On Wed, 14 May 2014 10:09:08 -0400, Dno <[email protected]> wrote:
>Hi, >Does anyone know why you cannot map 100, 101, 102 or 110 records with this >macro? I'd like to be able to collect a subset of the DB2 and CICS records, >possibly by subsystem or region, or even down to a thread or transaction >because of volume. We are not using log streams yet. >Thanks >Dean Some of the challenge with these data sources are variability and complexity (to start), as follows: 1) CICS CMF 110/1 has 'tailorable' transaction data (MCT-directed by site/region/version) that is mapped by corresponding DICTIONARY data. 2) DB2 101 (with certain ACCOUNTING TRACE type activation) has the potential to generate a continuation-like record if more than 10 packages occur - that must be mapped back to the primary record since not all fields are present in both. 3) DB2 102 data (at the IFCID level) is comprehensive and larger number of metrics than a bread-basket. 4) Additionally, such as MQ 116/1-2, similar condition to #2 above with continuation-like record generation, based on unique-queue activity. In summary, these are just too comprehensive data sources for simple-mapping, likely without post-processing once the data-records are decoded to map all 'related records' to one transaction instance/event. Scott Barry SBBWorks, Inc. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
