Since a COD upgrade is "one event" that alters the field, it seems reasonable to conclude that there are other events that also alter the field. Your code may be making a false assumption.
Does your program check the return code after calling the CSRSI service? The Knowledge Center (at https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSLTBW_2.2.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r2.ieaa700/CSRSI_Description.htm) identifies conditions under which the field is not valid. Do any of these conditions apply to your customer? > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER- > l...@listserv.uga.edu] On Behalf Of Mike Shaw > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 9:14 AM > To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU > Subject: CSRSIIDF Question > > Anyone: > > Question about comments in the CSRSIIDF mapping DSECT used to map > information returned by a call to the CSRSI service. The DSECT has this > field in it: > > SI00LASTUPDATETIMESTAMP DS CL8 STCK > > With these comments for the field: > > "timestamp when system last re-issued STSI to retrieve the most current > information. A capacity upgrade on demand event is one event that results > in this update. The field is 0's if the information has not been > retrieved since IPL." > Our code treats a non-zero value in the above field as an indication that a > capacity on demand upgrade has been performed since the last IPL. A customer > of ours had a non-zero value in the timestamp field, even though they said > they had not performed a capacity on demand upgrade. > The comments in the DSECT for the timestamp field make me think we should not > rely on just this field to signal that a capacity on demand upgrade has > occurred. > Question: is it incorrect to rely on the presence of a timestamp in the > SI00LASTUPDATETIMESTAMP field as an indication that a capacity on demand > upgrade has been done?
