Like Ed, I recently questioned the availability of automatic JES2 parm 
back-generation. Seems that I had catapulted a long-standing requirement into a 
fait accompli. Does not exist, sadly. JES2 is especially complicated, as others 
have noted, because a change edited into the init deck will not likely take 
effect until some time in the future--perhaps unexpectedly.

All parms, JES included, are even further complicated by the effect of 
defaults, which figure into pretty much all products from z/OS forward. There 
are historically two different attitudes toward defaults. IBM generally 
recommends taking available defaults (unless documentation recommends 
otherwise) in order to take advantage of developer updates. But many sysprogs 
prefer to hard code values to minimize poking around for effective values. So 
it can easily happen that a parm value can differ by whether it's hard coded on 
any or all systems and if not, what the default value is for any given release 
and APAR level.  

All in all, the prospect of automating parm back-generation is pretty dim. 

.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler 
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf Of 
Seymour J Metz
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2021 8:56 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: (External):Re: How to compare parameters in one z/Os with parameters 
in another z/OS

*** EXTERNAL EMAIL - Use caution when opening links or attachments ***

A lot can be automated, but the task is not as simple as it seems. In addition 
to the issue of order, there's also the issue of symbols and the IPL parameters 
from the HMC. As others have mentioned, good configuration control processes 
will help to avoid the need to frequently compare parameters.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3

________________________________________
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [[email protected]] on behalf of 
Arthur [[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2021 9:29 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: How to compare parameters in one z/Os with parameters in another 
z/OS

On 13 Jun 2021 16:50:55 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
(Message-ID:<[email protected]>)
[email protected] (ibmmain) wrote:

 >&nbsp;We want to make sure two z/OS use the same 
 >parameters(PARMLIB,VTAMLST,and so on)&nbsp;  >  >  >Because there is some 
 >parameter which is multiline in member, it isn't easy to compare them.
 >&nbsp;&nbsp;
 >Is there any way to compare&nbsp; parameters in one z/Os with parameters in 
 >another z/OS

Others have suggested a good start of display commands, IPLINFO, SHOWZOS, etc. 
This is a good way to compare running systems because the output will be in 
predictable order and format. BUT....

Most parms can be overridden by commands. If/when a system is IPLed, it will 
revert to the parms as specified in parmlib. If you have proper change control, 
those parms have been updated, too. But, if you had that level of change 
control, you probably would not be in the situation of trying to compare parms 
from one system to another.

So it probably does make sense to start with the easy techniques, but you may 
still have to slog through checking the parmlibs against each other the hard 
way.

But I have two thoughts on the above:

Do you have a sandbox where you can IPL those systems in a test mode and 
compare the displays with the running systems?

Are there (supported?) ways to generate parmlib members from what's actually in 
effect? (ISTR that JES2 does.) If so, they'll probably be in he same formats 
and orders, thus easy to compare.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to