On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 12:38 PM, retired mainframer <
[email protected]> wrote:

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On
> > Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 5:10 AM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: ENQ for the life of the job
> >
> > The OP's peculiar constraint is that the serialization must be achieved
> > with no change to existing JCL.
>
> Does anyone else find it a little absurd that a trivial change to some JCL
> is a constraint violation but way outside the box solutions (which are much
> more complicated and may require a lifetime of maintenance) such as SMF and
> JES exits or a software modification to the change management system (which
> will probably require JCL changes any way if even feasible) that fiddles
> with some system control block(s) are acceptable?
>
> This looks like one of those PHB edicts to fix the problem but not change
> anything.
>

​Total agreement. But I understand why. We have an occasional S0C7 due to
the end user uploading bad data. My solution was to change a SORT control
card in a stand alone SORT step. After over a month, this change is still
pending research and approval. It is actually _easier_ for the programmer
to allow the abend, then edit the uploaded file (deleting records), and
rerun the job than to get the fix put in. It is a single control card
change.​

​Changing JCL requires copying from Production to test. Testing. Move to
MDOF. Test. Move to Production. This is known a "bureaucratic utopia".​


-- 
If you sent twitter messages while exploring, are you on a textpedition?

He's about as useful as a wax frying pan.

10 to the 12th power microphones = 1 Megaphone

Maranatha! <><
John McKown

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

Reply via email to