release APS license

We are having an issue with APS not checking back in the license when
the job is done or stopped. So far,
closing, logging off, rebooting the host or lmremove has not worked
consistantly. I have been able to force
the release but the license gets checked out again somewhere between
instantly or hours later. Is there a
lock or daemon or something that APS uses to keep the license? I also
tried lmCheckIn("90003") and no
luck.

Thanks

Rick

rick wrote, on 11/04/10 15:54:

We are having an issue with APS not checking back in the license when
the job is done or stopped.   So far,
closing, logging off, rebooting the host  or lmremove has not worked
consistantly.  I  have been able to force
the release but the license gets checked out again somewhere between
instantly or hours later.  Is there a
lock or daemon or something that APS uses to keep the license?  I also
tried lmCheckIn("90003") and no
luck.

Thanks

Rick

Rick,

When using APS from ADE (I'm assuming you're using it from the spectre interface
and then using the high performance options to pick spectre?) it should be
switching to "batch" mode and the simulator should then exit at the end of the
simulator (which will release the license).

Is the simulator still running at the end of the simulation?

I suspect you'll need to log a service request for this.

Regards,

Andrew.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: n...@netfront.net ---

We are in batch mode and it will release 4 and keep 4 licenses
even if ADE and Virtuoso has been closed. I did open a ticket
but no solution yet

rick wrote, on 11/05/10 14:02:



We are in batch mode and it will release 4 and keep 4 licenses
even if ADE and Virtuoso has been closed.   I did open a ticket
but no solution yet

Is spectre still running though? If not, it seems possible that it might be a
bug in FlexLM. Might be worth checking what version of lmgrd you're using..

So it sounds as if it is partially releasing the tokens? (i.e. using 8 tokens
initially and then releasing 4 of them?). BTW, if you move to MMSIM72 or
MMSIM101 it uses fewer tokens - I'm assuming you must be using MMSIM71 if it's
using 8 tokens.

Regards,

Andrew.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: n...@netfront.net ---

On Nov 5, 8:50 am, Andrew Beckett <andr...@DcEaLdEeTnEcTe.HcIoSm
wrote:



rick wrote, on 11/05/10 14:02:

We are in batch mode and it will release 4 and keep 4 licenses
even if ADE and Virtuoso has been closed.   I did open a ticket
but no solution yet

Is spectre still running though? If not, it seems possible that it might be a
bug in FlexLM. Might be worth checking what version of lmgrd you're using.

So it sounds as if it is partially releasing the tokens? (i.e. using 8 tokens
initially and then releasing 4 of them?). BTW, if you move to MMSIM72 or
MMSIM101 it uses fewer tokens - I'm assuming you must be using MMSIM71 if it's
using 8 tokens.

Regards,

Andrew.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: n...@netfront.net ---

Hi Andrew

Spectre is no longer running....or at least there is no process
associated with it.   It looks
like there is an orphaned handle 10058  that is spawning a fantom run
thats grabbing the
licenses.   I can lmremove the other handles but not this one.   When
the job re-apprears,
new handle number appears except that one.

We were using MMSIM7.11.169_Hotfix but we just loaded up
MMSIM7.20.400_Hotfix so
we will be switching to that version.   The AE recommended starting a
new session, let it
finish and hopefully the new version will release all licenses.   If
not, do you have ideas?

Also, THANKS for the info about the lower license info in MMSIM7.2.!!!

Rick

Looks like the defunct processes was the root cause for the licenses
getting re-checked out. The
parent process was no longer active and would have been listed with
the user who submitted the job whereas
the child processes were still present. The child processes were
not owned by the submitting user but some by
arbitrary ID since it was fire off by the tool. Is there a way to
have the child processes owned by the submitting
user?