Yeah if you have MXG there's ANAL30DD PROC that will point out pgms and
EXCPs. With slight modification could only look for ERB* modules.
In a message dated 7/14/2016 4:33:43 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
vicky.toble...@americannational.com writes:
Well - now we have RMF disabled in
@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of patrickfalcone7
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2016 3:33 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL]Re: SMF type 89 records reporting RMF usage
Are all references to RMF libraries also removed...are you using SDSF?
Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone
Clark Morris
>
>vicky.tobleman
>
>-Original Message-
>From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
>Behalf Of Cheryl Watson
>Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2016 7:57 AM
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>Subject: [EXTERNAL]Re: SMF type 89 r
@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL]Re: SMF type 89 records reporting RMF usage
The issue was in an IBM software audit ... in addition to the SCRT reports,
which did not report on RMF, the audit required us to run Usage Reports. @ the
time we had 3 separate environments - two of them
to suggest.
vicky.tobleman
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Cheryl Watson
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2016 7:57 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [EXTERNAL]Re: SMF type 89 records reporting RMF usage
Hi Peter,
I thin
Wireless 4G LTE smartphone
Original message
From: Peter Ten Eyck <peter_tene...@farmfamily.com>
Date: 07/14/2016 8:55 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: SMF type 89 records reporting RMF usage
After some research... I am starting to think this
RMF will be in the PRODFEAT fields of TYPE89-2 (PDB.TYPE892 in MXG) but SCRT
does not read that field and SCRT does not report that fields. In the same
records, the PRODREGS should be zero if you are not using RMF.
Al Sherkow, I/S Management Strategies, Ltd.
Consulting Expertise on IBM Workload
, 2016 8:56 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: SMF type 89 records reporting RMF usage
After some research... I am starting to think this might be the case. It
appears we had RMF enabled in IFAPRD00, but were not running it. We are running
CMF.
Can a SMF type 89 record indicating RMF use
After some research... I am starting to think this might be the case. It
appears we had RMF enabled in IFAPRD00, but were not running it. We are running
CMF.
Can a SMF type 89 record indicating RMF use be cut under these circumstances?
Sherkow <a...@sherkow.com>
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2016 9:40 PM
Subject: Re: SMF type 89 records reporting RMF usage
SCRT only reports on products. It does not report features of products. AND
SCRT only reports on products it knows to be IBM Sub-Capacity produc
SCRT only reports on products. It does not report features of products. AND
SCRT only reports on products it knows to be IBM Sub-Capacity products. So SCRT
does not report on RMF, just as SCRT does not report on IMS TM or IMS DB. It
only reports IMS as a product.
As Cheryl wrote if you
o: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: SMF type 89 records reporting RMF usage
Hi Peter,
Usually, RMF does NOT show up on the SCRT report that you create to send IBM.
It will show up, however, on their bill coming back (also in Excel format).
Where are you seeing it? If it's on th
SMF type 89 records reporting RMF usage
Our SCRT reporting for IBM showed type 89 records that indicted that RMF was
used. We do not run RMF, we run CMF. I am looking back at syslogs and SMF data;
I am trying to determine what caused that (RMF usage) type 89 record to get
cut. It does not ap
Our SCRT reporting for IBM showed type 89 records that indicted that RMF was
used. We do not run RMF, we run CMF. I am looking back at syslogs and SMF data;
I am trying to determine what caused that (RMF usage) type 89 record to get
cut. It does not appear that the RMF STC was started…
other spatial object, natural or manufactured,
> since the beginning of time.
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Peter Ten Eyck
> Sent: Monday, July 11, 2016 3:15 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSER
Have you checked your IFAPRDxx Parmlib member to see whether RMF is ENABLED? Or
issue the 'D PROD,STATE,ALL' command and that should also show you the state of
the various product entries.
It may have been ENABLED and someone started/stopped RMF?
Just my 0.02 worth
Roger
ning of time.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Peter Ten Eyck
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2016 3:15 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: SMF type 89 records reporting RMF usage
Can anyone think of how a SMF type 89 re
Can anyone think of how a SMF type 89 record reporting RMF usage would be
generated without running the RMF STC?
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the
18 matches
Mail list logo
