Here is how I handled this at one time:
I put this CLIST in **sysproc dsn**:
PROC 2 TYPE DSN
CONTROL END(ENDO)
ERROR DO
GOTO OUT
I don't check this list regularly but I think you slightly misunderstood. I'm
not looking for who is using what procedure _library_. I'm looking for the
use of individual members. RACF doesn't (unless it happened in a recent
release and I missed it) allow us to audit individual members of
and INCLUDEs. WAS Re: "Trapping"
messages written to JESYSMSG?
Tim Hare wrote:
>As mentioned before, I've created a SHARE requirement and an RFE to have the
>system record the information from the IFC001I (cataloged procedure was
>expanded from... msg) and IFC002I (INCLUDE was e
Tim Hare wrote:
>As mentioned before, I've created a SHARE requirement and an RFE to have the
>system record the information from the IFC001I (cataloged procedure was
>expanded from... msg) and IFC002I (INCLUDE was expanded from... msg) message
>in an SMF record.If this would be important
As mentioned before, I've created a SHARE requirement and an RFE to have the
system record the information from the IFC001I (cataloged procedure was
expanded from... msg) and IFC002I (INCLUDE was expanded from... msg) message in
an SMF record.If this would be important or useful to your
I have created a SHARE requirement for this (which I think was submitted to
RFE) _and_ an RFE ( 133491 ) to write IEFC001I and IEFC002I information to SMF.
If voting is still open and this information is important to your shop, please
vote. My suggested solution was to make any solution
Compuware's ThruPut Manager also has the ability to detect which procs are
being used and where they came from.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the
Is there an exit that can "see" these messages? Maybe an MPF exit? If so, you
could always write an exit to echo the messages to some routing code that
doesn't go to the console, process it with automation, and hopefully prevent
it from going to your operlog or syslog.
Our SyzMPF/z also allows it, so I don't see why CA can't handle it as well,
after all they cost more than 10 times more.
Brian
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to
eavy into CA
> products.
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
> On
> > > Behalf Of John McKown
> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 9:24 AM
> > > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> &g
gt; Thanks. We don't run that. We run CA-OPS/MVS. We are heavy into CA products.
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> > Behalf Of John McKown
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 9:24 AM
> > To: IBM-MAIN@LI
MVS. We are heavy into CA products.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of John McKown
> Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 9:24 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: "Trapping" messages written
t: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 9:24 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: "Trapping" messages written to JESYSMSG?
[[ SEI WARNING *** This email was sent from an external source. Do not open
attachments or click on links from unknown or suspicious senders. *** ]]
This question was s
This question was sparked by the thread on tracking PROC usage. I don't see
any way to "trap" messages written to JESYSMSG. I know that I can process
them using the SAPI,
https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSLTBW_2.1.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r1.ieaf200/sapi.htm,
or the SDSF API or a number of
14 matches
Mail list logo
