IEFU29 - Intermittently does not get control

2010-07-12 Thread Ruegsegger, Jeff
We have been using the standard SMF switch/dump method utilizing IEFu29 for 
years.  Recently on one of out severly systems, IEFU29 is not getting control 
after our midnight switch of SMF recording.  We issue "I MVS" at around 
midnight followed by our daily SMF accumulation process.  We also switch our 
JES2 SYSLOG at this time.  Interestingly I moved the "I SMF" command just a 
few minutes later and U29 seems to get control just fine.   I'ts my 
understanding that IEFU29 runs as part of the SMF address space so I assume 
that I'm off base assuming that the WRITELOG we issue for the SYSLOG at the 
same time is affecting IEFU29however moving the time by just a few 
minutes after the WRITELOG seems to have solved the issue.  Has anyone else 
come accross this before?  Any notions about why IEFU29 is not invoking as 
expected? 

--
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


Re: IEFU29 - Intermittently does not get control

2010-07-13 Thread Elardus Engelbrecht
Ruegsegger, Jeff wrote:

>We have been using the standard SMF switch/dump method utilizing IEFu29 
for years.  Recently on one of out severly systems, IEFU29 is not getting 
control after our midnight switch of SMF recording. 

Do you do the switch on all LPARS simultaneously on midnight? My (bad) 
experience is that you should do 'I SMF' one or two LPAR(s) in a sysplex at a 
time.

What is running on that LPAR during midnight?

>We issue "I MVS" at around midnight followed by our daily SMF accumulation 
process.  We also switch our JES2 SYSLOG at this time.  Interestingly I moved 
the "I SMF" command just a few minutes later and U29 seems to get control 
just fine.   

What is 'I MVS' command? You mean perhaps 'I SMF'?

Perhaps that exit does something? Submitting a job or issueing a WTO?

>I'ts my understanding that IEFU29 runs as part of the SMF address space so 
I assume that I'm off base assuming that the WRITELOG we issue for the 
SYSLOG at the same time is affecting IEFU29however moving the time by 
just a few minutes after the WRITELOG seems to have solved the issue.  Has 
anyone else come accross this before? 

IEFU29 is indeed part of SMF address space as documented.
I have no more comments, but who issued the WRITELOG and 'I SMF' 
commands? 

> Any notions about why IEFU29 is not invoking as expected?

What is your exit doing? Do you have the source code?

Groete / Greetings
Elardus Engelbrecht

--
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


Re: IEFU29 - Intermittently does not get control

2010-07-16 Thread Ruegsegger, Jeff
Does anyone have any ideas on this?

--
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


Re: IEFU29 - Intermittently does not get control

2010-07-16 Thread Ruegsegger, Jeff
On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 02:25:09 -0500, Elardus Engelbrecht 
 wrote:

>Ruegsegger, Jeff wrote:
>
>>We have been using the standard SMF switch/dump method utilizing IEFu29
>for years.  Recently on one of out severly systems, IEFU29 is not getting
>control after our midnight switch of SMF recording.
>
>Do you do the switch on all LPARS simultaneously on midnight? My (bad)
>experience is that you should do 'I SMF' one or two LPAR(s) in a sysplex at a
>time.
>
We do via our scheduling package TWS...I see them regularly run within 
seconds on all 3 sysplex members.
>What is running on that LPAR during midnight?
>Not much.  Only one of the other LPAR's is busy (DB2 database for SAP and 
thats about it) running SAP batch. 
>>We issue "I MVS" at around midnight followed by our daily SMF accumulation
>process.  We also switch our JES2 SYSLOG at this time.  Interestingly I moved
>the "I SMF" command just a few minutes later and U29 seems to get control
>just fine.
>
>What is 'I MVS' command? You mean perhaps 'I SMF'?
my bad...yup "I SMF"
>
>Perhaps that exit does something? Submitting a job or issueing a WTO?
Vanilla IEFU29 right out of SYS1.SAMPLIB.
>
>>I'ts my understanding that IEFU29 runs as part of the SMF address space so
>I assume that I'm off base assuming that the WRITELOG we issue for the
>SYSLOG at the same time is affecting IEFU29however moving the time by
>just a few minutes after the WRITELOG seems to have solved the issue.  Has
>anyone else come accross this before?
>
>IEFU29 is indeed part of SMF address space as documented.
>I have no more comments, but who issued the WRITELOG and 'I SMF'
>commands?
Batch job (IEBGENER) issues "I SMF"
>
>> Any notions about why IEFU29 is not invoking as expected?
>
>What is your exit doing? Do you have the source code?
see my previous on this
>
>Groete / Greetings
>Elardus Engelbrecht
>
>--
>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

--
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


Re: IEFU29 - Intermittently does not get control

2010-07-18 Thread Peter Relson
It seems unlikely that the system is failing to call the exit routines in 
the circumstances in which it is documented to do so. 

Have you tried putting a SLIP trap wherever the call is initiated to 
confirm that your expectation of calling the exit matches the reality?

Are you certain that your IEFU29 is defined properly? There is not one 
single IEFU29 exit. There is, for example, SYS.IEFU29 and SYSSTC.IEFU29 
etc.
Doing various DISPLAY PROG,EXIT's can make sure that you have all of the 
IEFU29's defined that you want and that your exit routine is associated 
properly with each. You might even try using a name other than IEFU29 
(there is no need to use the name IEFU29 for your exit routine) with 
appropriate EXIT ADD statements in PROGxx.

Peter Relson
z/OS Core Technology Design

--
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