Hi Gregory :)
You are most definitely correct!! and I ordered it today... with
several ideas for improving some of our system jobs here...
Also thanks to Jeff S. I have the TermDSM (standalone) patch on it's way!
and will be testing it next week on our 928...Thanks to Peggy M. at the RC I
was also able to get the SR# (8606176448) for this patch... more reading to
do... as if 200+ pages of HIPAA stuff wasn't enough!!
Art "Reading again! hehe" Bahrs
----- Original Message -----
From: <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 11:34 AM
Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] ABORTPROC patch LXG3
> X-no-Archive:yes
> INPUT;CONSOLE. Were our 3000s still in production, we could use this in
our
> job that quiesces the system before backup. Here to for, it would TELLOP
> that this command file, or the job wrapped around it, was running, and
that
> the operator can break out of the command file or abort the job, then
pauses
> for one minute. It would then WARN everyone that the system is going down
in
> five, and pause again.
>
> Instead of that first TELL and PAUSE, this INPUT would seem to be just the
> ticket, allowing the operator to respond to the prompt that they in fact
do
> not want to take the system down (not that ANYONE has EVER accidentally
run
> something like this when the didn't mean to - except that one time when I
> streamed the job to take down the network, when I meant to PRINT it...).
>
> I could even see adding such a prompt to the corresponding job that brings
> the system back online for general use. Say for instance that a tape drive
> has died, as demonstrated during backups (not that any of OUR DDS-2 drives
> have EVER given us anything but reliable service, either the original five
> or any of their sixteen replacements). Since these were not hot-swappable,
> support would arrange for the CE to come in and replace the drive. We
> wouldn't want to bring up the system, only to have someone manually shut
it
> down again, especially since by that time, the CE is standing there,
waiting
> to get to work.
>
> In fact, a short prompt for just about any job that would hurt really bad
to
> run at the wrong time could be in order... if not to the console, at least
> to the streamer (although I understand that the latter has been
available).
>
> Gee, I hope the problem is lack of time and inclination, rather than
> interest. It seems like a few folks could add it to at least one job.
>
> Greg Stigers
> http://www.cgiusa.com
> I'm going to have to get use to using the past tense and subjunctive for a
> while
|
