Gil,
Could be. BUT it worked fine for 20+ years.
Maybe IBM should make it easier to consolidate the record types
(internally)?
Trying to hunt down the blasted records is daunting especially since
there is no standard place in each component.
Might be worth a SHARE requirement?
Ed
On Jan 3, 2014, at 12:35 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Fri, 3 Jan 2014 12:10:15 -0600, Ed Gould wrote:
Interesting thing about SMF...
For 20 years IBM documented SMF records in one consolidated place the
SMF manual.
In the last 5 or so years IBM did an about face and started to
scatter them around in unlikely places WHY??????????????????
My guess would be that the specification of the formats of SMF records
is owned not by SMF, but by the various utilities that generate them.
As such, it would be onerous, untimely, perhaps even error-prone for
each utility that adds a new SMF record type to require an update of
a central SMF data areas manual section.
-- gil
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
