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

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
    ACCEPTED ANSWER

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

    ‏2012-07-20T14:27:04Z  in response to dysonbags
    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
      ACCEPTED ANSWER

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

      ‏2012-07-20T14:30:50Z  in response to SystemAdmin
      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
        ACCEPTED ANSWER

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

        ‏2012-07-20T15:35:58Z  in response to dysonbags
        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
          ACCEPTED ANSWER

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

          ‏2012-07-23T09:44:52Z  in response to SystemAdmin
          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
            ACCEPTED ANSWER

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

            ‏2012-07-23T10:31:49Z  in response to dysonbags
            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
              ACCEPTED ANSWER

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

              ‏2012-07-23T13:32:50Z  in response to SystemAdmin
              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
                ACCEPTED ANSWER

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

                ‏2012-07-23T15:28:18Z  in response to dysonbags
                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
                  ACCEPTED ANSWER

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

                  ‏2012-07-23T15:35:10Z  in response to SystemAdmin
                  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