Recommended Service 2603 with 15.1.07

[Steve Roy]

I have just now applied patching for the last 6 months.

The test MUF is still using the 2509 RS level, but I ran a batch CXX report on a database, using the updated 2603 CABDLOAD in the STEPLIB, and received 

DB13001E - UNEXPECTED RETURN CODE 94 (200) CXX NAME/DSN MISMATCH SU/MU
                    DB10045E - ABNORMAL TERMINATION DUE TO ERROR(S)   

Before this set of patches, the CXX report ran as desired.

Why would this happen?

-------------------------------------------

[Kenneth Eaton]

Steve

testing your case but not exactly the same code line.   MUF running older code than DBUTLTY is using.

i brought up my MUF instance with service level 2501  and ran DBUTLTY with 2603 plus  CXX report (Full) .  That  worked fine for me.    Suggest you open a case,  send in the output from DBUTLTY JOB 2603 that failed,  plus all output from the MUF instance running 2509. 

copy of your DBSYSID macro settings you are using to link DBSIDPR.

Sorry i do not have a better answer...

thanks

ken

[Don Johnson]

Hi Steve, it was good to work with you through your case. I am posting a summary here for others who might be following the discussion.

In looking at your situation and another case we had earlier this year, we saw similarities in two areas:

1. You both were running the MUF with a release level before CARS 2510, and the DBUTLTY program (on a CXX report) with a release level after CARS 2510.
2. You both were using SIMPLIFY=NO

I am not sure if the SIMPLIFY setting is directly related without reviewing all the code there, but I can say that the release level was a key part of the problem. We introduced a change to one of the DBUTLTY modules in a PTF that was part of CARS 2510 release, and reviewing a customer dump indicated that there was a difference in the location of a data field used in the CXX report. This led to the RC 94(200) error you received.

I would suggest that you continue to follow your practice of a simple test using DBUTLTY or other programs at the new release level, as that is easier to validate some things before changing the whole environment to the new level. However, if you run into an error or other unexpected results, you should run the test again on matched release levels before reporting a problem. 

I am glad that this was a fairly simple problem to overcome and hope that the rest of your testing of CARS 2603 is successful!

Don

------------------------------
​Don Johnson
Sr. Principal Support Engineer | MSD - Datacom product family

CADRE/Datacom Community Champion
Support File Transfer Lead
Broadcom Software
[e-mail]
------------------------------