I want a new report, and it should be sorted on AGENTNAME with header at top and total at bottom. When i use SYNC SORT with SORT FIELDS=(7,9,CH,A) to sort on AGENTNAME it displays like this :
Balraj, Can you confirm you are getting WER* messages and not ICE* messages? Because you have posted to DFSORT part of the forum and you are pretty old to forum.
You can use ICETOOL's DATASORT operator to sort the data records |in a data set without sorting the header or trailer records. You |use the following operands to tell DATASORT the number of header records, |trailer records, or header and trailer records in your data set:
||HEADER or FIRST - |the first record is a header record |HEADER(x) or FIRST(x) - |the first x records are header records |TRAILER or LAST - |the last record is a trailer record |TRAILER(y) or LAST(y) - |the last y records are trailer records
|DATASORT does not require an "identifier" in the header or trailer |records; it can treat the first x records as header records and the |last y records as trailer records.
|You must specify a USING data set to specify a DFSORT SORT statement |that tells DATASORT the fields you want to use to sort your data records. | You can use various other DFSORT statements as well; see z/OS DFSORT Application Programming Guide for |details.
|DATASORT sorts the data records between your header records (first |x records of the data set) and trailer records (last y records of |the data set) while keeping the header and trailer records in place.
So for this example I am assuming the EMPID as the key.
So the control statement for ICETOOL will become like this.
Joined: 23 Nov 2006 Posts: 19243 Location: Inside the Matrix
Hello,
Is there not some output that has Syncsort information at the top of the page? There should be some "printout" that was generated by Syncsort and not the DOS system. . .
Look at the output from another sort that is working. It will produce information about the process that was run (record counts, dsorg, etc). We need that same info from the problem run.
Gerry's modified INREC statement is correct. That should work fine. Please let us know if you continue to encounter a problem after making this change.