On 05/13/2015 03:57 PM, Ed Finnell wrote: > Check out Sam G's BRODCAST utility on CBT. It addresses the problem. > > > In a message dated 5/13/2015 3:46:03 P.M. Central Daylight Time, > [email protected] writes: > > How many (willing to say) are using logfile.USERID in place of > SYS1.BRODCAST? How difficult was this to implement? And could it > solve that problem for us? > > ... We only had one minor problem with converting to user log files. There is one subtle inconsistency in the TSO SEND command behavior that bit us in a very puzzling way when we converted to user broadcast datasets many years ago: the defined resturn codes for the TSO SEND command change when you switch to to user log data sets!!
Without user log files you get a non-zero return code only if there is an actual message delivery failure. With user log data sets, a non-zero return code is possible if the message is successfully stored and will eventually be successfully delivered but the user is just not able to immediately see it for some reason (e.g., not logged on). If you are invoking the SEND command from a CLIST in certain environments (we were, in batch TSO), the non-zero return code can cause the CLIST containing the SEND command (and batch TSO) to immediately terminate without completing any following statements in the CLIST. If you have never seen this behavior in a CLIST before, it is very difficult to debug when you have evidence the CLIST began, a SEND command was reached (someone got a message), but the following statements, which you assumed had to have also been reached, didn't seem to have worked. After we were able to prove the CLIST was bailing out after the SEND command, we consulted the manuals, found the return code change was documented, but still didn't understand the CLIST behavior. The manuals at the time were not at all clear (they were subsequently revised) as they implied to someone unfamiliar with TSO internals that this immediate termination of TSO would only occur for commands in an input file, not also for command statements embedded in a CLIST. I think we resolved the issue by converting the CLIST to REXX so another TCB was involved. The additional return code granularity for SEND could be potentially useful, but there should have been some warning as a migration consideration under the discussion of user log data sets. -- Joel C. Ewing, Bentonville, AR [email protected] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
