There is actually two issues here.

1) Only IBM's mail programs (QMSF and QTSMTPCLTP) are throwing MCH3401, and then code was written to filter them out.
Is that acceptable?
None of IBM other LPP throw MCH3401.
I remember on an old PMR which included why are MCH3401 appearing in the joblog, IBM's response was application error that needs to be resolved.

2) The second issue would be a valid RFE for an enhancement when STRWCH is performed to give it more flexibility for including user jobs or excluding system jobs.

Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bryan Dietz
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2018 4:35 PM
To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: WRKWCH for MCH3401 - system jobs QMSF and QTSMTPCLTP triggering the watch thousands of times.

push back on "working as designed", I hate that cop-out reply.

If you really think it's broken keep at it. Present your case.

Bryan



Steinmetz, Paul wrote on 10/11/2018 3:28 PM:
Long story short, WAD.
RFE needed on STRWCH to either to be able to select all user jobs or omit system jobs.

Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Steinmetz, Paul
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2018 10:00 AM
To: 'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'
Subject: RE: WRKWCH for MCH3401 - system jobs QMSF and QTSMTPCLTP triggering the watch thousands of times.

Opened PMR with IBM.
IBM support recreated the issue.
QMSF, QTSMTPCLTP, and possibly other jobs are trapping the MCH3401, messages never appear in their joblogs.
The WRKWCH, however, is picking these up.
Waiting on response from a CPS B5ELFJ for MSF and SMTP developers to respond to why the messages are being generated but suppressed from their joblogs

Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rob Berendt
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2018 3:56 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: WRKWCH for MCH3410 - system jobs QMSF and QTSMTPCLTP triggering the watch thousands of times.

Open a ticket. Either IBM needs to fix this or figure out a better way to
write code to check for an object's existence with some method which will
not trigger such an error. But I'm thinking there's something which needs
to be fixed and not just an error trapping coding improvement.


Rob Berendt


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.