Hi Alan, One last question on this. This SMF CONTROL file change (1 to 0) does this setting normally mean that you have the RACFSMF guest in place and are using it for dynamic switching of the SMF data set and if you did not have the '1' there it would not invoke RACFSMF to do the switch if needed?
In other words if you are using RACFSMF to do the switching would you need the '1' in the control file? Thank You, Terry Martin Lockheed Martin - Information Technology z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning Cell - 443 632-4191 Work - 410 786-0386 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 5:04 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: RACF ERROR On Wednesday, 10/29/2008 at 04:11 EDT, "Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks all. I was able to get RACF back running. I did not have RACFSMF > set up to handle the switching. I am doing that now!! > > One last note after I cleared the SMF data sets and re-ipled RACFVM (I > IPL 490 CL) it still asked for the USERID that was set up to handle the > switching (RACFSMF) and the disk that was used to link 'TO'. I had to > supply this information before RACFVM would come back up even though I > did not have RACFSMF setup(?) Or go into SMF CONTROL and change the "1" to a "0". (Not documented. Shhh. You didn't hear it from me.) I already opened up an internal problem report on this particular point. Bizzare - two people with the same problem on the same day! (The other was an internal IBM account.) Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
