On 8/16/06, Patrick O'Keefe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm having a disagreement with IBM Support for a product. I need to quote chapter and verse (of doc that may not even exist) on the use of FORCE.
FORCE doc: http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/IEA2G150/4.13?DT=20040713102635
I have found a situation that requires use of FORCE if parts of Unix System Services are brought down prior to shutting the product down.
It is hard to comment without knowing what it is your bringing down in Unix System Services. Not that I would have any idea if you had. Some programs have so many hooks into USS these days that I can't say I'm very surprised.
The product can be canceled (but not stopped) up to the point it gets an EC6 abend; once it gets an EC6 abend, a cancel is ignored.
What was the reason code on the EC6? There are some nasty looking ones on the list. Maybe the USS is trying to protect it's integrity? Level 2 says the problem
is in the order we are doing our shutdown. I contend he is right but that doesn't justify need of the FORCE.
I agree, I hate using FORCE.
BTW, that's a real "temination at end of memory" FORCE, not a FORCE,ARM. In the PMR I said that need for a FORCE represents a bug, but I don't really know if that is true. Is there any official IBM take on this? I can feel a "broken as Designed" in the wings, but I doubt need for a FORCE was really part of the design.
Step 2 under considerations of FORCE doc: "Use the DUMP command -- if you want a dump produced. Respond to the prompt for parameters with the jobname or ASID of the "stuck" job, as well as ASID(1)=MASTER." Seems to imply something went wrong that needs debugging. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
