> -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin > Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 3:19 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: ISV Anchor Table > > In a recent note, Jeffrey D. Smith said: > > > Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 12:38:30 -0600 > > > > Peter Relson manages the allocation of ISV slots in > > table. You only get a fullword slot, so use it wisely. > > Be sure all of your products have a common protocol > > for managing it. > > > > ECVTCTBL points to the array of customer anchors. > > > When is this preferable to name/token services? When is > name/token services preferable? Is there any protocol > such as prefix registration to prevent collisions in > name/token services? > > -- gil /snip/
CTBL is useful for referencing common area control blocks. The name:token service has system-level, primary-space-level, home-space-level, and task-level scopes for the names. The system-level is visible by all address spaces, so you must be careful to avoid name collisions. The primary-space-level and home-space-level are visible only within the particular address space. The name won't collide with an unrelated address space. The task-level is visible only to the task that defines the name. The name won't collide with names used by other tasks or with address space level names or system-level names. I use both name:token services and the CTBL thing. I don't know of any IBM recommended prefixing for the name:token. What I DO know is that I can find my cryptographic global control block with 5 load instructions using CTBL, or an unknown number of instructions using name:token services. So, I think the CTBL thing is always faster than name:token services, and I don't have to worry about naming conventions. Currently, I must sniff the retrieved token to see if it looks like what I expect, to avoid a possible collision with someone else who happens to be using the same name (unlikely -- but I must verify it). My CTBL chaining is designed for backward compatibility. I can grow my pointer vectors in any direction for multiple products and still be compatible with my older software that doesn't know about the new stuff. I don't need working storage for looking at CTBL. I do need working storage for name:token services. I will probably continue to use name:token services in addition to the CTBL. CTBL seems to be more efficient and easier to use. Jeffrey D. Smith Principal Product Architect Farsight Systems Corporation 700 KEN PRATT BLVD. #204-159 LONGMONT, CO 80501-6452 303-774-9381 direct 303-484-6170 FAX http://www.farsight-systems.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
