OnDemand User Group

Support Forums => z/OS Server => Topic started by: octater on April 14, 2021, 02:04:40 PM

Title: os/390 indexer fails after upgrading to v9.5
Post by: octater on April 14, 2021, 02:04:40 PM
after upgrading to 9.5 inorder to get to v10, we are seeing our os/390 indexer defined jobs failing with the following:

2021-04-14 20:38:10.997950: ARS1144I OnDemand Load Id = >5025-208-0-2133FAA-0-0-5026<
2021-04-14 20:38:10.998267: ARS1174E Internal product logic error.  File=SYS15350.T195540.RA000.ARNLOAD.SRCCMS.H01(ARNLOAD), Line=6082
2021-04-14 20:38:10.998297: ARS1166E Unable to save load information
2021-04-14 20:38:10.998363: ARS1146I Loaded 0 rows into the database
2021-04-14 20:38:10.998382: ARS4311E Loading failed
2021-04-14 20:38:10.998399: ARS4319W Unloading of data was NOT performed
2021-04-14 20:38:10.998415: ARS4318E Processing failed for file >/ars/tmp//16908753.00000178D228DA73 (DD:INPUT-IOU.PROD.ONDEMAND.AUDIT.TRAILS.G4092V00(0))<

before the upgrade, I can see that the processing file had 1 / before the system generated name.
Title: Re: os/390 indexer fails after upgrading to v9.5
Post by: scottnys on April 15, 2021, 09:39:56 AM
Did you update the APP after the upgrade?  I've had problems when changing the ACIF to 390 and back again.  inserted parameters and didn't remove them.  Don't see them in the "indexing information" but could see it in the "Summarize" option. 

Also, using the Wizard, didn't seem to populate the "Data compression" value in "load information".   

Maybe help.  We load just fine however.
Title: Re: os/390 indexer fails after upgrading to v9.5
Post by: octater on April 19, 2021, 07:48:53 AM
The existing jobs were not touched in anyway.   Just after the upgrade, they are failing with an additional / in the file process location.
Title: Re: os/390 indexer fails after upgrading to v9.5
Post by: Ed_Arnold on April 19, 2021, 10:54:41 AM
Is there an exit involved?

Ed Arnold
Title: Re: os/390 indexer fails after upgrading to v9.5
Post by: scottnys on April 23, 2021, 11:24:40 AM
Like Ed said, do you use input exits?  We went from v8.5 to v9.5 and the API calls in the Input exists had changed.  Needed to change every Input exit we wrote to accommodate.