I've written an Assembler and COBOL ADATA to Java or XML utility, but it
isn't very useful without lots of manual work on SMF data for the reasons I
mentioned above:  the DSECT doesn't have complete type or any structure
information.



Kirk Wolf
Dovetailed Technologies
http://dovetail.com


On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 3:52 PM, Charles Mills <[email protected]> wrote:

> Yeah, and world peace, too. <g>
>
> On a more serious note, you can get from any of the IBM DSECTs to C/C++
> headeers by using the IBM C Compiler-included CDSECT utility.
>
> I just Googled <convert C struct to perl> and got a number of hits, so I
> would guess IBM DSECT to any of the languages you mention is do-able, if
> not
> pretty.
>
> You might object that IBM C is a separately charged product, but it uses
> the
> ADATA output of the assembler, which is documented. I don't think it would
> be real hard to write a DSECT to any arbitrary data schema program,
> especially if it were for your own use and you could tolerate a 90% job.
>
> Hey, there's a product for you: a DSECT to XML schema converter.
>
> Charles
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On
> Behalf Of Kirk Wolf
> Sent: Friday, January 03, 2014 12:11 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: SMF (was: REXX tutorial)
>
> (on SMF "schemas")
>
> I think that it would be useful to consider processing SMF data in other
> languages, like Perl, Python, System/R, C, etc.   If you had record schemas
> you could generate the language bindings.  Although not readily available
> on
> z/OS, any of these languages/tools could be run on z Linux, which also has
> the advantage moving general processor usage.
>
> Kirk Wolf
> Dovetailed Technologies
> http://dovetail.com
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Kirk Wolf <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Even better if the SMF records were uniformly described by some
> > metadata format (schema) that described the fields in the record.
> > Consider the IBM SMF record DSECTS -  one has to look at the field
> > comments to determine not only structure (e.g. triplets) but also
> > whether some C fields are really character or numeric, dates, times, etc,
> etc.
> >
> > Much better would be if IBM published some sort of metadata / schema,
> > perhaps in XML, that had all of the information in the DSECT, but also
> > included structure, data types, etc.    Utilities could be used to
> convert
> > these into record / DSECTS in assembler or HLLs.     It wouldn't have to
> be
> > XML  so long as there were a defined grammer, standard data types, etc.
> >
> >  If done properly so as to include comments for each field, this would
> > also cover 90% of the necessary "documentation" requirements.
> >
> > Currently, the closest thing to SMF schemas are in MXG (SAS).
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to