| Title: | VAX and Alpha VMS |
| Notice: | This is a new VMSnotes, please read note 2.1 |
| Moderator: | VAXAXP::BERNARDO |
| Created: | Wed Jan 22 1997 |
| Last Modified: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 703 |
| Total number of notes: | 3722 |
Hello. I know that generic queues don't do any prioritising when submitting their jobs to execution queues apart from "first available in the list", but I have a customer who is seeing jobs going to the second queue in the list even though the first one is empty and idle. Can anyone shed any light on why this might happen ? Many thanks for any help or pointers. Simon R. Mills OpenVMS Specialist, UK CSC
| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 291.1 | AUSS::GARSON | DECcharity Program Office | Thu Mar 06 1997 20:04 | 8 | |
re .0
Selection can depend on form and characteristics (and who knows what
else).
At the very least you need SHOW QUEUE/FULL from all the relevant
queues. Even better would be a log file showing exactly what the queues
look like and what the user is doing and what the results are.
| |||||
| 291.2 | COMICS::MILLSS | "Jump! Jump now!" ...Kosh | Mon Mar 10 1997 05:05 | 42 | |
re .1 > Selection can depend on form and characteristics (and who knows what > else). They're batch queues, so form and characteristics not relevant in this case. > At the very least you need SHOW QUEUE/FULL from all the relevant > queues. Even better would be a log file showing exactly what the queues > look like and what the user is doing and what the results are. Yep. Good point. I'll get the hang of this Noting lark, yet ! > $ sh que ransysq/ful > > Generic batch queue RANSYSQ > /GENERIC=(RANSYSQ_MIL2,RANSYSQ_MIL1) /OWNER=[SYSTEM,SYSTEM_MGR] > /PROTECTION=(S:M,O:D,G:R,W:S) > > $ sh que ransysq_mil1/ful > Batch queue RANSYSQ_MIL1, idle, on MIL1:: > /AUTOSTART_ON=(MIL1::) /BASE_PRIORITY=4 /JOB_LIMIT=2 > /OWNER=[SYSTEM,SYSTEM_MGR] /PROTECTION=(S:M,O:D,G:R,W:S) /WSEXTENT=15000 > > $ sh que ransysq_mil2/ful > Batch queue RANSYSQ_MIL2, idle, on MIL2:: > /AUTOSTART_ON=(MIL2::) /BASE_PRIORITY=4 /JOB_LIMIT=2 > /OWNER=[SYSTEM,SYSTEM_MGR] /PROTECTION=(S:M,O:D,G:R,W:S) /WSEXTENT=15000 I don't have a log of what happened to the customer, but it was simple. He submitted a job to RANSYSQ whilst both queues it pointed to were empty. The job went to RANSYSQ_MIL1 even though RANSYSQ_MIL2 is listed first and was empty and idle. It happened on (VAX, I think) VMS V6.2. I've tried reproducing it myself but it all works as I would expect. Any ideas ? Thanks and regards, Simon. | |||||
| 291.3 | AUSS::GARSON | DECcharity Program Office | Mon Mar 10 1997 20:37 | 22 | |
re .2
>They're batch queues, so form and characteristics not relevant in this case.
Characteristics are applicable to batch queues but if the queues don't
show characteristics set then they are not relevant to this particular
topic.
Actually what I thought the customer was complaining was that jobs
didn't go to an idle execution queue but instead remained pending on
the generic queue in which case SHOW QUEUE/FULL might give clues as to why.
If the situation is simply that they expect that there is ordering
within the list of execution queues then perhaps they need to point to
some doco that covers this.
I have no idea what controls allocation to execution queues all other
things being equal.
If the customer can reproduce the behaviour then a log would help to
make sure we have a common understanding of the scenario and would be
highly desirable if they want to escalate formally.
| |||||
| 291.4 | COMICS::MILLSS | "Jump! Jump now!" ...Kosh | Tue Mar 11 1997 09:07 | 11 | |
re .3 Thanks for your input. I did ask the customer the other day to supply me with some hard evidence but his only response was "I have the accounting files". I have asked him again to supply me with evidence. As an aside, he also claims not to have installed any patches. Thanks and regards, Simon. | |||||