I don't have a big problem with using Datacom behind the scenes of CA-Scheduler, which we use as our scheduling product. Of course, I'm a Datacom DBA, so that might have something to do with it. We have had good performance using the Datacom back-end, and we haven't had any sort of data corruption or even had any sort of a scare. Just about the only problems we have had have been one issue regarding cross-system communication on the initial install of Scheduler 9.0 and one time when our automated ops package was down and did not kick off the Datacom log spill job, so Scheduler froze until that was resolved.
That said, although you don't have to be a Datacom DBA to install and use the products it certainly doesn't hurt. Installation was not too bad; I can't claim it would have been easy for someone with no exposure to Datacom, though. (I need to admit here that we used our existing Datacom libraries and just created a new MUF.) Jon <snip> Let me see if I can help with some of this. I do understand some of the challenges from the System Programming point of view. </snip> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
