Topic
  • 8 replies
  • Latest Post - ‏2012-07-23T15:35:10Z by dysonbags
dysonbags
dysonbags
16 Posts

Pinned topic PM53735: EYUNX0013E TRANSACTION CODB INVALID VALUE EYU9DBUG OPTION PROGRAM

‏2012-07-20T13:10:06Z |
I'm trying out the CICS 5.1 Beta. It's all installed easily enough and I have a region running. I've also converted the CPSM CMAS and WUI on this LPAR.

I'm now trying to start a region that's still at TS 4.2 and connect it to the 5.1 CMAS. This is where I see this message, on the TS 4.2 region either during startup or if I run the COLM transaction.

I can see that this was an issue in TS 4.2 and a PTF was created. Is there a similar PTF for the %.1 beta?

Cheers
Graham
Updated on 2012-07-23T15:35:10Z at 2012-07-23T15:35:10Z by dysonbags
  • SystemAdmin
    SystemAdmin
    124 Posts

    Re: PM53735: EYUNX0013E TRANSACTION CODB INVALID VALUE EYU9DBUG OPTION PROGRAM

    ‏2012-07-20T14:27:04Z  
    Hi Graham,

    That PTF should been integrated into the code base of CICS TS 5.1 Open Beta. I assume this message comes out on the CMAS?

    Cheers

    Adam
  • dysonbags
    dysonbags
    16 Posts

    Re: PM53735: EYUNX0013E TRANSACTION CODB INVALID VALUE EYU9DBUG OPTION PROGRAM

    ‏2012-07-20T14:30:50Z  
    Hi Graham,

    That PTF should been integrated into the code base of CICS TS 5.1 Open Beta. I assume this message comes out on the CMAS?

    Cheers

    Adam
    Hi Adam,

    No, it comes out on the log of the TS 4.2 MAS region.

    EYUNX0013E Z010CICS TRANSACTION CODB has invalid value: EYU9DBUG for option: PROGRAM
    EYUNX0013E Z010CICS TRANSACTION CONL has invalid value: EYU9XLEV for option: PROGRAM
    EYUNX0014E Z010CICS The definition for TRANSACTION CONL is invalid. MAS initialization is terminating

    Cheers
    Graham
  • SystemAdmin
    SystemAdmin
    124 Posts

    Re: PM53735: EYUNX0013E TRANSACTION CODB INVALID VALUE EYU9DBUG OPTION PROGRAM

    ‏2012-07-20T15:35:58Z  
    • dysonbags
    • ‏2012-07-20T14:30:50Z
    Hi Adam,

    No, it comes out on the log of the TS 4.2 MAS region.

    EYUNX0013E Z010CICS TRANSACTION CODB has invalid value: EYU9DBUG for option: PROGRAM
    EYUNX0013E Z010CICS TRANSACTION CONL has invalid value: EYU9XLEV for option: PROGRAM
    EYUNX0014E Z010CICS The definition for TRANSACTION CONL is invalid. MAS initialization is terminating

    Cheers
    Graham
    Hi Graham,

    Thanks for the clarification I've just looked at the PMR in more detail. It looks like the PMR created some sample definitions called EYU$nnn where nnn is the release. With CICS TS 5.1 Open Beta a new set has been created called EYU$670 (these are within the EYUSAMP dataset) and this should be applied to the CICS TS 4.2 system that is connecting to avoid these messages being produced. Obviously because this is a beta I would be careful when updating already existing systems.

    Hope that helps

    Cheers

    Adam Coulthard
  • dysonbags
    dysonbags
    16 Posts

    Re: PM53735: EYUNX0013E TRANSACTION CODB INVALID VALUE EYU9DBUG OPTION PROGRAM

    ‏2012-07-23T09:44:52Z  
    Hi Graham,

    Thanks for the clarification I've just looked at the PMR in more detail. It looks like the PMR created some sample definitions called EYU$nnn where nnn is the release. With CICS TS 5.1 Open Beta a new set has been created called EYU$670 (these are within the EYUSAMP dataset) and this should be applied to the CICS TS 4.2 system that is connecting to avoid these messages being produced. Obviously because this is a beta I would be careful when updating already existing systems.

    Hope that helps

    Cheers

    Adam Coulthard
    Hi Adam,

    I must be missing something somewhere.

    I've added SEYUSAMP(EYU£M670) to my TS 4.2 CSD and added it to one of the grouplists. I've then cold started the region but I still get

    EYUNX0013E Z010CICS TRANSACTION CONL has invalid value: EYU9XLEV for option: PROGRAM
    EYUNX0014E Z010CICS The definition for TRANSACTION CONL is invalid. MAS initialization is terminating

    It is a slight improvement as I've lost the
    EYUNX0013E Z010CICS TRANSACTION CODB has invalid value: EYU9DBUG for option: PROGRAM
    message which I had previously.

    Is it me or is there something wrong with the definitions?

    Cheers
    Graham
  • SystemAdmin
    SystemAdmin
    124 Posts

    Re: PM53735: EYUNX0013E TRANSACTION CODB INVALID VALUE EYU9DBUG OPTION PROGRAM

    ‏2012-07-23T10:31:49Z  
    • dysonbags
    • ‏2012-07-23T09:44:52Z
    Hi Adam,

    I must be missing something somewhere.

    I've added SEYUSAMP(EYU£M670) to my TS 4.2 CSD and added it to one of the grouplists. I've then cold started the region but I still get

    EYUNX0013E Z010CICS TRANSACTION CONL has invalid value: EYU9XLEV for option: PROGRAM
    EYUNX0014E Z010CICS The definition for TRANSACTION CONL is invalid. MAS initialization is terminating

    It is a slight improvement as I've lost the
    EYUNX0013E Z010CICS TRANSACTION CODB has invalid value: EYU9DBUG for option: PROGRAM
    message which I had previously.

    Is it me or is there something wrong with the definitions?

    Cheers
    Graham
    Hi Graham,

    At least we are one message down :-), I'll have a dig into why CONL is still getting the message and get back to you.

    Cheers

    Adam Coulthard
  • dysonbags
    dysonbags
    16 Posts

    Re: PM53735: EYUNX0013E TRANSACTION CODB INVALID VALUE EYU9DBUG OPTION PROGRAM

    ‏2012-07-23T13:32:50Z  
    Hi Graham,

    At least we are one message down :-), I'll have a dig into why CONL is still getting the message and get back to you.

    Cheers

    Adam Coulthard
    Hi Adam,

    Progress. After reading the old 4.2 PMR again, it said the transaction def was incorrect but was created dynamically by one of the CJ* programs if it didn't exist. So I deleted the CONL definition from the compatibility group in SEYUSAMP(EYU£M670) and restarted the region (cold start) and the LMAS processing completes properly.

    When the region comes up the CONL definition looks like this:

    Tra(CONL) Pri( 255 ) Pro(CJD9XLEV) Tcl( DFHTCL00 ) Ena Sta Prf(DFHCICST) Cda Any Iso Bac Wai
    Ind(000000) Ots(000000) Installt(23/07/12 14:26:03) Installu(£CICZ01 ) Cre Defines(SYSTEM ) Definet(23/07/12 14:26:02)

    Note program CJD9XLEV rather than EYU9XLEV. So I guess the answer is to either change the def for CONL or just delete it completely.

    What do you reckon?

    Cheers
    Graham
  • SystemAdmin
    SystemAdmin
    124 Posts

    Re: PM53735: EYUNX0013E TRANSACTION CODB INVALID VALUE EYU9DBUG OPTION PROGRAM

    ‏2012-07-23T15:28:18Z  
    • dysonbags
    • ‏2012-07-23T13:32:50Z
    Hi Adam,

    Progress. After reading the old 4.2 PMR again, it said the transaction def was incorrect but was created dynamically by one of the CJ* programs if it didn't exist. So I deleted the CONL definition from the compatibility group in SEYUSAMP(EYU£M670) and restarted the region (cold start) and the LMAS processing completes properly.

    When the region comes up the CONL definition looks like this:

    Tra(CONL) Pri( 255 ) Pro(CJD9XLEV) Tcl( DFHTCL00 ) Ena Sta Prf(DFHCICST) Cda Any Iso Bac Wai
    Ind(000000) Ots(000000) Installt(23/07/12 14:26:03) Installu(£CICZ01 ) Cre Defines(SYSTEM ) Definet(23/07/12 14:26:02)

    Note program CJD9XLEV rather than EYU9XLEV. So I guess the answer is to either change the def for CONL or just delete it completely.

    What do you reckon?

    Cheers
    Graham
    Hi Graham,

    Yeah that is what I was thinking, I was going to suggest changing the CSD sample to make it work. But I was getting someone that understands the CJx parts better than I do to confirm whether that was the case or not.

    Sounds like its sorted out the problem.

    Cheers

    Adam Coulthard
  • dysonbags
    dysonbags
    16 Posts

    Re: PM53735: EYUNX0013E TRANSACTION CODB INVALID VALUE EYU9DBUG OPTION PROGRAM

    ‏2012-07-23T15:35:10Z  
    Hi Graham,

    Yeah that is what I was thinking, I was going to suggest changing the CSD sample to make it work. But I was getting someone that understands the CJx parts better than I do to confirm whether that was the case or not.

    Sounds like its sorted out the problem.

    Cheers

    Adam Coulthard
    Yes, it's sorted but it would be interesting to know whether it's the definitions that are wrong or the program that's doing the verification.

    Cheers
    Graham