Marten:
I don't think processing them is the issue here. Like Ed F. suggested
that is hat we have computers for.
Ed
On Jan 3, 2014, at 2:00 PM, Martin Packer wrote:
If you want a link between REXX and SMF it is that in z/OS 2.1 REXX
can
process VBS eg SMF directly.
Cheers, Martin
Martin Packer,
zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator,
Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM
+44-7802-245-584
email: [email protected]
Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker
Blog:
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker
From: Charles Mills <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Date: 03/01/2014 19:35
Subject: Re: SMF (was: REXX tutorial)
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-
[email protected]>
Currently it's kind of the worst of both worlds. Some SMF records
formats
are in the SMF manual. Some are in one product-specific manual or
another,
with no consistency from product to product. There is a cross-
reference in
the SMF manual, but it sometimes lags reality.
Charles
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-
[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Mark Zelden
Sent: Friday, January 03, 2014 11:09 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: SMF (was: REXX tutorial)
On Fri, 3 Jan 2014 12:35:44 -0600, Paul Gilmartin
<[email protected]>
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.
Oh, you mean someone would have to do some work. :-)
Seriously... I don't like the trend (although it isn't
widespread). As
long there is
internal communication within IBM and everyone played by the same
rules,
the information could be kept consolidated in a single manual or
kept in
sync
with the component / subsystem manuals. Same goes for operator
commands
(catalog / DFSMS manuals comes to mind). There is an overall
owner of
z/OS,
so I suppose it would be up to them to dictate direction of keeping
all
the information in a single manual (or not) or keeping the information
current in multiple manuals (although it would come at a cost as
nothing
is free and these decisions
are made with the financial aspects in mind).
One thing's for sure - complaining on IBM-MAIN won't do anything.
--
Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS
ITIL v3 Foundation Certified
mailto:[email protected]
Mark's MVS Utilities: http://www.mzelden.com/mvsutil.html
Systems Programming expert at http://search390.techtarget.com/
ateExperts/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with
number
741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire
PO6 3AU
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
