Page 1 of 1

Job sequence

Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 2:16 am
by marcogonnelli
Hello I have a problem with job sequence :

I have two jobs with (insert new or update existing clause) that inserts records or update different fields in the same table.

Job 1 : Key, field1, field2
Job 2 : Key, field3

Informix table : Key, field1,field2,field3

If I run the two jobs separate all rows are inserted and updated (for the same key values correctly).

But if I build a job sequence that runs in order Job1 then Job2 it does't write rows correctly.

Values Inserted : Key,field1(correct),field2(correct),field3,field3(null)

Any help will be appreciated, thnX in adv. Marco :?

Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 2:39 am
by Sainath.Srinivasan
What does it mean by saying "field3, field3 (null)"?

Do you have any errors from job2? Do they run in parallel?

Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 2:52 am
by marcogonnelli
First job and scond job end with "OK conditial" with no errrors or warnings.
They are not parallel jobs.

If I run the jobs separate all rows are inserted correctly..

If I run the two jobs in sequence in the target Informix table in all rows the field value3 (Inserted from the second job) has all values set to null .... :cry:

Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 2:56 am
by Sainath.Srinivasan
In either of the job, do you insert/update null for other job's column(s)?

Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 3:04 am
by marcogonnelli
In first Job I insert/update only field1, field2
In the second job I insert/update only field3

the "strange" is that if I run job1 and the job2 spearate all rows are inseted with correct values, but if I link the two jobs in the sequence and run it with the sequence job it runs correctly but all values for field3 are set to 'null' values...

Could it be for transcation isolation problem ?? mah dunno :cry:

Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 3:19 am
by Sainath.Srinivasan
Did you try running job2 and then job1?

Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 3:28 am
by marcogonnelli
I've tried to change isolation level of ODBC Informix table stage from : none to AutoCommit.. now seems to work fine. :?: