| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Sreejith
Intermediate
Joined: 02 Dec 2002
Posts: 155
Topics: 25
Location: N.Ireland
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 8:46 am Post subject: LTERM and Userid |
 |
|
Hi,
I recently saw a thread some where someone talking about LTERM and Userid returning different values in Test and Prod region. I can't recall where I saw this. Today I got the same problem in our production IMS region. All our transactions are coded in such a way that it refers LTERM-ID in IO-PCB as USERID. This works perfectly in Test regions. But recently production region is not returning the userid in LTERM.
Does anyone know about any recent updates to IMS which altered the LTERM value
Thanks
Sreejith |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bithead
Advanced
Joined: 03 Jan 2003
Posts: 550
Topics: 23
Location: Michigan, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 8:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| What changed in the production environment? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bauer
Intermediate
Joined: 10 Oct 2003
Posts: 315
Topics: 49
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 8:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Sreejith,
why didn't you get the UserID from the UserID field from io_pcb?
As far as i know, it depends on the installation, if the lterm field contains the Userid or an Lterm name not coreeponding to the racf userid. We always use the UserID field.
But as Bithead asked already, any changes in production environment ?
regards,
bauer |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sreejith
Intermediate
Joined: 02 Dec 2002
Posts: 155
Topics: 25
Location: N.Ireland
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Bithead and Bauer,
Thanks for the reply. These programs were developed a long time ago(1970s) and uses LTERM as userid to allow certain access. All of a sudden some of the users started having problems and I spent last 2 days finding out the problem. what happened is earlier all users could only have single logon and when a new screen scraper application is deployed some of them were enabled for multiple logons. This changed the value of LTERM to a unique value instead of userid.
So as Bauer suggested we are going to use userid field. But none of the IOPCB got a field called userid.it ends after date and time. So it is going to get busy now 
Sreejith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bauer
Intermediate
Joined: 10 Oct 2003
Posts: 315
Topics: 49
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 12:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sreejith,
structure referenced by iopcb looks in our environment like this:
| Code: |
DCL 1 IO_PCB BASED (PMSG)
, 2 LTNAME CHAR (08)
, 2 JCBADD BIT (16)
, 2 S_CODE CHAR (02)
, 2 IN_PREFIX
, 3 DATE DEC FIXED(07)
, 3 TIME DEC FIXED(07)
, 3 NO BIN FIXED(31)
, 2 MOD_NAME CHAR (08)
, 2 USERID CHAR (08)
;
|
i'm not sure, if this works in all environments (original IBM supplied data structure) or if this structure is customized in our environment.
So, have a look to the dokumentation or may be i can ask our ims specialist.
regards,
bauer |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sreejith
Intermediate
Joined: 02 Dec 2002
Posts: 155
Topics: 25
Location: N.Ireland
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 3:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks bauer
this is what I tried and it is working ok. This is the COBOL layout. similar to your PL1 (??) layout
| Code: |
01 TERMINAL-PCB.
05 TP-TERM-NAME PIC X(8).
05 TP-RES PIC XX.
05 TP-STATUS-CODE PIC XX.
05 TP-JULIAN PIC S9(7) COMP-3.
05 TP-TIME PIC S9(7) COMP-3.
05 TP-MSG-SEQ-NBR PIC S9(4) COMP.
05 FILLER PIC XX.
05 TP-MOD-NAME PIC X(8).
05 TP-USER PIC X(8).
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bauer
Intermediate
Joined: 10 Oct 2003
Posts: 315
Topics: 49
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 4:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sreejith,
yesyou are right, my coding is PL1. I missed to give you a remark for the programming language. Sorry.
regards,
bauer |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Quick Manuals
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
