A great deal of your arguments seem to me to be about the performance impact of 
a multitasking program on other-system-critical applications, presumably a 
multitasking program running in a single batch step in lieu of multiple steps 
using any or all of your other suggestions of z/OS alternative solutions.

How is the performance of one truly multitasking batch step any different from 
any other WLM-managed batch job?  Isn't it WLM's job (and therefore the job of 
the sysprog team responsible for setting the appropriate WLM controls) to 
control how much priority and CPU and I/O any batch job gets?

You seem to be arguing that a multitasking batch job step in a production batch 
stream could interfere with the priority-CPU-I/O of the online and real-time 
and database activities running on the same system(s).  Again, isn't that an 
already-handled situation in the correct setting of WLM controls, or at least 
shouldn't it be?

I just don’t understand why you are so dead set against pipes for "allowing" 
multitasking to be more easily created by "ordinary" programmers.  How would a 
well-designed-and-reviewed pipes-based production-quality multitasking 
application really differ in its impact on critical system applications 
(online, database, etc.) from a well-designed-and-reviewed production-quality 
multitasking application written in any other language of your choice?

Or is it just multitasking itself that you are against?

Peter

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Jon 
Perryman
Sent: Sunday, September 7, 2025 7:08 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Pipelines = you don't understand z/OS

<Snipped>

>>Pipes 101: The most rudimentary z/OS PIPE is batch (step 1 feeds step2 that 
>>feeds ... that feeds step #). 
>> 
>Can batch do this without using a temporary data set?

What is the problem with using UNIT=VIO or in storage VSAM? Do you think pipes 
is doing something different?

>can a downstream step take timely action on output
>from an upstream step?  This is routine design in
>CMS Pipelines.

Is there no possible z/OS alternative? Are you saying this is how the 
performance sysprog wants you to do this in z/OS?  You do this in CMS, what is 
the downside? In z/OS, does it impact CICS, IMS, DB2, MQ and more. 
<Snipped>
--


This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee 
and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader 
of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any 
attachments from your system.


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

Reply via email to