Gee, along with a recent message over on the RACF forum, this is making the BPXAS initiator address space seem like a z/OS UNIX version of a JES XBM (eXecution Batch Monitor) initiator. This had never occurred to me before. And is likely not really of much use or interest to others.
-- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets® 9151 Boulevard 26 • N. Richland Hills • TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone • john.mck...@healthmarkets.com • www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets® is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. –The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company®, Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] > On Behalf Of Hunkeler Peter (KIUP 4) > Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 1:31 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: BPXP024I BPXAS INITIATOR STARTED ON BEHALF OF... ( was: > JVMDUMP032I message) > > >Now STC39500 looks like some sort of started task that began like > this: > > BPXP024I BPXAS INITIATOR STARTED ON BEHALF OF JOB FTPD9 RUNNING > IN ASID 01C1 > > Don't get fooled by that stupid message. It may have been introduced > for some debugging purposes, I can't tell. > > What is an address space called BPXAS? It is an idle initiator waiting > for some UNIX work to arrive it can host. > > New UNIX processes that result from (non-local) spawn() or fork() > function calls need an address space to run in. Because creating as > well as destroying an address space is somewhat costly in z/OS and > because many UNIX processes are very short living (think of shell > commands as an example), BPXAS initiator address spaces were invented > back in OS/390 V1.3 (or around that time. Before that APPC initiators > have been "missued" for this). > > Step 1) When a new process needs an address space, the system looks if > it can find an *idle* BPXAS initiator. > Step 1a) If so the process' environment will be built in that > existing BPXAS address space and the process can run. > Step 1b) If no idle BPXAS is available (and WLM thinks the system > can cope with one more address space), then a new BPXAS is started for > this new process, the process' environment will be built in the newly > started BPXAS address space and the process can run. > Step 2) When the process finally ends, the address space is no longer > needed and could be destroyed. Again, since this is somewhat costly, > the BPXAS initiator AS will not immediately end. It will stay around > for 30 minutes (this 30 minute period was a hard coded; I believe it > still is), and will be available for step 1/1a of another new process. > Chances are, a new process will be born in due time (if there is some > UNIX work going on on that system). > > I don't know when the above message has been introduced (it wasn't > always there), but the message is issued *once* when a new BPXAS is > started (Step 1/1b above). It documents the jobname and ASID of the > *parent* process, i.e. the process that initiated the new process about > to be run in this BPXAS. Thereafter, no message is issued when an > existing, idle BPXAS is selected to host just another process. > > -- > Peter Hunkeler > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
