If you have SDSF or equivalent product, you can look at the internal text for the job to see if the 1440 value of the time parameter was actually sent to the JCL converter. Otherwise, some local modification has intercepted it. The value 1440 should be in clear text with other JOB or EXEC statement parameters.
Bill On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 12:12:16 +0100, Vernooy, C.P. - SPLXM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >This is not logical, TIME=1440 and TIME=NOLIMIT are identical, from JCL >reference: >"Also code TIME=1440 or TIME=NOLIMIT to specify that the system is to >allow this step to remain in a continuous wait state for more than the >installation time limit, which is established through SMF." > >So I still think that an exit overrides TIME=1440, but does not >recognize and modify TIME=NOLIMIT. > >Kees. > > >"NAIDOO Raleigh , AXA-Tech-AU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in >message >news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED] >services.axa-tech.intraxa>... >> It is not. >> >> TIME=NOLIMIT however works. >> >> Raleigh Naidoo >> Z/OS Systems Programmer >> Mainframe System Software >> Phone +61 3 96163969 >> Mobile +61 412 257 543 >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Behalf Of Rob Scott >> Sent: Saturday, 11 November 2006 8:09 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: IEFUTL wait time >> >> Check that the TIME=1440 keyword is not being removed by IEFUJV or a >JES >> exit >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
