EXECIO is not supported the same between z/os and CMS. This is a pain. GLOBALV probably needs porting to solve other problems. I was tempted to do that on the last project I was on where we had REXX working between the two platforms.
Sent from my iPhone — small keyboarf, fat fungrs, stupd spell manglr. Expct mistaks > On Sep 17, 2021, at 3:57 PM, Hobart Spitz <[email protected]> wrote: > > IMHO, the Business Cases on Pipes in the z/OS Base are as follows. (Pipes > is already available as part of BatchPipes.) > > The case *for *Pipes in the z/OS base.: > > 1. Development costs would drop for customers, vendors, and IBM, since > everyone could use Pipes in their software. > 2. Hardware usage would drop for customers. In addition to avoiding > I/O, Pipes uses a record address-and-length descriptor. A record can > flow from stage to stage with the only data movement being for changed > records. Potential data needed by a stage could have already been in the > working set and/or cache-loaded by the previous stage. (A methodology for > identifying the cost/benefits by JOB and application would allow the best > to be reworked first. Thus Pipes would pay for itself in the shortest > amount of time.) > 3. Product efficiency for vendors (IBM and others) would improve. > (Arguably it's the other side of the coin in #2.) > 4. Tight integration with REXX, CLIST and JCL. > 5. Portability to and from z/VM. This breaks down differently for > different groups: > - Customers: Cheaper porting to/from z/OS. (Porting to other IBM > Series is expensive and time-consuming, AFAIK.) > - Vendors: Write once for both platforms. > - IBM: Rather than customers moving to non-IBM platforms, when z/OS > or z/VM don't meet their needs, those customers would have another option > to stay with IBM. > 6. You can process both RecFM F records and RecFM V records with the > same stages. > 7. Pipes can be used on both EXEC and DD JCL statements. This is > primarily for REXX-a-phobes. Pipe commands in REXX are amazing; I've used > the combination on both z/OS and z/VM (and predecessors). Pipes with > CLISTs is almost as good, AFAIK. > 8. Increased competitiveness for IBM hardware and software. This would > especially apply to UNIX customers who have exceeded the capabilities of > their platforms. > 9. CMS/TSO Pipes is better than UNIX piping, and REXX is better than C. > With today's processors, C's performance advantage over REXX is not > significant, and dwarfed by low developer productivity (your bullet, your > gun, your foot) of C. Strategically using Pipes with REXX, can give better > performance that UNIX piping and C. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
