Dave, Ever considered using SCLM? - one of its strengths is controlling what actually has been updated and what to build as a consequence.
There is some initial pain to define exactly what makes up the product using its own "ARCHDEF" language - however after that it is a breeze to re-gen the product - and it all runs in one batch job in the correct sequence. The price is right too..... Rob Scott Rocket Software, Inc 275 Grove Street Newton, MA 02466 617-614-2305 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Cole Sent: 23 May 2008 19:16 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Controlling the execution sequence of dependant jobs in JES2 (the details) At 5/23/2008 08:37 AM, Ted MacNEIL wrote: > >This is where scheduling package comes into play to prevent such > incidents and tales of war stories describing such horrors. ;-D > >That assumes Production Batch. I don't believe Dave's stuff is Production. > >And, it's rare that non-Production is allowed to be managed by schedulers. Ok, just FYI, here's my specific situation. My need is for controlling the updates, assemblies and linkedits that I need to run when regenerating z/XDC. (It has nothing to do with the installation process at customer sites.) My typical gen jobstream is: * One update job. * Followed by from 1 to 175 assemblies. * Followed by one multi-step linkedit job. The assemblies may run in any order, but none may run prior to the update job, and they all must run one at a time, and all must run before the linkedit job. If assemblies abend or fail, I will still want to run the linkedit job since any given assembly failure will affect only one linkedit (out of the potentially 14 or so linkedits that might be in the linkedit job). For this, I do not need a thruput manager. The suggested solution of having each job submit its successor is not ideal for me because of the possibility of the succession chain being broken. (I do not want the gen to come to a screeching halt just because an assembly or two failed or abend'd. [Yes, I do know how to use COND=, but I also do not want to break the chain if I should decide to cancel one or more assemblies prior to their running.]) So serializing via JES2 is, to me, the ideal solution. It's just a shame that the IBM JES2 folks have allowed needless tradeoffs to creep into the serialization setup process. As I noted earlier, at my shop, specifying CNVTNUM=1 works just fine. I do not run a MAS, and (as it happens) I don't use //JCLLIBs. (And even if I did, I don't need or use archival/migration support.) Obviously, what works for me would not work for many other shops. I have an idea for how IBM could, rather easily, fix this issue. More about that in my next post. Dave Cole REPLY TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cole Software WEB PAGE: http://www.colesoft.com 736 Fox Hollow Road VOICE: 540-456-8536 Afton, VA 22920 FAX: 540-456-6658 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
