|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
jasorn
Warnings : 1
Active User
Joined: 12 Jul 2006
Posts: 191
Location: USA
|
|
|
|
Can you use sj in batch sdsf?
I've looked and read and can't find an example or a reference that says it doesn't work. I've tried too and can't get it to work. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
enrico-sorichetti
Superior Member
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 10891
Location: italy
|
|
|
|
use a bit of logic please....
what is the meaning of sj ( answer provided for clarity )
| Quote: |
| ... to put you in an ISPF edit session for the JCL. ... |
and... the consequence is ....
for suggestions and samples about rexx and batch sdsf see
www.redbooks.ibm.com/abstracts/sg247419.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jasorn
Warnings : 1
Active User
Joined: 12 Jul 2006
Posts: 191
Location: USA
|
|
|
|
| enrico-sorichetti wrote: |
use a bit of logic please....
what is the meaning of sj ( answer provided for clarity )
| Quote: |
| ... to put you in an ISPF edit session for the JCL. ... |
and... the consequence is ....
for suggestions and samples about rexx and batch sdsf see
www.redbooks.ibm.com/abstracts/sg247419.html |
enrico-sorichetti,
Was that a shot? I suppose I'm deserving of shots. And, well, you are senior in this forum 
Sure that's the purpose of SJ. Following that line I suppose the meaning of SE be to put you in an ISPF edit session for the spool? So I figure if ++SE works ++SJ does and I just can't figure it out.
This is for a process to capture information about ad hoc jobs run in test so that for archive purpose we have a record of the job as it ran. Currently it captures the spool information and it would be nice if ++SJ would work as well as the change to the existing process would be very minimal.
I have a work around that gives the job as it ran 99% of the time and am OK with using it. I figured I'd ask here to see if SJ was supported and I missed it.
These ad hoc jobs aren't mission critical or they'd run in production. But a nice to have would be if ++SJ could replace ++SE in the code below and work. Or if a different set of commands to sdsf in batch mode would accomplish the same thing.
I've seen the link you posted and while this process doesn't use rexx I looked through it anyway. It says SJ is not supported in rexx but I haven't seen any reference that speaks to whether SJ is supported in batch sdsf as SE seems to be since the below code works.
| Code: |
SET CONFIRM OFF
PREFIX jobname
OWNER *
DA
++ALL
RESET
FIND jobname LAST
++SE
RESET
PRINT FILE REPORT
PRINT
PRINT CLOSE
END
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
enrico-sorichetti
Superior Member
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 10891
Location: italy
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
expat
Global Moderator
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 8796
Location: Welsh Wales
|
|
|
|
| Why not just retain the JCL (JESJCL ??? element of the output - can't recall it exactly as I'm not at work) and if the need arises a few seconds of brainpower will reconstruct the JCL. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jasorn
Warnings : 1
Active User
Joined: 12 Jul 2006
Posts: 191
Location: USA
|
|
|
|
| That's the trouble with me and manuals. Sometimes I don't get the clear part. I saw the last line and wondered, "Does that means SJ isn't supported?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jasorn
Warnings : 1
Active User
Joined: 12 Jul 2006
Posts: 191
Location: USA
|
|
|
|
| expat wrote: |
| Why not just retain the JCL (JESJCL ??? element of the output - can't recall it exactly as I'm not at work) and if the need arises a few seconds of brainpower will reconstruct the JCL. |
That's the solution that's in place. The issue is it takes some time to reconstruct the jcl and sometimes the time I have to reconstruct them is less than others or will get me home sooner. So I want to keep the job as it ran, too. Depending upon the time of year the few minutes required to reconstruct a few ad hoc jobs again could make a noticeable difference in the day.
I just made a wrapper that submits the job so there will be a copy of what was submitted without needing to reconstruct it as well as the spool, too. It serves the need but if SJ was supported it would have been a bit cleaner. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ofer71
Global Moderator
Joined: 27 Dec 2005
Posts: 2358
Location: Israel
|
|
|
|
As far as I know, the SJ command invokes the ISPF service EDIF.
O. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
