Re: SMFxTME field

2016-01-08 Thread Ted MacNEIL
That that is is that that is not is not is that it it is - -teD -   Original Message   From: Ed Finnell Sent: Friday, January 8, 2016 03:33 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List Subject: Re: SMFxTME field That that is is that that is not is not? In a message

Re: SMFxTME field

2016-01-08 Thread Vernooij, CP (ITOPT1) - KLM
field That that is is that that is not is not is that it it is - -teD -   Original Message   From: Ed Finnell Sent: Friday, January 8, 2016 03:33 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List Subject: Re: SMFxTME field

Re: SMFxTME field

2016-01-08 Thread Ed Finnell
Slide cursor over relevant portion and hit Reply In a message dated 1/8/2016 11:21:56 A.M. Central Standard Time, 004dc9e91b6d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu writes: Sorry, I don't see how to quote a prior message.

Re: SMFxTME field

2016-01-08 Thread Janet Graff
Sorry, I don't see how to quote a prior message. This is what worked for me from Charles. "Divide by 100 -- remainder is hundredths of a second. Divide quotient by 60 -- remainder is seconds. Divide quotient by 60 -- remainder is minutes. Quotient is hours (24 hour clock). SMFxxDTE is in an

Re: SMFxTME field

2016-01-07 Thread Janet Graff
That worked. Now I have the time formatted very nicely. Thank you! Janet -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: SMFxTME field

2016-01-07 Thread Charles Mills
Which "that"? Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Janet Graff Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 5:01 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: SMFxTME field That worked. Now I have the time form

Re: SMFxTME field

2016-01-07 Thread Ed Finnell
That that is is that that is not is not? In a message dated 1/7/2016 7:02:55 P.M. Central Standard Time, charl...@mcn.org writes: "that"? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to

Re: SMFxTME field

2016-01-07 Thread Elardus Engelbrecht
Janet Graff wrote: >That worked. Now I have the time formatted very nicely. What worked? Please be kind to clarify what worked and what reply/replies really helped you? It would really help if the persons who asked for help, also post the results of success/failures on IBM-MAIN so that

Re: SMFxTME field

2016-01-06 Thread Neil Duffee
Kown 2015 -Original Message- From: Charles Mills [mailto:cha...@mcn...org] Sent: January 5, 2016 19:46 Subject: Re: SMFxTME field Of course, if you have the good Doctor Merrill's most excellent MXG software then it will do all of this for you and more in but a trice! -Original Message-

Re: SMFxTME field

2016-01-06 Thread Barry Merrill
ListServer http://www.mxg.com/mxg-l_listserver/ -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Neil Duffee Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2016 2:45 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: SMFxTME field Caveat: with daily digesting, I'm

Re: SMFxTME field

2016-01-05 Thread Elardus Engelbrecht
Janet Graff wrote: >What macro would we use to convert TIME BIN to a readable DATE TIME? It >doesn't look like STCKCONV to CONVTOD take input of a 32-bit unsigned binary. Others gave you good replies including DFSORT/ICETOOL method and how to calculate it. Charles Mills gave a good reply too.

Re: SMFxTME field

2016-01-05 Thread Elardus Engelbrecht
Ed Finnell wrote: > TITLE('SMF Type-14 Records') DATE TIME PAGE - > HEADER('Time') ON(7,4,TM1,E'99:99:99') - > C'hh:mm:ss' HEADER('Date') ON(11,4,DT3,E'-999') - DT3? yuck! That's Julian format and so ancient ... ;-) I prefer this, but then it is just me! From my sample ICETOOL job for SMF

Re: SMFxTME field

2016-01-05 Thread Ed Finnell
Which records are you trying to process? There might be samples on _www.cbttape.org_ (http://www.cbttape.org) . DFSORT and SAS/MXG are SMFTIME knowledgeable. From DFSORT Smart Tricks manual(pg 80). Likewise, you can use the TOD date and time formats (DC1-3 and TC1-4) and the ETOD date and

Re: SMFxTME field

2016-01-05 Thread Charles Mills
in some years. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Janet Graff Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2016 3:39 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: SMFxTME field What macro would we use to convert TIME BIN to a readable

Re: SMFxTME field

2016-01-05 Thread Charles Mills
05, 2016 4:30 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: SMFxTME field The SMFxxTME and SMFxxDTE fields are in my experience consistent representations of *local* time and date on the LPAR represented by the SMFID. No worries about leap seconds (unless you need to get back to some more basic

Re: SMFxTME field

2016-01-05 Thread Janet Graff
What macro would we use to convert TIME BIN to a readable DATE TIME? It doesn't look like STCKCONV to CONVTOD take input of a 32-bit unsigned binary. Janet -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,

Re: SMFxTME field

2016-01-05 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On 2016-01-05 16:38, Janet Graff wrote: > What macro would we use to convert TIME BIN to a readable DATE TIME? It > doesn't look like STCKCONV to CONVTOD take input of a 32-bit unsigned binary. > Suss out, by trial and error, an affine transformation to convert 32-bit unsigned binary to the 64

Re: SMFxTME field

2015-02-23 Thread Janet Graff
Thank you to everyone for your help. It turns out my content was correct but my timing was off. I was filling in the SMFxTME with the correct Time component of TIME BIN but I was doing it when my server started. I need to change my code to fill in the SMFxTME with the correct Time component

Re: SMFxTME field

2015-02-21 Thread Elardus Engelbrecht
Janet Graff wrote: We just noticed our product was setting the SMFxTME field inappropriately using the TIME BIN macro. What should we be using to set the SMFxTME field? Please post the TIME BIN macro and all fields/variables used. Please post the result of that macro and what you're expected

Re: SMFxTME field

2015-02-20 Thread Bob Rutledge
On 2/20/2015 2:05 PM, Janet Graff wrote: We just noticed our product was setting the SMFxTME field inappropriately using the TIME BIN macro. What should we be using to set the SMFxTME field? The doc says 06 06 SMFxTME4binary Time since midnight

Re: SMFxTME field

2015-02-20 Thread Blaicher, Christopher Y.
-8260 | M: 512-627-3803 E: cblaic...@syncsort.com -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Janet Graff Sent: Friday, February 20, 2015 2:06 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: SMFxTME field Importance: Low We just noticed

SMFxTME field

2015-02-20 Thread Janet Graff
We just noticed our product was setting the SMFxTME field inappropriately using the TIME BIN macro. What should we be using to set the SMFxTME field? The doc says 06 06 SMFxTME4binary Time since midnight, in hundredths

Re: SMFxTME field

2015-02-20 Thread Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
In 3495911068637390.wa.janet.graffyahoo@listserv.ua.edu, on 02/20/2015 at 01:05 PM, Janet Graff 004dc9e91b6d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu said: We just noticed our product was setting the SMFxTME field inappropriately using the TIME BIN macro. Why inappropriately? It matches

Re: SMFxTME field

2015-02-20 Thread Charles Mills
the century! Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Janet Graff Sent: Friday, February 20, 2015 11:06 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: SMFxTME field We just noticed our product was setting the SMFxTME field