Portal | Manuals | References | Downloads | Info | Programs | JCLs | Master the Mainframes
IBM Mainframe Computers Forums Index
 
Register
 
IBM Mainframe Computers Forums Index Mainframe: Search IBM Mainframe Forum: FAQ Memberlist Usergroups Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in
 

 

RESOLVING SYMDEFS

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    IBMMAINFRAMES.com Support Forums -> JCL & VSAM
View previous topic :: :: View next topic  
Author Message
Garry Carroll

Active Member


Joined: 08 May 2006
Posts: 990
Location: Dublin, Ireland / Edinburgh, Scotland

PostPosted: Tue Sep 08, 2009 5:59 pm    Post subject: RESOLVING SYMDEFS
Reply with quote

My position is that batch jobs, in particular jobs run with TYPRUN=SCAN are failing to resolve SYMDEFS as defined in SYS1.PARMLIB(IEASYMnn). Has anyone a simple means of having these resolved?

Thanks in advance,
Garry.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Robert Sample

Global Moderator


Joined: 06 Jun 2008
Posts: 7913
Location: Bellevue, IA

PostPosted: Tue Sep 08, 2009 6:05 pm    Post subject:
Reply with quote

From the JCL Language Reference manual, link at the top of the page:
Quote:
5.4.1 What are System Symbols?

System symbols represent values that are unique to each system. A system replaces those symbols with its own values when it processes started task JCL (jobs and procedures read from a procedure library) and TSO logons. (A started task is a task resulting from JCL that is processed immediately as a result of a START command.
Exactly where in there does is say anything about SUBMITTED jobs? Started tasks, yes. TSO logons, yes. Submitted jobs, NO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Garry Carroll

Active Member


Joined: 08 May 2006
Posts: 990
Location: Dublin, Ireland / Edinburgh, Scotland

PostPosted: Tue Sep 08, 2009 6:19 pm    Post subject:
Reply with quote

Thanks Robert,

Yes, I'm aware that Started Tasks & TSO Logons will resolve the SYMDEFS. I also can see that it doesn't mention submitted jobs. If the manual gave me an answer, I'd not be asking.

My problem is that, before submitting updates for such procedures to proclibs, I'd like to be able to demonstrate with, for example, a TYPRUN=SCAN that the SYMDEFS will get resolved. Change Control people don't like to let what appear to be unresolved references through. Each time there's a started task update, they issue a challenge that has to have a response.

Regards,
Garry.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Robert Sample

Global Moderator


Joined: 06 Jun 2008
Posts: 7913
Location: Bellevue, IA

PostPosted: Tue Sep 08, 2009 6:23 pm    Post subject:
Reply with quote

Since started tasks do not have JOB statements, where are you going to place the TYPRUN=SCAN?

It sounds like you may need to work with your Change Control group to come up with a better process for started task changes, or you'll just have to live with the challenge / response for every started task change.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dick scherrer

Site Director


Joined: 23 Nov 2006
Posts: 19270
Location: Inside the Matrix

PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 1:07 am    Post subject:
Reply with quote

Hello,

Might it suffice to add a JOB statement and run a TYPRUN=SCAN to prove the expansion, but not promote the JOB/TYPRUN with the change?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MBabu

Active User


Joined: 03 Aug 2008
Posts: 401
Location: Mumbai

PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:36 am    Post subject:
Reply with quote

or maybe you can write a small Rexx routine that preprocess the JCL using MVSVAR('SYMDEF',symbol) and get the change control group to agree to (maybe run it and) review its output.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Robert Sample

Global Moderator


Joined: 06 Jun 2008
Posts: 7913
Location: Bellevue, IA

PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 6:17 am    Post subject:
Reply with quote

Quote:
Yes, I'm aware that Started Tasks & TSO Logons will resolve the SYMDEFS. I also can see that it doesn't mention submitted jobs. If the manual gave me an answer, I'd not be asking.
Actually, the manual did answer you -- since submitted jobs are not explicitly mentioned while the others are, you can pretty much bet that submitted jobs are not going to be able to access the SYMDEFS. A negative answer is still an answer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Garry Carroll

Active Member


Joined: 08 May 2006
Posts: 990
Location: Dublin, Ireland / Edinburgh, Scotland

PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 11:28 am    Post subject:
Reply with quote

Quote:
Might it suffice to add a JOB statement and run a TYPRUN=SCAN to prove the expansion, but not promote the JOB/TYPRUN with the change?


Thanks Dick, but the job submitted does not resolve SYMDEFS - as per Robert's reference to JCL manual.

Quote:
or maybe you can write a small Rexx routine that preprocess the JCL .....


Perhaps MBabu, but I was hoping to avoid this.

Quote:
Actually, the manual did answer you -- since submitted jobs are not explicitly mentioned while the others are, you can pretty much bet that submitted jobs are not going to be able to access the SYMDEFS. A negative answer is still an answer.


Robert, I'd contend that this is not a negative answer. The fact that you say "you can pretty much bet.." suggests a slim possibility may exist.


Anyway, it would seem that I'll either have to code around, fix the Change control process/people, or live with it.

Thanks for your inputs,

Garry.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
enrico-sorichetti

Global Moderator


Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 10202
Location: italy

PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 11:50 am    Post subject: Reply to: RESOLVING SYMDEFS
Reply with quote

have You tried to play around with started JOBS ?

it has been a while that the facility is around,
but beware I have not cheched if typrun= scan works with them
IIRC SYMDEFS get resolved in started JOBS,
after having satified the people with funny hats all You have to do is to take away the JOB card when promoting to final production
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dick scherrer

Site Director


Joined: 23 Nov 2006
Posts: 19270
Location: Inside the Matrix

PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:10 pm    Post subject: Reply to: RESOLVING SYMDEFS
Reply with quote

Hi Garry,

Quote:
Thanks Dick, but the job submitted does not resolve SYMDEFS - as per Robert's reference to JCL manual.
My bad - brain fade. . . icon_redface.gif

30 lashes. . .

d
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MBabu

Active User


Joined: 03 Aug 2008
Posts: 401
Location: Mumbai

PostPosted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 11:41 pm    Post subject: Reply to: RESOLVING SYMDEFS
Reply with quote

OK - 1st... I have no idea what I'm talking about here icon_redface.gif so for whatever it is worth... Is it possible to add a known fatal error to the started task JCL so that the input will run through conversion but not proceed to execution? If so, then you could add an agreed upon flaw to the JCL, start it, let it fail and use the joblog as a means to verify changes. (I know - I don't like it either, but its worth asking since it is similar to typerun=scan, I guess). I'm assuming, of course, that the job log would contain expansions, and that may be wrong - I don't have a sys to test on
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Robert Sample

Global Moderator


Joined: 06 Jun 2008
Posts: 7913
Location: Bellevue, IA

PostPosted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 12:34 am    Post subject:
Reply with quote

Mbabu, you really want to monkey around with the JES start up deck that much? Or the CA-7 JCL? Actually, there's a few started tasks that you could not do this to anyway -- if the CA RIM job fails during the IPL, for example, none of the CA products on that LPAR will be able to run. And CA RIM is typically only executed during an IPL since you only need it once -- but it is a started task that has to be changed every now and then.

The o/p either needs to get an exception for started tasks, or work with the change control group to implement something that is workable.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MBabu

Active User


Joined: 03 Aug 2008
Posts: 401
Location: Mumbai

PostPosted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 1:41 am    Post subject:
Reply with quote

I didn't really think it was a viable option to change the actual proc, just a copy (which has its own issues) but still, as I said, I didn't like it either.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Garry Carroll

Active Member


Joined: 08 May 2006
Posts: 990
Location: Dublin, Ireland / Edinburgh, Scotland

PostPosted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 11:58 am    Post subject:
Reply with quote

Thanks Enrico,
Quote:
have You tried to play around with started JOBS ?


I'll try following that route. I'll let you know how I get on, but I'll be off the air for a while.

Cheers,
Garry.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
View previous topic :: :: View next topic  
Post new topic   Reply to topic    IBMMAINFRAMES.com Support Forums -> JCL & VSAM All times are GMT + 6 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 

Search our Forum:

Similar Topics
Topic Author Forum Replies Posted
No new posts Need some help in resolving job abend... tuvi_kp JCL & VSAM 2 Wed Nov 20, 2013 5:37 am
No new posts Resolving nested symbolic variables i... Terry Heinze CLIST & REXX 5 Wed Nov 13, 2013 8:24 am
No new posts Resolving AZI4 enrico-sorichetti CICS 15 Fri Dec 30, 2011 1:50 pm
No new posts Resolving -911 DEADLOCK OR TIMEOUT mailsaurabh.tripathi DB2 3 Fri Dec 05, 2008 7:02 pm
No new posts Resolving ASRA rpuhlman COBOL Programming 4 Wed Aug 06, 2008 9:37 pm


Facebook
Back to Top
 
Mainframe Wiki | Forum Rules | Bookmarks | Subscriptions | FAQ | Tutorials | Contact Us