Hi, Listers,

We seem to have hit a "show stopper" in our effort to implement COBOL v5.1 
(upgrading from COBOL v4.2).  

A collection of nightly batch jobs incurs sporadic, seemingly random S0C4 
abends when the "main" program and a couple of subroutines are compiled with 
the COBOL v5.1 compiler, with the rest of the subroutines compiled with COBOL 
v4.2 and/or COBOL v3.4.  We've been working a PMR with IBM COBOL Support for a 
few months now, and IBM has identified the cause of the S0C4 as corruption of a 
pointer to a key LE control block.  Current efforts are aimed at identifying 
the perpetrator of the corruption, but it seems we cannot obtain the problem 
documentation IBM has requested.

"Why not?" you might ask.

Well, first, the abends occur ONLY in Production.  All efforts to recreate them 
in DEV have failed so far.  Thus, setting up the "capture environment" in 
Production requires that we discuss its setup in Change Control each time, 
effectively limiting our attempts to once per week.

Second, when one (or more) of the jobs incurs the S0C4, we set up a dynamic 
Storage Alteration SLIP with ACTION=TRACE and other parameters specified by 
COBOL Support, start GTF with TRACE=SLIP and re-run the job.  Unfortunately, 
the job then runs to normal completion and no SLIP trace is captured.  This has 
been true for each of multiple failed jobs that are re-run with the diagnostic 
capture set up.  After all diagnostic capture attempts, the change package for 
the failing program is reverted to "no COBOL v5.1-compiled components".  
Needless to say, we tend to get less enthusiastic about subsequent capture 
attempts.

Environment:  z/OS 1.13 on all LPARs, currently at identical maintenance levels 
(~RSU0514 plus HIPERs and PEFIXes through August); DB2 v10 in "new function 
mode".  DEV runs on a z114-N02; Production runs on a z114-Y02 (in case machine 
speed might be a factor); both CECs are at current and required MCL levels.  
Compiler options for COBOL v5.1 include ARCH(9), OPT(1) and TEST(EJPD,SOURCE).  
The batch jobs (31 total) in the collection are identical except for a 
"warehouse identifier" passed as a run-time parameter and are released to run 
concurrently.  The load library is (required to be) a PDSE.

Any ideas as to what else we might try would be appreciated, as would any ideas 
as to "why only in Production?"  Regarding the latter, we've already dismissed 
planetary alignment, sunspot activity, moon phase, etc.  :-)

TIA,

   -jc-

**********************************************************************
Information contained in this e-mail message and in any attachments thereto is 
confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this 
message, delete any copies held on your systems, notify the sender immediately, 
and refrain from using or disclosing all or any part of its content to any 
other person.

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

Reply via email to