On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 21:07:32 -0400, P S <[email protected]> wrote: >Well, I'm showing my RACF ignorance in a big way, obviously! That >doesn't bother me, I can take it. > >The issue is code that currently generates some data objects (they're >all small) and caches them in HFS. Someone said, "They should be in >RACF". So a corollary question is, "Does RACF allow definition of >arbitrary objects ([email protected] -- yes, > 8 bytes) and then >allow access control over them? My reading suggests that it doesn't, >but I haven't gotten very far. > >If it does, then the question is, "So, if these objects are accessed >frequently, is it better performance-wise to ask RACF for access, or >to read them from disk?" (Yes, this skips the question of whether just >asking "Mother May I" is sufficient for this purpose, but let's assume >it is.) >
Hi, if I had to do that I'd use a FACILITY class profile, they're designed for general resources. Something like RDEF FACILITY [email protected] etc. should work. I don't think there are much restrictions on profile names. You can make them generic if required (e.g. with wildcards). cheers Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
