Hi,
In one server job having Sequential File ->Sort -> Transformer -> Sequential File stages.
When I am running this job it is taking long time and it is showing in running status only(It's not completing) when I abort the job I am getting below error.
StgFactAftMgrTillCntdwnAS400_SSNMasking..srtPosPrtnrId: Error in merging files
At row 1, link "outsrtPosPrtnrId"
Call to output link returned numeric error code: 17
Please let me know what might be the reason.
Thanks in Advance
Error in merging files at Sort stage
Moderators: chulett, rschirm, roy
-
- Participant
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:30 am
-
- Participant
- Posts: 54607
- Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:52 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Contact:
Killing the SORT stage while it still had heap files on the scratch disk was probably the cause.
Try using sort as a Filter command in the Sequential File stage; the Sort stage is substantially slower than the UNIX sort command.
Try using sort as a Filter command in the Sequential File stage; the Sort stage is substantially slower than the UNIX sort command.
IBM Software Services Group
Any contribution to this forum is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect any position that IBM may hold.
Any contribution to this forum is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect any position that IBM may hold.
-
- Participant
- Posts: 54607
- Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:52 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Contact:
Please confirm that your environment, including version, is identical to that of the original poster. You are hijacking a thread in which the previous post is 30 months old!
Have you researched the possible causes of segmentation fault errors, either here or elsewhere?
Have you researched the possible causes of segmentation fault errors, either here or elsewhere?
IBM Software Services Group
Any contribution to this forum is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect any position that IBM may hold.
Any contribution to this forum is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect any position that IBM may hold.