Obtaining the number of active REXX-es in OPS/MVS
search cancel

Obtaining the number of active REXX-es in OPS/MVS


Article ID: 252321


Updated On:


OPS/MVS Event Management & Automation


If there is a need to collect some statistics in order to optimize their OPS/MVS installations.
One of the requests is to obtain the number of REXX execs that are actually being called by OPS/MVS.
The OPSOSF procedure in proclib has a huge SYSEXEC concatenation, but how is it possible to obtain the members that are actually being called from that concatenation.
On top of everything there are 15 monoplex installations which are different from each other, and it is needed to obtain this data for each installation separately.
Is there a method or a tool that can collect this usage data over a certain period of time (either from SMF or in another way)?


Release : 14.0


There are however 2 solutions that will provide you some information...
The first is:
Unless if there is a specific 'audit' trail code within the OPS/REXX program there is nothing built-in within the product to provide the counts to obtain for OPS/REXX programs. All there is that may provide some help in this area, would be to do a manual profile in the OPSLOG on message id OPS3724*. This message logs all activity triggered to an OPS server, thus doing a find on a REXX program name. This of course will not show any CALLS or external function invocations of a program if coded in this manner. Meaning, if a rule or program did a CALL abcd, or query=ABCD(), it would not see an OPS3724* for ABCD. Also, while OPS3724* may help, it is only as good for as far back as your live OPSLOG and archive opslogs take you. This request has been looked at a few times as a potential for an enhancement, but it comes down to making sure that we do not introduce any 'overhead' to the product in doing so.   

The second option would be the SMF reporting using AME..
See this link:  SMF Reporting Using AME
The SMF reporting requires some additional pre-work to get it setup, but would give you the more complete option of the 2..