Post In conditions to ControlM from INTRDR/JCL

waveal · Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 1:24 pm

Hello,

I have a rather weird question. Is it possible to post an IN condition to control M OS/390 from a JCL? The situation is this: I have a job(say, Job A) that is triggered by a transaction and is sent to INTRDR for execution. And then, there is a second job (say, Job B), cyclic, waiting in control M that will pick up the file output of job A.

Job A is triggered every 15 minutes and Job B is scheduled 5 minutes after the theoretical start time of Job A. Sometimes, job A and Job B will run concurrently and Job B fails with a JCL error since the file is not yet created.

I was only thinking of a straight forward solution of limiting the runs of Job B by posting an in condition from job A jcl to controlM(if ever this is possible) but other solutions are most welcome (resource control?)

Thank you in advance.

n.b: I did not design this workflow and I am only supporting the system.
ps. i've read some posts by dick scherrer that uses gdgs as a lookout but this seems to be too taxing on the system (if i were to schedule a lookout job every 5 minutes considering that the file is very critical, the system is shared by several divisions and night batch is running for some divisions during the time my division is online)

enrico-sorichetti · Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 1:30 pm

why not schedule job b upon the creation of the relevant <trigger> file from job a ?

job b should take care of deleting the <trigger> dataset upon completion

You do not schedule any lookout ... it is the job scheduler that will take care of everything

done properly it will schedule things for any number of job A submissions
( not at the same time )

waveal · Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 1:36 pm

Hello Enrico,

Thank you for your suggestion.
Job B actually is a control D report creating job. It picks up the flat file created by Job A and turns it into a cdam report file. Job B triggers another element (control D element) for report decollation and sending to control D PC.

I actually thought of incorporating the steps of Job B into Job A so that it would run as one thorough job but the next question is, how do i trigger the control D element to pick up the cdam file? (which brings me back to square one)

waveal · Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 1:39 pm

i think i misunderstoon your post, enrico. is there a way (like a filewatcher) to let Job B run once Job A creates the file?

expat · Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 1:41 pm

It should all be in the control M documentation

waveal · Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 1:50 pm

Hello expat,

we have external triggers in our scheduler but I've only seen samples for TDE transfers. TDE script triggers the job once the file is created as a post processing run. but i havent come across any external triggers coming from a jcl(?)

gcicchet · Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 2:17 pm

Hi,

what happens if job A fails, what tracks it ?

do you have CMEM running on your system ? if yes, you can track the job and on successful completion of job A you can do the usual post processing ie. post a condition to kick off job B.

Your decollating mission will need to consume/delete/clean up the condition is preparation for the next successful run of job A.

Yes, you can post a condition in batch mode using IOACND.

Gerry

waveal · Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 3:00 pm

Hello Gerry,

thank you for that. i'll ask my system admin if we have cmem. i'll aslo look for documentation on IOACND.

Thanks again

gcicchet · Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 3:06 pm

Hi,

just check if CMEM started task is running.

Also with CMEM you can track dataset creation to trigger job B.

The best bet is for job A arriving with a TYPRUN=HOLD and CMEM to track it's arrival.

This way you can have full control when job A runs. ie don't start job A until job B and decollating mission have completed.

Gerry

Phrzby Phil · Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 5:26 pm

Why not just have the in-cond for B be the creation of A's file that B wants? Then A's status is irrelevant and need not be mentioned in B's scheduling parms.

gcicchet · Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 4:03 am

Hi Phil,

I did say