And my problem is solved too.
I added 'CP SET SMSG IUCV'
I changed from WAKEUP ( SMSG
to WAKEUP ( IUCVMSG
I am no longer losing stacked SMSGs after 6 years of trying.
This list is great!
/Fran Hensler at Slippery Rock University of Pennsylvania USA
[EMAIL PROTECTED] +1.724.738.2153
"Yes, Virginia, there is a Slippery Rock"
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 15:21:58 -0500 Aria Bamdad said:
>SOLVED!!!
>
>Bruce (and others) thank you for your comments. The solution was
>as Bruce said, to remove the SMSG from the WAKEUP command.
>
>My test program that did fail before no longer does so. I do a
>SET MSG IUCV and then WAKEUP (IUCVMSG.
>
>Having the WAKEUP (SMSG IUCVMSG was the problem.
>
>Thanks again.
>
>Aria.
>On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 12:47:56 -0500 Bruce Hayden said:
>>I think you should remove SMSG from the wakeup options. When you use
>>the SMSG option, I think WAKEUP does a SET SMSG ON and then handles
>>receives the messages via VMCF. What you want is to receive the
>>messages via IUCV, so leave the CP SET SMSG IUCV but code your wakeup
>>command as
>>"WAKEUP +00:10 (NOEXT IUCVMSG"
>>
>>On 2/15/06, Aria Bamdad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I should have been more clear.. I am not doing the SET SMSG within the
>>> loop. Here is what I have
>>>
>>> 'CP SET SMSG IUCV'
>>> do forever
>>> "WAKEUP +00:10 ( SMSG NOEXT IUCVMSG"
>>> <do some work based on why we woke up>
>>> end
>>>
>>> There are no other SET SMSG commands in the code. Allthe work done is
>>> in the same exec and do not involve RACF, etc.
>>>
>>> I do issue a new WAKEUP every time the loop is repeated because I need to
>>> sleep for at most 10 seconds. I don't see any other way to do with
>>> without having an external wakeup times file. Would issuing the WAKEUP
>>> command flush out any pending SMSG messages?
>>
>>--
>>
>>Bruce Hayden
>>IBM Global Services zSeries Linux
>>Endicott, NY
