In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 12/04/2005
at 09:56 AM, Paul Gilmartin [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Bill's point is not so easily dismissed. So deferring symbol
evaluation would significantly erode the serialization and deadlock
protection that many production shops depend on.
But that's no obstacle to
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 12/04/2005
at 10:26 AM, Paul Gilmartin [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
But that hierarchy has embraced Rexx, even if at shotgun-point.
Partially; it certainly hasn't embraced newer language facilities.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position;
From: Tom Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2005 5:21 PM
Symbolic substitution will create a significant problem IFF the user
is somehow astonished at the (unintended) result. If the result is
what the user (or site) intended to achieve, then so much the better.
I wonder
In a recent note, Tom Schmidt said:
Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 16:21:59 -0600
On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 10:13:28 -0500, Bill Ogden wrote:
Symbolics that might specify or imply a volser, data set name, device type,
or DISP parameter can create a significant problem if not resolved early.
In a recent note, Farley, Peter x23353 said:
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 17:32:39 -0500
I had thought many years ago that IBM was on a path to make interpreted REXX
the replacement language for controlling all jobs, but I was sadly mistaken
and VM-centric in that thought -- I didn't count
On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 10:13:28 -0500, Bill Ogden wrote:
Symbolics that might specify or imply a volser, data set name, device type,
or DISP parameter can create a significant problem if not resolved early.
Remember that these are needed to test all the ENQ and allocation situations
that exist before
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 12/01/2005
at 08:54 PM, Tom Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
No, not impossible,
Yes impossible. It's not a SMOP, but a logical impossibility. You
could, of course, design a new kind of JCL with a new set of rules[1],
but then you would be solving a different problem
-- snip --
Different local offsets in the CLOCKxx member. Or somebody does a weird
T CLOCK= command. The TOD clocks must be in sync. But the local times
may differ.
-- snip --
Well, I know that. We don't use it, but I think I have no problems
understanding it.
-- snip --
On Fri, 2 Dec 2005 11:32:16 +0100, TISLER Zaromil [EMAIL PROTECTED]
AUSTRIA.COM wrote:
- what time should be written in the operlog?
Syslog uses local. Not sure about operlog, I don't use it.
- what time should be written in the sysplex coupling datasets, logger
coupling datasets?
UTC
- what
Tom Schmidt wrote:
[...]
We can't standardize the symbol processing in MAS sites today -- that's the
core issue (which was discussed on ibm-main, what, 6-9 years ago??). But
each site also has systems programmers being paid, presumably, to program
something.
Not necessarily. The companies
On Thu, 1 Dec 2005 09:46:59 +0100, R.S. wrote:
Tom Schmidt wrote:
We can't standardize the symbol processing in MAS sites today -- that's
the core issue (which was discussed on ibm-main, what, 6-9 years
ago??). But each site also has systems programmers being paid,
presumably, to program
On 12/1/2005 1:07 AM, Joe Zitzelberger wrote:
On Nov 30, 2005, at 12:20 PM, Walt Farrell wrote:
Unfortunately, since different systems in a sysplex (or sharing the
spool) could have very different times and dates, they could get very
unexpected results if we let those symbols be used in batch
Walt,
-- snip --
Unfortunately, since different systems in a sysplex (or sharing the
spool) could have very different times and dates, they could get very
unexpected results if we let those symbols be used in batch job JCL.
Suppose the job converted on a system where the date is today,
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of TISLER Zaromil
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2005 10:52 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Using symbolic in JCL
snip
How is then possible to have different times and dates
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:35:10 -0500, Farley, Peter x23353
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... JCL Conversion and Interpretation are no longer handled in one
place, much less that Execution is a separate third phase. ...
... I would expect them to reflect the
EXECUTION-time environment and no other.
In a recent note, Patrick O'Keefe said:
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 14:31:18 -0600
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:35:10 -0500, Farley, Peter x23353
[log in to unmask] wrote:
... I would expect them to reflect the
EXECUTION-time environment and no other. The Conversion and
Interpretation
In a recent note, McKown, John said:
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 11:00:03 -0600
For the truly strange (like me): Imagine a sysplex where there is a
different z/OS image for every possible time zone in which the company
does business. The users in that time zone are directed to their z/OS
without them for this long, we can probably wait some more.
Peter
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2005 3:35 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Using symbolic in JCL
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:35:10 -0500
in that thought -- I didn't count on the recalcitrance of the
MVS-centric hierarchy at IBM.
Peter
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2005 4:00 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Using symbolic in JCL
Snipped
Your
In
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
on 12/01/2005
at 04:37 PM, Farley, Peter x23353 [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
OTOH, SYSUID certainly ought to reflect the TSO userid of the actual
submitter from the actual submitting system,
No way. The only value that makes sense is the userid for the job,
regardless of who
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 12/01/2005
at 09:46 AM, R.S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Look at VMS, Unix, Netware, Windows. No assembler coding.
ROTF,LMAO!
In the MVS world we have systems programmers who don't know how to
program. In the Unix world they have systems administrators who can
and do
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 11/30/2005
at 09:02 PM, R.S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
BTW: I think the problem with symbols is not so bothersome, because
batch schedulers provide equivalent functionality.
Some do, some don't.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position;
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 11/30/2005
at 01:40 PM, Tom Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I, for example, would NOT want to see the Reader time/date used; I'd
rather see the Interpreter time/date since that is closest to the
execution of the 3 choices available (without an exit).
Not only would it
In
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
on 11/30/2005
at 04:36 PM, Hunkeler Peter (KRDO 4)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Isn't TSO logon demand selected the same way STCs are?
Yes, the logon code is very similar[1] to the START code. Symbols are
permitted in both.
[1] Some of it is the same code.
--
Shmuel
In
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
on 11/30/2005
at 01:35 PM, Farley, Peter x23353 [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Let me just relate the point of view of the simple application
programmer: Symbolics are a Good Thing, and I ought to be able to use
them in my ordinary Batch JCL. As for values, I would expect them
On Thu, 1 Dec 2005 19:48:59 -0500, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
on 11/30/2005 at 01:35 PM, Farley, Peter x23353 said:
Let me just relate the point of view of the simple application
programmer: Symbolics are a Good Thing, and I ought to be able to use
them in my ordinary Batch JCL. As for
sorry, list
hand faster then head
On 11/30/05, Marian Gasparovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. yes
2. yes
3. 2
4. 7
5. cca 1,000
On 11/29/05, R.S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I already get some responses, so I think people are interested in the
survey.
However *please* follow the
What about SYSUID?
SYSUID is not what we refer to as a system symbol for the purposes of
the discussion. If it is not in the list of symbols defined for ASASYMBM
(or added by the system when it invokes ASASYMBM), then it is not a system
symbol in this regard.
Don't forget APPC and TSU.
I'll
Isn't TSO logon demand selected the same way STCs are?
Peter Hunkeler
Credit Suisse - Information Technology
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message:
In a recent note, Peter Relson said:
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 09:09:16 -0500
What about SYSUID?
SYSUID is not what we refer to as a system symbol for the purposes of
the discussion. If it is not in the list of symbols defined for ASASYMBM
(or added by the system when it invokes
On 11/30/2005 11:24 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In that case, a multitude of customers would be delighted to see the date
and time symbolics moved from the class of system symbols to the same
class as SYSUID, whatever you call the class. I understand (but don't
necessarily agree with) the
Walt Farrell wrote:
On 11/30/2005 11:24 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In that case, a multitude of customers would be delighted to see the date
and time symbolics moved from the class of system symbols to the same
class as SYSUID, whatever you call the class. I understand (but don't
Subject: Re: Using symbolic in JCL
On 11/30/2005 11:24 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In that case, a multitude of customers would be delighted to see the date
and time symbolics moved from the class of system symbols to the same
class as SYSUID, whatever you call the class. I understand (but don't
@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Using symbolic in JCL
On 11/30/2005 11:24 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In that case, a multitude of customers would be delighted to see the
date and time symbolics moved from the class of system symbols to
the same class as SYSUID, whatever you call the class. I
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 10:05:54 -0800, Charles Mills wrote:
Walt, I think the message from the customers is that they would be happy to
accept your gun, your bullet, your foot. Customers want these symbols
available. If they have a Sysplex and set the dates very differently, well
then, they may see
Tom Schmidt wrote:
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 10:05:54 -0800, Charles Mills wrote:
Walt, I think the message from the customers is that they would be happy to
accept your gun, your bullet, your foot. Customers want these symbols
available. If they have a Sysplex and set the dates very differently,
On Nov 30, 2005, at 12:05 PM, Charles Mills wrote:
Walt, I think the message from the customers is that they would be
happy to
accept your gun, your bullet, your foot. Customers want these
symbols
available. If they have a Sysplex and set the dates very
differently, well
then, they may
One could always submit a SHARE requirement and fight it out in that
venue ... At least you could find out how important this really is to
other sites (yes, I know not everyone is a SHARE member).
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe /
Subject: Re: Using symbolic in JCL
On Nov 30, 2005, at 12:05 PM, Charles Mills wrote:
Walt, I think the message from the customers is that they would be
happy to
accept your gun, your bullet, your foot. Customers want these
symbols
available. If they have a Sysplex and set the dates very
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 15:28 -0500, Imbriale, Donald (Exchange) wrote:
Is this an unfounded allegation against IBM
I didn't see ANY allegation in Ed's post.
or do you have any evidence to support your position?
Ed said: I think ... just guessing ... Just a guess. So I'm going to
go out on a
On Nov 30, 2005, at 2:28 PM, Porowski, Ken wrote:
One could always submit a SHARE requirement and fight it out in that
venue ... At least you could find out how important this really is to
other sites (yes, I know not everyone is a SHARE member).
Ken,
I believe its already been submitted and
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 21:02:36 +0100, R.S. wrote:
Tom Schmidt wrote:
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 10:05:54 -0800, Charles Mills wrote:
Walt, I think the message from the customers is that they would be happy
to accept your gun, your bullet, your foot. Customers want these
symbols available. If they have a
On Nov 30, 2005, at 12:20 PM, Walt Farrell wrote:
Unfortunately, since different systems in a sysplex (or sharing the
spool) could have very different times and dates, they could get
very unexpected results if we let those symbols be used in batch
job JCL.
Suppose the job converted on a
I already get some responses, so I think people are interested in the
survey.
However *please* follow the following rules:
- Send directly to me (R dot Skorupka at bremultibank dot com dot pl)
- Write sysplex survey in the Subject field
- Provide the information:
1. sysplex (yes/no)
2.
Ted MacNEIL wrote:
You work for big shops. Majority of mainframe
users is not sysplexed.
Probably almost every shop, even monplex use
more than one systems
(that's why we have LPARs).
I don't think that is an accurate statement
for North America. Most corporations that are
still running
Ted MacNEIL wrote:
Define big shop.
Here a 4000 MIPS shop is a small one.
-teD
Me? A skeptic? I trust you have proof!
Where did you get that number? We are at about 2000 MIPS and last I
knew we were in the top 10% of mainframe MIPS.
To summarize the current capability:
Symbols may be used in started tasks and started jobs, but not batch jobs.
Peter Relson
z/OS Core Technology Design
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send
From when I was working with IGS.
In order (from Memory -- so don't shoot me):
Royal Bank
Bank of Montreal
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce
Toronto Dominion/Canada Trust
The Bank of Nova Scotia
Manufacturer's Life Insurance
The Canadian Depository for Securities
These are all on the big side
Symbols may be used in started tasks and
started jobs, but not batch jobs.
TSO?
-teD
Me? A skeptic? I trust you have proof!
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on
11/24/2005
at 10:50 AM, Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Not true, in batch (a file with SYSNAME in
it, and the file exists):
IEFC627I INCORRECT USE OF AMPERSAND IN THE DSN
FIELD
Batch is not STC. Batch is not TSU. What you quoted was correct.
--
Shmuel
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 11/25/2005
at 08:01 AM, Paul Gilmartin [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
No joy. Dammit, how many things can IBM do wrong in the JCL parser?
Which JCL parser? JES2 and JES3 parse their respective control
statements before the C/I ever sees them.
It's that simple!
No it's not
Ted MacNEIL wrote:
(*) I mean: submitted,converted,executed on
the same system. Most of the
installations are monoplexes, probably most
of them do not use NJE for
vast majority of jobs.
I have never worked in a single system shop,
either before or after SYSPLEX, so I have
always
In a recent note, R.S. said:
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 09:07:48 +0100
That's because it is forbidden by IBM. I'd prefer determinate on single
system *only*. Limited functionality. This is more than I have today.
Today I have nothing.
With similar more than I have today motivation, I
On Nov 25, 2005, at 2:07 AM, R.S. wrote:
-SNIP__
You work for big shops. Majority of mainframe users is not sysplexed.
Probably almost every shop, even monplex use more than one systems
(that's why we have LPARs). Probably many of them have NJE
List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Friday November 25 2005 07:01
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Using symbolic in JCL
In a recent note, R.S. said:
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 09:07:48 +0100
That's because it is forbidden by IBM. I'd prefer
-teD
Me? A skeptic? I trust you have proof!
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at
When are the symbol values determined for a
started task?
When the task starts (actually gets
converted). Remember, a started task always
starts on the same system that it is invoked
on. There are the
submitting/conversion/execution system is
always the same.
(PS: sorry for the previous
You work for big shops. Majority of mainframe
users is not sysplexed.
Probably almost every shop, even monplex use
more than one systems
(that's why we have LPARs).
I don't think that is an accurate statement
for North America. Most corporations that are
still running Mainframes are running
-teD wrote:
I don't think that is an accurate statement for North America.
Most corporations that are still running Mainframes are running
with a SYSPLEX.
Define big shop.
Here a 4000 MIPS shop is a small one.
It appears to me, little informed, that the benefits of
outsourcing did not reach,
Isn't it supported only in started task ?
I can never remember if TSO is supported or
not, but Batch will probably never be
supported because of the issue of which system
do I use the variables from?
1. The submitting system?
2. The converting system?
3. The executing system?
And, what do I
System symbols (like SYSNAME) are supported
in started task JCL and TSO
logons.
Not true, in batch (a file with SYSNAME in
it, and the file exists):
IEFC627I INCORRECT USE OF AMPERSAND IN THE DSN
FIELD
-teD
Me? A skeptic? I trust you have proof!
Ted MacNEIL wrote:
Isn't it supported only in started task ?
I can never remember if TSO is supported or
not, but Batch will probably never be
supported because of the issue of which system
do I use the variables from?
1. The submitting system?
2. The converting system?
3. The executing
Isn't it supported only in started task ?
I can never remember if TSO is supported or
not, but Batch will probably never be
supported because of the issue of which system
do I use the variables from?
1. The submitting system?
2. The converting system?
3. The executing system?
And, what do I
(*) I mean: submitted,converted,executed on
the same system. Most of the
installations are monoplexes, probably most
of them do not use NJE for
vast majority of jobs.
I have never worked in a single system shop,
either before or after SYSPLEX, so I have
always been in an environment
On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 14:40:18 -0500, Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Subject: Re: Using symbolic in JCL
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
(*) I mean: submitted,converted,executed on
the same system. Most of the
installations are monoplexes, probably most
of them do
- Original Message -
BTW, the results are not indeterminate.
If you use a symbol in the JCL, you will
always get a JCL error.
Unless of course you don't.
I contributed a solution to the cbt which I use constantly. Resolves systems
symbols in JCL so I can use sysname, date and time
Bill,
There is an IEFUJV exit in CBT Tape that do what you want.
== http://www.cbttape.org/ftp/cbt/CBT573.zip
Regards,
Philippe Leite
z/OS Systems Programmer
BBVA Portugal
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access
Dear all ,
I have a jcl that will be use on 2 partitions , and ideally i would want
some thing like :
// if sysname EQ PART1 then
stepA(...)
// else
stepB(..)
// end
I've tried to code it, but i get jcl error , i suppose that the problem has
been addressed by many sites , so just want to have
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on
11/15/2005
at 03:59 PM, Marian Gasparovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Isn't it supported only in started task ?
AFAIK it's supported for everything except batch jobs: APPC, STC and
TSU are all converted and interpreted on the submitting system.
--
Shmuel (Seymour
69 matches
Mail list logo
