Job schedules failing to run on schedule
Moderators: chulett, rschirm, roy
-
- Premium Member
- Posts: 145
- Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2017 10:43 am
Job schedules failing to run on schedule
Hi, we have been scheduling jobs using the datastage director for some time now, it seems we had some issue over the weekend that caused one of the scheduled jobs PID to crash. This was a master controller sequence job that crashed, we recompiled it and everything it touches and confirmed it runs fine. Restarted the datastage servers and verified the schedules. Unfortunately none of the jobs are running on schedule as expected. I have a parallel job that I set a schedule on to test this and waited, but the job does not run on schedule. I can issue a job run from the director and that works fine. I re-entered the user credentials for scheduled jobs in DataStage administration for this project and verified the test passes. Does anyone have any suggestions on what else I can check?
-Me
-
- Participant
- Posts: 54607
- Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:52 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Contact:
Check the setting of the system clock.
I know that sounds weird, but I did encounter it once back in the day - the O/S failed to update time from the network.
I know that sounds weird, but I did encounter it once back in the day - the O/S failed to update time from the network.
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.
This may or may not be related, but for what it's worth, we had to install a client tier patch for Director in order to resolve some unusual rescheduling problems. We had obtained the patch by opening a case (PMR) with IBM Support.
JR53246 Fixed problem with rescheduling and encrypted job parameters
JR53246 Fixed problem with rescheduling and encrypted job parameters
Choose a job you love, and you will never have to work a day in your life. - Confucius
-
- Participant
- Posts: 54607
- Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:52 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Contact:
During a training class in version 1.0, we had a competition to design the fastest job. I won it by changing the system clock while the job was running, but then got disqualified on some technicality.
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.
-
- Premium Member
- Posts: 145
- Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2017 10:43 am
ray.wurlod thats funny! Your job was able to complete a task before it started?
As an update I received the follow update from IBM:
\IBM\information server\projects
He's unsure why he had to do that as of yet however so we're still investigating. Definitely seems as if some permissions change was made to that user. I'll keep you all posted and thank you so much for the replies.
As an update I received the follow update from IBM:
I was able to work with out AD specialist and, while he was not able to alter the policy which is set to enabled, he made some permissions changes for the scheduling user we have specified to the following directories and that resolved the issue in our dev environment:Please try this suggestion out and see if the scheduled job runs.
The setting in question is:
Local Security Policy -> Security Options -> User Account Control: Run all administrators in Admin Approval Mode
Setting this to Disabled seems to resolve the problem.
We also found that if we do not specify a username and password in the Administration client schedule page, then scheduling worked both with and without the setting.
...If the suggestion does not work, we have a patch that may help but I would need to confirm if it would work for 11.5. You would need to unschedule everything and reschedule the jobs though.
\IBM\information server\projects
He's unsure why he had to do that as of yet however so we're still investigating. Definitely seems as if some permissions change was made to that user. I'll keep you all posted and thank you so much for the replies.
-Me