In
<5225212463451561.wa.elardus.engelbrechtsita.co...@listserv.ua.edu>,
on 05/02/2013
at 05:20 AM, Elardus Engelbrecht <[email protected]>
said:
>Strange no one came with another reason why duplicate jobnames are to
>be prohibited or allowed.
>It is about resource usage. If you have limited resources, it is
>better to have your jobs running in sequence.
That doesn't explain using a scredriver as a hammer.
>Sometimes, not always, having fewer jobs by limiting inits and by
>having jobs to be named so they consume resources one by one, not
>together, we could get things going.
That's the right answer to the wrong question. Why rely on duplicate
job names for the purpose once better tools are available?
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2 <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
