I have a product called JobTrak that will do something like this.  It's
original intent was to be able to scan through a job and index all of the
nested STREAM commands so you could see the entire job tree.  One of the
things we implemented was an ALIAS for the STREAM command in case you were
using a UDC or command file to stream.  The other side of this is that you
could define anything, such as USE or RUN etc.  What it does NOT do is let
you say "search job A for the stream 'bob'" and have it scan through all of
the sub-ordinate files.

If you are trying to do a one time thing, a relativly small MPEX command
file would probably do it for you.

shawn






"GIRIDHAR (WIPRO ENTERPRISE SOLUTIONS)" <[log in to unmask]> on
10/10/98 02:40:15 AM

Please respond to "GIRIDHAR (WIPRO ENTERPRISE SOLUTIONS)"
      <[log in to unmask]>

To:   [log in to unmask]
cc:    (bcc: Shawn Gordon/IS/FHM/FHS)
Subject:  SEARCH COMMAND




Is there any search command which searches
in all the used programs too in a JOB.?

For example In JOB A , If I have a statement
'USE B.QZSRC'.

And the search command on JOB A should search in B.QZSRC also.


Thanks and Regards
Giridhar.


-----Original Message-----
From: Stan Sieler <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Saturday, October 10, 1998 3:34 AM
Subject: Re: KSAM Files - Need Help


>Evan writes:
>> After performing an ffindbykey() function, I would like to be able to
>> retrieve the relative record number.  You can use ffileinfo(9,recnum) to
>> retrieve the physical record number, but I really do want to retrieve
>> the relative record number.
>
>Why?  The value returned by FFILEINFO 9 would appear to be the
>chronological pointer ... which is usable in a call to FPOINT and
>FREADDIR and FWRITEDIR.
>
>Chronological records numbers are used by:
>   FREADC, FPOINT, FREADDIR, FWRITEDIR
>
>Logical record numbers are used by:
>   FREAD (i.e., reads in logical sequence), FFINDN, FWRITE.
>
>It sure would have been nice if the original KSAM authors/documenters
>hadn't called the sorted-order record numbers "logical" (thereby confusing
>them with the file system "logical" record numbers!)
>
>There are other nomenclature problems that I'm discussing with HP offline.
>
>--
>Stan Sieler                                          [log in to unmask]
>                                     http://www.allegro.com/sieler.html