search cancel

*+ E DC601059 VALID USER NAME WAS NOT SPECIFIED

book

Article ID: 41438

calendar_today

Updated On:

Products

IDMS IDMS - Database IDMS - ADS

Issue/Introduction

Question: 

 

While running IDMSDDDL (DIRLDEFS from upgrade JOB09) we get 

*+ E DC601059 VALID USER NAME WAS NOT SPECIFIED 

*+ DC601058 SIGNON REJECTED 

*+ W DC601069 FORWARD SPACING UNTIL VALID SIGNON FOUND

 

  The input does not have an explicit SIGNON USER, but the USER that submitted the job is a valid USER in the dictionary (SYSDIRL) who has AUTHORITY FOR UPDATE ALL. 

  How did it not find this user?  We have run such steps many times before with no errors and no explicit Signon.

Answer

In most cases this is simply because the USERid that submitted the job is not defined in the dictionary and dictionary option SECURITY FOR IDD SIGNON IS ON.

In one case we found that the client had very recently expanded the Page Range of the SYSDIRL.DDLDML area with UNLOAD/RELOAD (added pages on the High end of the page range), BUT the updated DMCL was not being used in the IDMSDDDL job.

This caused the IDMSDDDL compiler to get 0326 Record-not-found when attempting to OBTAIN CALC for the USER-047 dictionary record for the relevant USER, because the page range of the area is a key factor in the CALC Algorithm.

Once the correct DMCL that matched the physical Area was used, the job ran successfully.

 

 

 

Environment

Release: IDADSO00100-18.5-ADS-for CA-IDMS
Component: