Re: What OS feature is OPNQRYF?

More info uncovered...

It's not the OPNQRYF generating the message (misleading info from client).

It's a job that is trying to reorganize a physical file (to squeeze out deleted records) and first creates a journal and receiver, starts journaling the file to that new journal,
executes the rgzpfm command, then stops journaling and removes the journal and receiver.
It presumably does this because the file is still being updated when the rgzpfm is executed and it's desirable that the reorg can be optionally cancelled.

So, it IS the journaling feature that is causing the license warning message.

I've asked the client to check with IBM about the license entitlement and whether it's been applied correctly (I think it's possible to apply a license but mess up the number of users).

Bottom line, thanks for all responses and advice.

Best Regards,

Thomas Garvey
<www.unpath.com>

On 10/18/2014 9:23 AM, CRPence wrote:

On 15-Oct-2014 11:28 -0500, Thomas Garvey wrote:

My reason for asking is that a process is sending a message that IBM
software 5761SS1 feature 5117 has 0 users authorized and 71 days,
etc. 5117 (on a v6 system) is supposed to be the High Availability
Journal Performance feature.

So the message is being issued by\from the job that is performing the OPNQRYF, and transpires at the same time as the OPNQRYF request? And that [still unknown] message identifier is being sent to the QSYSOPR or to the QHST, or is logged within the joblog of the requesting job? If the latter, then what is the full context of the messaging [from-program, to-program, et al], all of which is available in the spooled joblog when filtered with LOG(4 0 *SECLVL)? The F6=Print of the message when viewed using F1=Help could instead provide the context of the specific message, but would not also provide the fuller context with regard to what might have transpired just before or after that specific message that a log\joblog of messages might provide.

However, the process is not using any journal commands but has an
OPNQRYF command being used.
So, I'm wondering how an expiration message for a HA Journaling
Performance LP would occur when an OPNQRYF command should be
running.

Maybe the 5117 feature that is installed but not yet expired, was referenced by the Open Query File (OPNQRYF) request because the query feature had decided to take advantage of some support that the 5117 feature offers. While anyone outside of the query development within IBM might not see any obvious reason for the query feature to have done so, they are probably more informed of the potential capabilities that the feature 5117 might offer to any particular query. Having all the details of the jobs operating against the data access by that query, the details of the physical file storing that data, and the details of the other files in the database file network, might help to expose why the query feature might try to access the capabilities of the feature 5117. Journaling of any of the data in the DBF network might give cause to the query to try to access some capability of that Journaling feature; if an query Open Data Path (ODP) is update capable, and commitment control is not being used, then possibly even more likely that the capabilities of the 5117 feature could be applicable, such that the Query feature might try to perform some operation using the 5117 feature.

However, even us mere mortals can figure-out what the query feature is doing to cause the message to be issued, and possibly even infer why the 5117 feature is being referenced. If the origin of the message is either directly, or even indirectly, being issued due to something that the OPNQRYF processing does, then the job can be traced to either see what originating the messaging or to figure out what request caused another process to inform of the reference to the [apparently expiring] 5117 feature. The library that supports the [apparently expiring] 5117 feature, or the information repository of that feature, possibly could be made unavailable momentarily to help force the traced request to better reveal the path that leads to an attempt to use the 5117 feature; or just a close review of the invocations of the OS Software Product Licensing (SZ) component and the timings of those invocations with respect to the messaging could reveal that path.

It occurred to me that the LP that includes OPNQRYF might not
actually be in use or active at this client since OPNQRYF is kind of
ancient methodology.

As noted in other replies, the OPNQRYF is part of the base Operating System (OS); no OPTION() nor any Licensed Program Product (LPP) being required, beyond the LIC and OS, for an Open Query File (OPNQRYF) request to operate properly.

Even if the OPNQRYF is directly responsible for the warning message being issued, because the OPNQRYF requires *no* additional features to function, once the 5117 feature is removed, the OPNQRYF would continue to function. If not, then likely there is a defect.

I am unsure what is meant by that above quoted comment; hopefully my prior comment, just above, resolves whatever concerns were expressed. If not, I will try to elaborate:

The implication of the quoted comment seems [to me] to be that the issue might have been perceived as being with a software feature that provides the OPNQRYF, versus being seen correctly for what is the actual issue. The actual issue being notified, is that there is an installed 5117 feature for which a lack of licenses\licensed-users will prevent [after some days, due to an expiration] any reference to that installed 5117 feature. So while the implication is that the use of the OPNQRYF is suspect to give rise to the described messaging [a warning about the feature 5117], the _origin_ of the messaging is really somewhat moot.

Even if the OPNQRYF gives rise to such a warning\messaging, the base issue remains, such that the installed feature 5117 is not generally available for use. Either the licensing needs to be made available to the installed 5117 feature or the 5117 feature needs to be uninstalled, in order _to prevent all warnings_ of the impending loss of the capabilities provided by that 5117 feature. Whether the warnings result directly from some invocation(s) of OPNQRYF, are merely timed coincidentally with those invocations, or result [in]directly from some other [non-OPNQRYF] invocation elsewhere on the system, that "actual issue" remains the same; i.e. the 5117 feature either needs to be licensed for use, or the feature will become unavailable for use [due to either the expired licensing or possibly someone having issued Delete Licensed Program Product (DLTLICPGM), perhaps because there is no intention of purchasing any licenses in order to prevent the messaging].