View previous topic :: View next topic
|
Author |
Message |
N.Kotivamsi
New User
Joined: 25 Jul 2012 Posts: 4 Location: India
|
|
|
|
Dear All,
I have a program which reads the files and creates one checkpoint-id after completing at evry 100 records(Checkpoint counter which i've given in checkpoint file),I need to do one checkpoint-id in one second.
Could you please advise on this.Many thanks in advance !!!
Please let me know if you need any other details.
Thanks !!! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dick scherrer
Moderator Emeritus
Joined: 23 Nov 2006 Posts: 19243 Location: Inside the Matrix
|
|
|
|
Hello and welcome to the forum,
Why does someone believe a checkpoint is needed every second?
It is possible that NO checkpoints are needed at all. . . |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Anuj Dhawan
Superior Member
Joined: 22 Apr 2006 Posts: 6248 Location: Mumbai, India
|
|
|
|
First, this question is very site-specific. Every shop will have its own style of writing such procedures -- suggest you ask some one around how it is done at your shop.
Second, most of the shops, I had been to, using check-point used to take a 'snapshot' of the current application state, and later on, use it for restarting the execution in case of failure. And time was never a parameter of snap-shots. So as Dick says, why a checkpoint is needed every second? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Anuj Dhawan
Superior Member
Joined: 22 Apr 2006 Posts: 6248 Location: Mumbai, India
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
N.Kotivamsi
New User
Joined: 25 Jul 2012 Posts: 4 Location: India
|
|
|
|
Hi Scherrer/All,
Thanks for your warm welcoming wishes and quick reply on this!!!
My Program is Batch IMSDB program and the checkpoint that we are using in program is Extended checkpoint,Please find the request that i got from DBA team,
Issue: Please change the checkpoint count for program XXXXXXXX
It is currently doing only 290 checkpoints on 11 minutes of wall time. It should Be 1 checkpoint a second. This will hopefully reduce the DFS2389I [MQ to IMS messaging] Buffer Full Condition.
please see the below sample of time difference b/w 1st and 290th chkpt-id,
PROGRAM=XXXXXXXX,CKPTID=XX000001,REGID=xxxx,DAY=199,TIME=0532045 --------------- 1st chkpt-id
DAY=199,TIME=053204596302-0400 X2P2
PROGRAM=xxxxxxxx,CKPTID=xx000290,REGID=xxxx,DAY=199,TIME=0543384 ----------------290th chkpt-id
DAY=199,TIME=054338410302-0400 X2P2
Kindly advise me on how to start on this request and let me know if any other details needed.
Thanks ! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Anuj Dhawan
Superior Member
Joined: 22 Apr 2006 Posts: 6248 Location: Mumbai, India
|
|
|
|
N.Kotivamsi wrote: |
Please find the request that i got from DBA team, |
Why don't you show this to someone at your shop instead of posting in a Forum. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
N.Kotivamsi
New User
Joined: 25 Jul 2012 Posts: 4 Location: India
|
|
|
|
Hi Anuj,
I've shown few of my peers at my place,They have advised me to reduce the checkpoint counter from 100 to 35.Not sure whether it will work or not and not sure what will be the impact after change.So i thought it's good to get some ideas from fourm...
Thanks! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PeterHolland
Global Moderator
Joined: 27 Oct 2009 Posts: 2481 Location: Netherlands, Amstelveen
|
|
|
|
Quote: |
It should Be 1 checkpoint a second. |
Well, i think this will bring IMS down in no time. The DFS2389I message means that OTMA has a problem with XCF messaging.
So dont talk with the DBA team, but talk to the IMS team. Those are
2 different things. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dick scherrer
Moderator Emeritus
Joined: 23 Nov 2006 Posts: 19243 Location: Inside the Matrix
|
|
|
|
Hello,
Sounds like "you" (collectively - apps, database, mq, whoever) need someone with a lot of experience with MQ/IMS applications to review the design and see if there is a flaw with the way this is implemented.
Increasing the frequency of the checkpoints may or may not help the "problem", but it surely might cause others. . .
Quote: |
It should Be 1 checkpoint a second. |
How was this determined? This is the first time i've seen a "requirement" to issue a checkpoint every second.
If there is a buffer full situation is it possibly because the batch process queues messages faster than they can be processed? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Anuj Dhawan
Superior Member
Joined: 22 Apr 2006 Posts: 6248 Location: Mumbai, India
|
|
|
|
N.Kotivamsi wrote: |
It should Be 1 checkpoint a second. |
This means -- in one minute the Job will take 60 check-points and in one hour 3,600 checkpoint -- I'm not sure do you really want to do that, it sounds like an over kill for the process, no? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
N.Kotivamsi
New User
Joined: 25 Jul 2012 Posts: 4 Location: India
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
Thanks for all giving quick replies on this !!!
@Peter,
Could you please eloborate your comments.Thanks in advance !!!
Thanks! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PeterHolland
Global Moderator
Joined: 27 Oct 2009 Posts: 2481 Location: Netherlands, Amstelveen
|
|
|
|
What can i say? The manuals say it all about that message. A DBA may know a lot about databases, but doesnt need to know about the inners of IMS. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
don.leahy
Active Member
Joined: 06 Jul 2010 Posts: 765 Location: Whitby, ON, Canada
|
|
|
|
IMO one checkpoint per second is not that unreasonable if the goal is to minimize contention and/or buffer usage. I would hope that in making this recommendation that your DBAs have considered the impact this increased frequency will have on the IMS logs. But I agree with Peter that the IMS sysprogs need to be in the loop as well. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ed Goodman
Active Member
Joined: 08 Jun 2011 Posts: 556 Location: USA
|
|
|
|
So the buffer can hold a few seconds worth of messages??
It could be the messages aren't released until the commit point (depends on set up), so increasing the commit frequency will make for smaller bunches.
It's weird that it was presented as a time span issue though. It really does sounds like a volume issue. It probably should have been presented as "the queue fills up after 5,000 records, so be sure to release them before that." |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|