Tweet
BCSleeth wrote: > When I look at the joblog, I notice a goofy error: > > - CPF325E Uncommitted changes pending for file XXX in library YYY. Brian, In a case like this, I'd just go ahead and follow the Recovery options if possible: "Recovery . . . : Do one of the following and try your request again: -- Complete the commitment control process by doing a commit or rollback for commitment definition &3. -- Change the commitment control option and compile the program again. " Since the first recovery option is not likely possible, I'd do the second. Further help may be possible if you read all of the second level help including the "Technical description" section of this message. Bill
-
-
SQL Create Procedure Fails with SQL0679 (joblog CPF325E)
Bill, Thank you for your reply, and yes, in cases like this following the recovery would make sense ... however .... There are no jobs that are creating / dropping procedures. I have signed off all of my sessions and back on to ensure there was no strange uncommitted changes. I still get the message that "someone" has an uncommitted change. I have worked with all of the jobs that are holding a lock on the library (the procedure (*PGM) does not exist anymore) and could not find any mysterious job hanging around. I even tried using the Work with Commitment Def (WRKCMTDFN) to see if there were any system jobs hanging around. All commit definitions were in a RESET (no pending commit / rollback). Having done all of this, I have concluded that in this case, the recovery documentation is not helpful. Thanks again, Brian -
SQL Create Procedure Fails with SQL0679 (joblog CPF325E)
BCSleeth wrote: > Thank you for your reply, and yes, in cases like this following the > recovery would make sense ... however .... Then it's time to call IBM if you have a S/W support contract. BillComment
-
SQL Create Procedure Fails with SQL0679 (joblog CPF325E)
Hi, we have encountered pretty much the same problem: we got a CPF325E on a V5R2 system, still, there's no trace of the commitment definition ID referred to in CPF325E on the WRKCMTDFN JOB(*ALL) screen. I found an APAR that's suspicious: SE19631. http://www-912.ibm.com/n_dir/nas4apa...256fc800429df3 the problem reported in the APAR exists on V5R1, V5R2 and V5R3. Unforutnately, no PTF numbers are public on the day this message is posted. I asked IBM to let me know the PTF IDs.Comment
-
SQL Create Procedure Fails with SQL0679 (joblog CPF325E)
I am attempting to (re)create an SQL procedure. I had previously been ample to create and drop the procedure with no problems. At one point, the procedure was actually a function. However, when I came in this morning and made a simple change, I can no longer create the procedure. I am using a source member with SQL statements (see code below) and the RUNSQLSTM. I get the following errors: - SQL0679 Position 1 Object XXX in YYY type *PGM not created due to pending operation. When I look at the joblog, I notice a goofy error: - CPF325E Uncommitted changes pending for file XXX in library YYY. (yes, it does say "file", and no, there is no file with that name anywhere on the system) I can create the procedure in a different library. I can change the name of the procedure and run the SQL statment and create a different named procedure, but I cannot create the one I need. As this procedure is being invoked via an ODBC call from another system, I am not at liberty to just change the name (or library) and ignore the error. Any help will be greatly appreciated. Thank you, Brian
CodeComment
-
SQL Create Procedure Fails with SQL0679 (joblog CPF325E)
Thank you for keeping this alive. We just had an opportunity to IPL and fully apply the latest CUM and a few required (by our mirroring software vendor) PTF's. So, at this point the box is in a very good state and with an IPL having just been done, I thought I would try my luck ... well, my luck has not changed and the problem has not gone away. Thank you for the APAR tip. I will look into that. Of course, we will not be able to do another IPL for sometime, so I it may be a very long time before I will know if I (ever) resolve this issue. Thank you again for your input, BrianComment
Comment