On 06/28/2014 05:19 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Jun 2014 15:21:04 -0500, Joel C. Ewing wrote:
>> An uncomfortable thought:  If the vendor product in question is saving
>> timestamps with inconsistent conventions, have you verified that it is
>> indeed consistently using the correct offset to derive the UCT value
> >from local time and the the change in offset values actually occurs at
>> the proper local time?  
>>
> Ouch!  Ouch!  Ouch!  If the vendor derives UTC from local time, he's
> probably Microsoft.  Fire him!  For reasons well discussed earlier in
> this thread, conversion from local to UTC is unreliable.  Rather the
> basis should be UTC and local tim derived from that.
>
> Here, IBM wisely chose to run the TOD clock on UTC (give-or-take
> CVTLSO) and derive GMT and LOCAL in the TIME macro from that.
>
> -- gil
>
Ouch indeed!  Yes, I see that's what I wrote!  I was thinking of
potential inconsistencies between UCT and local time and  got my
thoughts backwards. 

In the z/OS environment it's not the UCT values that are questionable
(assuming TOD is set to the correct convention), it's the offset to
local time and local time that may be suspect.  My point, which I hope
might still have come through from the rest of my paragraph, is that an
application cannot totally depend on changes to  the z/OS system local
time offset from UCT to determine whether Daylight Saving time should be
in effect, or depend on system local time values to be consistent with
the official DST transition rules.  This is because the local time
transition on z/OS may depend on some manual action (like an IPL), or
even on an automatic process where there is some potential for the
process to run too far from the precise time it should.  z/OS and its
current hardware have the capability of automating this process with
great precision, but there may be historic or application reasons why
installations may require that other events determine the precise time
of transition.  The discrepancy may be short lived and the window of
opportunity only occurs two days a year, so any level of imprecision
here may be inconsequential in the context of interest, but yet the
imprecision may exist.

-- 
Joel C. Ewing,    Bentonville, AR       [email protected] 

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to