Berry:
We had an STC that processed sysouts (some off the wall product that
may not be around now). If we didn't suppress the type 30's (I think
its been a while). Whenever we would bring it down it would literally
cause the SMF address space to run at 100 per cent cpu for hours
writing out type 30's records. It took me weeks to figure it out.
Even trying to take a dump of SMF address space was fun. I took a
SALONE and did some hunting and looking around and found type 30's
were the culprit. We needed them for accounting. Trying to dump
(IFSMFDMP) the smf datasets was hopeless when this was happening. We
had to schedule extra OT for the operators and they weren't happy.
Ed
Our operators hated being there as they couldn't leave until the
system came down
On Aug 14, 2012, at 11:39 AM, Barry Merrill wrote:
Except for the existence of SMF 30 EXCP segments based on SMFPRMxx
options,
(i.e., whether they exist in the Step term and Job term records, where
they cause problems for long running STCs, causing virtual storage
exhaustion,
or whether they are only in the Interval records, so they are still
counted,
and which is recommended for long running STCs), I'm not aware of
any other
differences in the SMF data created for a batch job versus a
started task.
Can someone educate me if there are other differences in data?
I have a very old note that says that running a task as a Started Task
rather
than as a JOB bypasses some validity checking, but that if all of the
STEPLIB
datasets are Authorized, that same validity checking is bypassed
for a JOB.
But I have no more details nor any proof, now.
Barry Merrill
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
