Database Analyzer (IMS Tools)Mainframe Configuration Manager for IMS for z/OSIMS TOOLS - MISCCompress Data Compression (IMS Tools)Database Analyzer for IMS for z/OSDatabase Copier for IMS for z/OSDatabase Organizer for IMS for z/OSMainframe Extended Terminal Manager (IMS Tools)High Performance Recovery for IMS for z/OSDatabase Organizer (IMS Tools)Mainframe Program Restart Manager for IMS for z/OSSecondary Index Builder for IMS for z/OSSecondary Index for IMS for z/OSJARSJARS Resource AccountingJARS SMF DirectorJMRMIM Resource Sharing (MIM)MIM Data Sharing (MII)MIM Tape Sharing (MIA)MIM Message Sharing (MIC)Nastel AutoPilot for WebSphere MQPanvaletQuickFetchRaps VSEScheduler VSESMRSOLVE:Operations AutomationSOLVE:Access Session ManagementSOLVE:FTSSYSVIEW Performance ManagementNXBRIDGE - SYSVIEW/ENDEVORSOLVE
Issue/Introduction
I've been working with IBM to try and filter out "false positives" on the TADz reporting for Panvalet usage. In our discussion the question came up: Under what circumstances can the detected usage of the PAM module be considered to be a reliable indicator of usage of the Panvalet product? I would extend that to include the caveat that there are no OTHER Panvalet modules being used - so the (altered) question becomes: Under what circumstances can the detected usage of ONLY the PAM module be considered to be a reliable indicator of usage of the Panvalet product?
Environment
All supported versions of CA Panvalet
Resolution
The detection of the PAM module by its self is not an indicator of a Panvalet user.
A true Panvalet user will invoke several Panvalet modules such as FGPAN23, PAN#1, PAN#2, PAN#x, PANEXIT, PANMODI and various other modules.
FILEAID has a Panvalet interface and it appears that FILEAID invokes the PAM module as part of this interface and it does not indicate that the Panvalet interface was used. The PAM module only is an indication the Panvalet stub in FILEAID was present.
Again, a true Panvalet user will invoke several Panvalet modules.