Yes, using CVTUSER sensibly for a whole organisation requires authorised code to run at IPL time, which must allocate a USERVT in common storage and point CVTUSER at that.
There will be other ways, but once that work is done, it is relatively little work to use it for each product that needs an entry. I was just wondering whether people still use it. Ruz On Sat, 30 Nov 2019, 20:31 Charles Mills, <charl...@mcn.org> wrote: > 1. I have no idea. It is certainly a relic of olden times. > > 2. Yes, or the vector that @Peter has described that led to this thread > offshoot. You can get to the vector with four (?) Loads, and then > presumably one or two more to get to the actual specific "user" data you > need. I suspect the overhead for N/T services -- while pretty efficient -- > is greater. > > Charles > > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin > Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2019 12:20 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: WTO > > On Sat, 30 Nov 2019 11:31:51 -0800, Charles Mills wrote: > > >I think the problem with CVTUSER is that there is only one field but lots > of "users" (customer, vendor, other customer department, other vendor, ...). > > > Is this a relic of single address space design? > > Is this something better addressed by name/token services? > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
