>Am I supposed to infer from this discussion that SMF timestamps are recorded in local time, as opposed to UTC?
It depends on the record/vendor, as Dr. Barry stated. >What century is this, anyway? I thought it had long been generally believed >that critical timestamps should be recorded in UTC. Records/programmes have to be re-engineered to accomplish that. Also, users depending on the existing formats wll be affected. Again, it's the old compatibility issues. I remember, back in the early 1980's, when IBM changed the format of the RMF Type74's (Device Activity) to a collapsed linked list, with the introduction of the 3380. MICS & MXG weren't available yet; I had to completely re-write the extract programme, from scratch -- the only thing that had not changed was the standard 18-byte header. And, NO, they didn't convert it to UTC. - Ted MacNEIL eamacn...@yahoo.ca Twitter: @TedMacNEIL ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
