# Tracing in EntireX

**URL:** <https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/t/tracing-in-entirex/58908>\
**Category:** Forum\
**Tags:** Mainframe-Integration, EntireX\
**Created:** [September 9, 2003, 5:53pm UTC](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/t/tracing-in-entirex/58908 "2003-09-09T17:53:02Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 5\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Peter\_F\_Frandsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ba8739/32.png) [@Peter\_F\_Frandsen](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/u/Peter_F_Frandsen)\
**Post date:** [September 9, 2003, 5:53pm UTC](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/t/tracing-in-entirex/58908/1 "2003-09-09T17:53:02Z")

</div>

As promised on the usergroup I hereby create this topic.  
  
Apparently this topic seems endless and to make Software AG and the users aware of existing functionality I would like to recall bits of Ian Porter’s presentation.  
  
At Nissan to monitor the Broker they were using SMF-data (and with - I believe - accounting data).  
They used the RDC-exit to monitor the RPC-server.  
  
However they - as I - still do not think this is enough.  
  
What we (at Dansk Supermarked) really would like is a setup where we decides to follow a specific application comprising one or more services (defined by the trinity) and one or more users (defined by their userid) and from the broker - preferably in a grafical tool (i.e. the Control center).  
  
Herein the developer can get a list of all request to and from the broker which falls into the above category. Note that it is not a dynamic view that gets updated, it is a historical view.   
  
So whenever a developer has an error he can set the trace for this user in particular and se the messages transferred between the host and the client, having then a clear notion where to look for the error.  
  
But if anyone else has other requirements please list them so Software AG has a chance to follow up on this.  
  
Regards, Peter F. Frandsen.  
Vicepresident of the EntireX Usergroup

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Thierry\_Casier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Thierry\_Casier](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/u/Thierry_Casier)\
**Post date:** [September 10, 2003, 6:30pm UTC](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/t/tracing-in-entirex/58908/2 "2003-09-10T18:30:49Z")

</div>

I would like to mention that the monitoring is not the same as tracing.  
The issue of Ian Porter was tracing and i reply here in this context.  
If I remember it right then it should be possible to start a tracing for a specicic user and/or a specific service(s) or a combination of both. The output should then be a list of Broker verbs and the different Control blocks in a sequence from both client and server. I presume that this would create some output in the Job log.  
Therefore I would like to add to the proposition that the start of this service should be **autorized**. I would not like to see that everyone can start this and then leaving it on until the broker restarts.  
  
Thierry Casier

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jesper.orland](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/90db22/32.png) [@jesper.orland](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/u/jesper.orland)\
**Post date:** [September 16, 2003, 7:14pm UTC](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/t/tracing-in-entirex/58908/3 "2003-09-16T19:14:09Z")

</div>

I agree with Peter that the important thing is that it is controlled from the broker, that you can filter on either user and/or service, and that it can be switched on and off online.  
I also think Thierries point about autorization is a good.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Wayne\_Campos](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/techcommunity/user_avatar/techcommunity.softwareag.com/wayne_campos/32/104_2.png) [@Wayne\_Campos](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/u/Wayne_Campos)\
**Post date:** [July 6, 2005, 9:46pm UTC](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/t/tracing-in-entirex/58908/4 "2005-07-06T21:46:08Z")

</div>

I agree, it would be very helpful if we could turn on a “filtered” trace. In many cases it is not practical to turn on a trace in Production for even a short period of time because of the amount of output that an unfiltered trace produces. I would also like the ability to filter on ERROR-CODE or ERROR-CLASS. For example, all ERROR-CODE not = ‘00000000’ or ERROR-CLASS = ‘0003’.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/techcommunity/original/3X/c/d/cd19967bb605d28a72d77eb83a1cae22f3df2eb8.svg) [@system](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/u/system)\
**Post date:** [April 2, 2021, 2:39pm UTC](https://techcommunity.softwareag.com/t/tracing-in-entirex/58908/5 "2021-04-02T14:39:32Z")

</div>


