Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Getting RC of 1245184 while executing the DFSRRC0 program #170

Open
sbjugali opened this issue Jul 17, 2023 · 2 comments
Open

Getting RC of 1245184 while executing the DFSRRC0 program #170

sbjugali opened this issue Jul 17, 2023 · 2 comments

Comments

@sbjugali
Copy link

We are encountering with Return code of 1245184 when running an step using DFSRRC0 program under OMVS
We are able to run the same steps successfully under the TSO directly.

Can you please help us on how to look at the JES logs for investigation ?

@dennis-behm
Copy link
Member

@sbjugali

DFSRRC0 is basically the interface to IMS. The MVSExec is not loading a full TSO environment, so most likely, this is why it is failing, when loading some specific.

So, maybe a JCLExec or a JobExec is a better way to implement this step.

To troubleshoot it: 1245184 looks like a Decimal value - when converting this Hexadecimal, it turns into 13000.

The System Completion Codes give us more insight: https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.5.0?topic=zmsc-system-completion-codes

image

Looking at the programmer response, we expect that there is a message in the system log about IEC141I

So, let's look up the IEC message in : https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.5.0?topic=iee-iec-messages, which takes us to:
https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.5.0?topic=messages-iec141i

The RC in the system log, will then tell us the reason why it failed.

@mhardin18
Copy link

There is a lot lacking in the DBB API with regards to information coming out of any of the IExecute interface classes:

https://www.ibm.com/docs/api/v1/content/SS6T76_2.0.0/javadoc/com/ibm/dbb/build/IExecute.html

So I am all for improving this. A mind blowing idea would be to tie in the results to Fault Analyzer for easy lookup :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants