|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
gmcateer
New User
Joined: 23 Aug 2024
Posts: 2
Location: Scotland
|
|
|
|
We have a program that issues an SDUMPX macro to dump the address space and an associated data space.
This program was written way back in the 90s and has worked under every release of z/OS until z/OS 3.1.
Under z/OS 3.1, instead of getting our address space and selected data space, we get a lot of data that was not requested, the dump request fails (see below) and the data space is not included.
When issuing the SDUMPX we get the following messages:
| Code: |
IEA794I SVC DUMP HAS CAPTURED: 929
DUMPID=002 REQUESTED BY JOB (XXXXX )
DUMP TITLE=XXX DUMP
INSUFFICIENT RESOURCES FOR OPTIMIZE=YES PROCESSING
IEF196I IGD100I 0A82 ALLOCATED TO DDNAME SYS00003 DATACLAS ( )
IEF196I IEF285I SYS1.S0W1.Z31B.DMP00002 CATALOGED
IEF196I IEF285I VOL SER NOS= B3SYS1.
IEA611I PARTIAL DUMP ON SYS1.S0W1.Z31B.DMP00002 933
DUMPID=002 REQUESTED BY JOB (SRM27 )
FOR ASID (0074)
INCIDENT TOKEN: ADCDPL S0W1 08/23/2024 08:02:00
SDRSN = 00000000 00000000 04000000 00000000
SOME STORAGE COULD NOT BE DUMPED RC=8
|
Under previous z/OS versions, our dump dataset would contain the normal DR2 H, SV, SC, A, etc. records, plus our expected DR2 SS.....%00000XXX records, where 00000XXX is our data space.
We have rebuilt the code under z/OS 3.1 but that made no difference. We have also changed the default dump parameters, altered the code to try different dump options, but still no data space and no obvious changes in what is being dumped.
Our SDUMPX macro is as follows:
| Code: |
SDUMPX HDRAD=SDUMPHDR,SUMLSTL=SUMLSTL, X
TYPE=(XMEM,FAILRC),SDATA=(NODEFS,SUM,RGN,TRT), X
MF=(E,SDUMPL)
|
As I have mentioned, this code has worked under all previous versions of z/OS.
Any help appreciated. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Pedro
Global Moderator
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Posts: 2593
Location: Silicon Valley
|
|
|
|
| It seems like you should call the IBM support center. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hankoerlemans
New User
Joined: 25 Jan 2018
Posts: 61
Location: Australia
|
|
|
|
I concur...however, even though it didn't use it I'd try with OPTIMIZE=NO set as the default.
IBM did an APAR a year or so ago for missing Java pages with OPTIMIZE=YES so I think it's worth the check. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joerg.Findeisen
Senior Member
Joined: 15 Aug 2015
Posts: 1329
Location: Bamberg, Germany
|
|
|
|
| hankoerlemans wrote: |
I concur...however, even though it didn't use it I'd try with OPTIMIZE=NO set as the default.
IBM did an APAR a year or so ago for missing Java pages with OPTIMIZE=YES so I think it's worth the check. |
See
| Code: |
| INSUFFICIENT RESOURCES FOR OPTIMIZE=YES PROCESSING |
message. It actually should have been processed as OPTIMIZE=NO already. But certainly worth a try. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gmcateer
New User
Joined: 23 Aug 2024
Posts: 2
Location: Scotland
|
|
|
|
We tried switching the default options, including changing them to OPTIMIZE=NO, but no difference.
Nothing we did with the defaults changed anything, even when we removed NODEFS from the macro. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rohit Umarjikar
Global Moderator
Joined: 21 Sep 2010
Posts: 3076
Location: NYC,USA
|
|
|
|
We also have faced recent failures with z3.1 upgrade.
Please contact IBM. They were able to help us with suggestions on insufficient storage. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
