Yes, the first 18 bytes are consistent. I know of no inconsistencies there for IBM or non-IBM products. But beyond that point there is no consistent standardization of time (or other) even within IBM products (Types 0 - 127). Thus we have, within the beyond-18 data for IBM products
SMF14RST - tttttttt 0cyydddF Local SMF42PTS - STCK SMF119TN_NITime - tttttttt 0cyydddF UTC etc. I could go on and on for non-time fields but this thread is about time fields. Charles -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Elardus Engelbrecht Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 3:09 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: CVTLSO, SMF, and RMF (was: Where environment variables ...) Charles Mills wrote: >>*Most* time fields are built by the individual record cutting product. If a >>product wants to record time as Latvian Summer Time expressed in Roman >>numerals in its SMF records it is free to do so. Thus one cannot say "SMF >>time fields are thus and such" (unfortunately). Indeed true for record types 128 - 255. You fill in your own headers yourself when working with SMFWTM or SMFEWTM. Paul Gilmartin wrote: >I'm shocked and dismayed. You mean that SMF (whatever that is) doesn't prefix >a standard header to the information supplied by the "record cutting product"!? SMFWTM or SMFEWTM will fill in (partially) for you for 0 - 127, but still you can write in whatever you want with IEFU83 if you want. You are free to be shocked+dismayed. Join the already shocked auditors for free... ;-D ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
