Re: STC as batch

[Charles Mills]

Oh sure, anything you can do in an STC you can do in a batch job (security, 
etc., permitting). Just clone the JCL, slap a job card on it, and submit it. 
Repeat until you get it right.

Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Peter
Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 8:02 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: STC as batch

Hi,

Thanks for the reply.

In our environment the STARTED TASK class are not active.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: STC as batch

[Peter]

Hi,

Thanks for the reply.

In our environment the STARTED TASK class are not active.

So the STC was failing with access violation. So figured out the way to run
with my ID until the STC access gets fixed.

Peter

On Nov 26, 2016 5:39 AM, "Jesse 1 Robinson"  wrote:

> I had to look up IEFJOBS. That’s the DD name in MSTJCLxx started tasks
> with job cards. In our case, IEFJOBS points to SYS1.STCJOBS. Installation
> defined.
>
> .
> .
> J.O.Skip Robinson
> Southern California Edison Company
> Electric Dragon Team Paddler
> SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
> 323-715-0595 Mobile
> 626-302-7535 Office
> robin...@sce.com
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Bill Ashton
> Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 3:51 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: (External):Re: STC as batch
>
> You can also add a job to the IEFJOBS file if you have it defined, and you
> can then have a Started Job.
>
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Wayne Bickerdike 
> wrote:
>
> > For CICS, yes it can run as a started job.
> >
> > CA-Datacom can run as a job too.
> >
> > Whatever you want to do, try itWrap a job card around the STC or
> > use an instream proc with a job card and see what happens.
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 4:59 AM, Peter Hunkeler  wrote:
> >
> > > >Is it possible to invoke a STC by submitting a batch Job ? If so
> > > >will it
> > > just run by adding Job card ?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > From the few answers so far I think it becomes clear more detail is
> > needed
> > > on what you want to achieve.
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Peter Hunkeler
>
>
> --
> 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

Re: Compiled Rexx Question

[scott Ford]

Charles,

Long time no talk to I was wondering if I could compile the rexx clist
or program and link it and then make a call from another language , i.e.;
Cobol or Assembler. Based on what you said it looks like I can ..I thinking
about building the Rexx Interface driver to handle the calls. My concern is
that I make the call does , rexx release program storage  ..?

Scott

On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 6:23 PM, Charles Mills  wrote:

> @Scott, there are two ways to compile Rexx: in one you end up with
> something
> that behaves like "normal" Rexx, but performs a little better in you have
> the library licensed* on the target machine. I am not familiar with that
> beyond the sentence I just wrote. The other way produces object code that
> you then linkedit. I am fairly familiar with that latter way. For that, the
> resulting load module is just like any other load module -- you would
> call/link to it just like you would if it were written in assembler. IIRC
> in
> that situation the parm passing is also just like for an assembler program.
> The first parm pointed to by R1 becomes Arg(1) and so forth.
>
> *For a vendor, compiled Rexx is less of a benefit than you might imagine.
> You will gain performance improvements only at customer sites that license
> the Rexx compiler run-time library. At other sites your compiled Rexx
> program will run, but it will run interpreted with "normal" performance.
> You
> also gain only very slight "source code obfuscation" benefits because all
> of
> your source code is sitting in plain EBCDIC inside the resulting load
> module. It is not perfectly editable source, but it would not take a
> hacking
> genius to turn it back into "real" source code.
>
> Charles
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Steve Thompson
> Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 2:44 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Compiled Rexx Question
>
> Sorry, I read your initial post backwards -- REXX calling COBOL.
>
> So far I haven't called REXX from COBOL.
>
> --
> 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

Re: Compiled Rexx Question

[Mike Schwab]

In some cases, compiled REXX performs slower than interpreted REXX.
This is because the variable have to be created with each call, and
destroyed upon return..

On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 12:53 PM, scott Ford  wrote:
> All:
>
> Has anyone compile a Rexx clist with arguments...then called it from Cobol
> as
> 'call x using ' ?
>
> If so where do i find info on how to do this ?
>
> Scott
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN



-- 
Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA
Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all?

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: STC as batch

[Jesse 1 Robinson]

I had to look up IEFJOBS. That’s the DD name in MSTJCLxx started tasks with job 
cards. In our case, IEFJOBS points to SYS1.STCJOBS. Installation defined. 

.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler 
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-302-7535 Office
robin...@sce.com


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Bill Ashton
Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 3:51 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: STC as batch

You can also add a job to the IEFJOBS file if you have it defined, and you can 
then have a Started Job.

On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Wayne Bickerdike  wrote:

> For CICS, yes it can run as a started job.
>
> CA-Datacom can run as a job too.
>
> Whatever you want to do, try itWrap a job card around the STC or 
> use an instream proc with a job card and see what happens.
>
> On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 4:59 AM, Peter Hunkeler  wrote:
>
> > >Is it possible to invoke a STC by submitting a batch Job ? If so 
> > >will it
> > just run by adding Job card ?
> >
> >
> >
> > From the few answers so far I think it becomes clear more detail is
> needed
> > on what you want to achieve.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Peter Hunkeler


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: STC as batch

[Bill Ashton]

You can also add a job to the IEFJOBS file if you have it defined, and you
can then have a Started Job.

On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Wayne Bickerdike  wrote:

> For CICS, yes it can run as a started job.
>
> CA-Datacom can run as a job too.
>
> Whatever you want to do, try itWrap a job card around the STC or use an
> instream proc with a job card and see what happens.
>
> On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 4:59 AM, Peter Hunkeler  wrote:
>
> > >Is it possible to invoke a STC by submitting a batch Job ? If so will it
> > just run by adding Job card ?
> >
> >
> >
> > From the few answers so far I think it becomes clear more detail is
> needed
> > on what you want to achieve.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Peter Hunkeler
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Wayne V. Bickerdike
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>



-- 
Thank you and best regards,
*Billy Ashton*

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Compiled Rexx Question

[scott Ford]

Steve,

No problem

Scott

On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 5:43 PM, Steve Thompson  wrote:

> Sorry, I read your initial post backwards -- REXX calling COBOL.
>
> So far I haven't called REXX from COBOL.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Nov 25, 2016, at 3:15 PM, scott Ford  wrote:
> >
> > Steve:
> >
> > Do you call IRXJCL or IRXEXEC ?
> >
> > Scott
> >
> >> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Steve Thompson 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I do it with uncompiled REXX.
> >>
> >> COBOL :  define the variables in the LINKAGE SECTION.
> >>
> >> PROCEDURE DIVISION USING xxx,  etc.
> >>
> >> I use display type values and let COBOL manipulate them as needed.
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >>
> >>> On Nov 25, 2016, at 1:53 PM, scott Ford  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> All:
> >>>
> >>> Has anyone compile a Rexx clist with arguments...then called it from
> >> Cobol
> >>> as
> >>> 'call x using ' ?
> >>>
> >>> If so where do i find info on how to do this ?
> >>>
> >>> Scott
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> 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
> >>
> >
> > --
> > 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
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Compiled Rexx Question

[Charles Mills]

@Scott, there are two ways to compile Rexx: in one you end up with something
that behaves like "normal" Rexx, but performs a little better in you have
the library licensed* on the target machine. I am not familiar with that
beyond the sentence I just wrote. The other way produces object code that
you then linkedit. I am fairly familiar with that latter way. For that, the
resulting load module is just like any other load module -- you would
call/link to it just like you would if it were written in assembler. IIRC in
that situation the parm passing is also just like for an assembler program.
The first parm pointed to by R1 becomes Arg(1) and so forth.

*For a vendor, compiled Rexx is less of a benefit than you might imagine.
You will gain performance improvements only at customer sites that license
the Rexx compiler run-time library. At other sites your compiled Rexx
program will run, but it will run interpreted with "normal" performance. You
also gain only very slight "source code obfuscation" benefits because all of
your source code is sitting in plain EBCDIC inside the resulting load
module. It is not perfectly editable source, but it would not take a hacking
genius to turn it back into "real" source code.

Charles

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Steve Thompson
Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 2:44 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Compiled Rexx Question

Sorry, I read your initial post backwards -- REXX calling COBOL. 

So far I haven't called REXX from COBOL. 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Compiled Rexx Question

[Steve Thompson]

Sorry, I read your initial post backwards -- REXX calling COBOL. 

So far I haven't called REXX from COBOL. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 25, 2016, at 3:15 PM, scott Ford  wrote:
> 
> Steve:
> 
> Do you call IRXJCL or IRXEXEC ?
> 
> Scott
> 
>> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Steve Thompson  wrote:
>> 
>> I do it with uncompiled REXX.
>> 
>> COBOL :  define the variables in the LINKAGE SECTION.
>> 
>> PROCEDURE DIVISION USING xxx,  etc.
>> 
>> I use display type values and let COBOL manipulate them as needed.
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On Nov 25, 2016, at 1:53 PM, scott Ford  wrote:
>>> 
>>> All:
>>> 
>>> Has anyone compile a Rexx clist with arguments...then called it from
>> Cobol
>>> as
>>> 'call x using ' ?
>>> 
>>> If so where do i find info on how to do this ?
>>> 
>>> Scott
>>> 
>>> --
>>> 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
>> 
> 
> --
> 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

Re: Compiled Rexx Question

[scott Ford]

Steve:

Do you call IRXJCL or IRXEXEC ?

Scott

On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Steve Thompson  wrote:

> I do it with uncompiled REXX.
>
> COBOL :  define the variables in the LINKAGE SECTION.
>
> PROCEDURE DIVISION USING xxx,  etc.
>
> I use display type values and let COBOL manipulate them as needed.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Nov 25, 2016, at 1:53 PM, scott Ford  wrote:
> >
> > All:
> >
> > Has anyone compile a Rexx clist with arguments...then called it from
> Cobol
> > as
> > 'call x using ' ?
> >
> > If so where do i find info on how to do this ?
> >
> > Scott
> >
> > --
> > 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
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Compiled Rexx Question

[Steve Thompson]

I do it with uncompiled REXX. 

COBOL :  define the variables in the LINKAGE SECTION. 

PROCEDURE DIVISION USING xxx,  etc. 

I use display type values and let COBOL manipulate them as needed. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 25, 2016, at 1:53 PM, scott Ford  wrote:
> 
> All:
> 
> Has anyone compile a Rexx clist with arguments...then called it from Cobol
> as
> 'call x using ' ?
> 
> If so where do i find info on how to do this ?
> 
> Scott
> 
> --
> 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

Re: A true discussion in today's world (at least here)

[scott Ford]

Guys,

I totally agree , and as you get older you see more issues like you both
mentioned.

Scott

On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Jesse 1 Robinson 
wrote:

> (It's Friday.) All analogies fail because no two things are alike. OTOH an
> analogy may help someone understand an issue by drawing (an imperfect)
> parallel to something else a person may be more familiar with. Or it may be
> used as a tool to persuade someone to take action in a realm where they are
> otherwise clueless.
>
> I offered the auto analogy for the second reason. Where I live in the
> West, everyone has a car and can relate to the issue. If someone in the
> corporate boardroom actually took umbrage to the comparison, then that
> person could probably be reasoned with on technical grounds. There aren't a
> lot of those folks in the management ranks.
>
> .
> .
> J.O.Skip Robinson
> Southern California Edison Company
> Electric Dragon Team Paddler
> SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
> 323-715-0595 Mobile
> 626-302-7535 Office
> robin...@sce.com
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Greg Shirey
> Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 7:03 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: (External):Re: A true discussion in today's world (at least here)
>
> Personally, I think the analogy is quite appropriate and I appreciate Skip
> sharing it.   I’m sure most analogies, “in some circumstances” can be
> proven to fail, but car maintenance is a fairly typical consideration for
> most people in the US.  If you live in an area with a dense population that
> mostly relies on public transportation, then modify the analogy to the
> subway system or the busses, or point to the Alaska Airlines wiki article
> to show the dangers of delaying maintenance.
>
> My 2 cents,
> Greg Shirey
> Ben E. Keith Company
>
>
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Tony Harminc
> Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 1:21 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: A true discussion in today's world (at least here)
>
> On 23 November 2016 at 12:33, Jesse 1 Robinson  mailto:jesse1.robin...@sce.com>> wrote:
> > When I get flak about the churn of staying current with maintenance, I
> climb my soapbox. Look, I say, I've calculated that on balance it's cheaper
> to drive your car as long as it runs rather than take in for periodic
> maintenance, which is both time consuming and out-of-pocket costly. Most
> likely it will fail somewhere down the road ;-) but getting it fixed then
> will be cheaper and quicker overall.
> >
> > Well, I say, if you wouldn't think of managing your car that way, why
> would you think it makes sense for a computer system?
>
> The analogy is cute, but I think it fails The problem is that in some
> circumstances that's a perfectly reasonable way to manage a car.
> Depending on the age, how much you depend on it, whether you ever drive a
> significant distance from home, etc. etc. there may be nothing wrong with
> deferring or not doing some maintenance.
>
> I live in a city, mostly walk or use transit, and I have very little need
> for reliability in a car.
>
>
> --
> 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

Compiled Rexx Question

[scott Ford]

All:

Has anyone compile a Rexx clist with arguments...then called it from Cobol
as
'call x using ' ?

If so where do i find info on how to do this ?

Scott

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: STC as batch

[Wayne Bickerdike]

For CICS, yes it can run as a started job.

CA-Datacom can run as a job too.

Whatever you want to do, try itWrap a job card around the STC or use an
instream proc with a job card and see what happens.

On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 4:59 AM, Peter Hunkeler  wrote:

> >Is it possible to invoke a STC by submitting a batch Job ? If so will it
> just run by adding Job card ?
>
>
>
> From the few answers so far I think it becomes clear more detail is needed
> on what you want to achieve.
>
>
> --
> Peter Hunkeler
>
>
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>



-- 
Wayne V. Bickerdike

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: zIIP Processor availability Display

[Carlos Cordero]

Peter, you´re right..


I get the info from RMF monitor about zIIP usage.



Thanks



De: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  en nombre de Peter 
Hunkeler 
Enviado: viernes, 25 de noviembre de 2016 12:41 a. m.
Para: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Asunto: AW: zIIP Processor availability Display

>On a z12 Mainframe with two physical box, with 8 LPARS on a Sysplex 
>configuration and Coupling Facility option, there are 6 Lpars for production 
>and 2 Lpars for previous environment (development or test); how can I display 
>if zIIP processor are assigned or used by Lpars of previous environments?


If you have RMF, the CPC report in RMF III or the CPU Activity report from the 
RMF Postprocessor will show the zIIP assignment and usage by LPAR. I guess CMF 
has similar reports.


--
Peter Hunkeler



--
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

Re: HSM question

[Gibney, Dave]

Run a list of your assigned tapes. Recycle any that are not marked full. They 
were created before you got the setting correct. 

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
> On Behalf Of Tony Thigpen
> Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2016 2:39 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: HSM question
> 
> That's what I thought, but it does not seem to be working. So, I figured I was
> misreading or doing something wrong.
> 
> Tony Thigpen
> 
> retired mainframer wrote on 11/24/2016 04:42 PM:
> > Doesn't SETSYS PARTIALTAPE(BAKCUP(MARKFULL)) do what you want?
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-
> m...@listserv.ua.edu]
> > On Behalf Of Tony Thigpen
> > Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2016 7:30 AM
> > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> > Subject: Re: HSM question
> >
> > The elapsed time is 10 minutes.
> >
> > Before we get off-track too much, the end result we are looking for is:
> > We want the HSM backup process to *always* use a scratch tape. We
> > never want it to ask for an existing tape to append to.
> >
> > --
> > 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

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

AW: STC as batch

[Peter Hunkeler]

>Is it possible to invoke a STC by submitting a batch Job ? If so will it
just run by adding Job card ?



>From the few answers so far I think it becomes clear more detail is needed on 
>what you want to achieve.


--
Peter Hunkeler



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

AW: Re: STC as batch

[Peter Hunkeler]

>STCs and Jobs are different MVS "units of work." Your question is analogous to 
>asking "is it possible for a dog to be a cat?" No, it is not.



Once the program runs, there is little difference left. In your analogy, I'd 
say a dog stays a dog. The difference is whether it can get immediate access to 
food or whether it has to wait patiently in a queue until it is its turn to eat.




--
Peter Hunkeler







--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: STC as batch

[Jesse 1 Robinson]

For a long time, it was customary for CICS folks to run their regions as batch 
jobs. Justification focused on handling of JES message data sets, which 
benefited from much more flexibility in batch than as STC. The answer is, as 
mentioned, STCJOBS, which allows an actual started task to specify job-like 
output class and disposition options.  

.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler 
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-302-7535 Office
robin...@sce.com


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Charles Mills
Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 9:14 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: STC as batch

STCs and Jobs are different MVS "units of work." Your question is analogous to 
asking "is it possible for a dog to be a cat?" No, it is not. 

But you can train a dog to catch mice. You can train a cat to fetch a ball.

What aspect of an STC would you like in batch? Or, what aspect of batch would 
you like your STC to have?

Taking your first question literally, yes, you can invoke (start) an STC from a 
batch job. You can -- subject to certain restrictions -- enter any console 
command from a batch job, including a START for a cataloged procedure. 

But I don't know how the rest of your post applies to your first question.

Charles

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Peter
Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 4:00 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: STC as batch

Hi

Is it possible to invoke a STC by submitting a batch Job ? If so will it just 
run by adding Job card ? I am sorry for being ignorant. Any suggestions would 
help


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: (External):Re: STC as batch

[Jesse 1 Robinson]

.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler 
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-302-7535 Office
robin...@sce.com


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Charles Mills
Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 9:14 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: STC as batch

STCs and Jobs are different MVS "units of work." Your question is analogous to 
asking "is it possible for a dog to be a cat?" No, it is not. 

But you can train a dog to catch mice. You can train a cat to fetch a ball.

What aspect of an STC would you like in batch? Or, what aspect of batch would 
you like your STC to have?

Taking your first question literally, yes, you can invoke (start) an STC from a 
batch job. You can -- subject to certain restrictions -- enter any console 
command from a batch job, including a START for a cataloged procedure. 

But I don't know how the rest of your post applies to your first question.

Charles

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Peter
Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 4:00 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: STC as batch

Hi

Is it possible to invoke a STC by submitting a batch Job ? If so will it just 
run by adding Job card ? I am sorry for being ignorant. Any suggestions would 
help.

--
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

Re: A true discussion in today's world (at least here)

[Jesse 1 Robinson]

(It's Friday.) All analogies fail because no two things are alike. OTOH an 
analogy may help someone understand an issue by drawing (an imperfect) parallel 
to something else a person may be more familiar with. Or it may be used as a 
tool to persuade someone to take action in a realm where they are otherwise 
clueless. 

I offered the auto analogy for the second reason. Where I live in the West, 
everyone has a car and can relate to the issue. If someone in the corporate 
boardroom actually took umbrage to the comparison, then that person could 
probably be reasoned with on technical grounds. There aren't a lot of those 
folks in the management ranks.

.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler 
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-302-7535 Office
robin...@sce.com


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Greg Shirey
Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 7:03 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: A true discussion in today's world (at least here)

Personally, I think the analogy is quite appropriate and I appreciate Skip 
sharing it.   I’m sure most analogies, “in some circumstances” can be proven to 
fail, but car maintenance is a fairly typical consideration for most people in 
the US.  If you live in an area with a dense population that mostly relies on 
public transportation, then modify the analogy to the subway system or the 
busses, or point to the Alaska Airlines wiki article to show the dangers of 
delaying maintenance.

My 2 cents,
Greg Shirey
Ben E. Keith Company


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Tony Harminc
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 1:21 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: A true discussion in today's world (at least here)

On 23 November 2016 at 12:33, Jesse 1 Robinson 
> wrote:
> When I get flak about the churn of staying current with maintenance, I climb 
> my soapbox. Look, I say, I've calculated that on balance it's cheaper to 
> drive your car as long as it runs rather than take in for periodic 
> maintenance, which is both time consuming and out-of-pocket costly. Most 
> likely it will fail somewhere down the road ;-) but getting it fixed then 
> will be cheaper and quicker overall.
>
> Well, I say, if you wouldn't think of managing your car that way, why would 
> you think it makes sense for a computer system?

The analogy is cute, but I think it fails The problem is that in some 
circumstances that's a perfectly reasonable way to manage a car.
Depending on the age, how much you depend on it, whether you ever drive a 
significant distance from home, etc. etc. there may be nothing wrong with 
deferring or not doing some maintenance.

I live in a city, mostly walk or use transit, and I have very little need for 
reliability in a car.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: STC as batch

[Charles Mills]

STCs and Jobs are different MVS "units of work." Your question is analogous to 
asking "is it possible for a dog to be a cat?" No, it is not. 

But you can train a dog to catch mice. You can train a cat to fetch a ball.

What aspect of an STC would you like in batch? Or, what aspect of batch would 
you like your STC to have?

Taking your first question literally, yes, you can invoke (start) an STC from a 
batch job. You can -- subject to certain restrictions -- enter any console 
command from a batch job, including a START for a cataloged procedure. 

But I don't know how the rest of your post applies to your first question.

Charles

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Peter
Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 4:00 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: STC as batch

Hi

Is it possible to invoke a STC by submitting a batch Job ? If so will it just 
run by adding Job card ? I am sorry for being ignorant. Any suggestions would 
help.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: zIIP Processor availability Display

[Jesse 1 Robinson]

Display config (D M) commands will show whether and how many zIIPs are online 
to an LPAR. They will not tell you, however, how much if any actual usage there 
is. We assign zIIPs to each LPAR that runs software capable of using zIIP MSUs. 

From what I've heard, if nothing in an LPAR is likely to benefit from a zIIP, 
you might refrain from assigning any zIIPs at the hardware level (Image 
profile). 

.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler 
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-302-7535 Office
robin...@sce.com

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Ed Jaffe
Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 7:31 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: zIIP Processor availability Display

On 11/24/2016 8:12 PM, Roger Lowe wrote:
>
> D M=CPU

Or 'D M=CORE' on the latest hardware with SMT support active.

--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

AW: Re: STC as batch

[Peter Hunkeler]

>Look up STCJOBS (I forget which manual).
 >
>It was superficially developed  so that you can run an STC specifying a 
>jobcard to pass for example accounting information.


This is still an STC not a job. but, yes, it may serve the OPs needs.


--
Peter Hunkeler




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: zIIP Processor availability Display

[Ed Jaffe]

On 11/24/2016 8:12 PM, Roger Lowe wrote:


D M=CPU


Or 'D M=CORE' on the latest hardware with SMT support active.

--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: STC as batch

[Field, Alan]

Look up STCJOBS (I forget which manual).

It was superficially developed  so that you can run an STC specifying a jobcard 
to pass for example accounting information.



Alan Field
Systems Engineer Principal
Blue Cross Blue Shield of MN

651.662.3546


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Peter
Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 6:00 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: STC as batch

Hi

Is it possible to invoke a STC by submitting a batch Job ? If so will it just 
run by adding Job card ? I am sorry for being ignorant. Any suggestions would 
help.

Peter

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended 
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If 
you are not the named addressee you must not disseminate, distribute or copy 
this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have 
received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you 
are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, 
distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this 
information is strictly prohibited.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: A true discussion in today's world (at least here)

[Greg Shirey]

Personally, I think the analogy is quite appropriate and I appreciate Skip 
sharing it.   I’m sure most analogies, “in some circumstances” can be proven to 
fail, but car maintenance is a fairly typical consideration for most people in 
the US.  If you live in an area with a dense population that mostly relies on 
public transportation, then modify the analogy to the subway system or the 
busses, or point to the Alaska Airlines wiki article to show the dangers of 
delaying maintenance.

My 2 cents,
Greg Shirey
Ben E. Keith Company


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Tony Harminc
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 1:21 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: A true discussion in today's world (at least here)

On 23 November 2016 at 12:33, Jesse 1 Robinson 
> wrote:
> When I get flak about the churn of staying current with maintenance, I climb 
> my soapbox. Look, I say, I've calculated that on balance it's cheaper to 
> drive your car as long as it runs rather than take in for periodic 
> maintenance, which is both time consuming and out-of-pocket costly. Most 
> likely it will fail somewhere down the road ;-) but getting it fixed then 
> will be cheaper and quicker overall.
>
> Well, I say, if you wouldn't think of managing your car that way, why would 
> you think it makes sense for a computer system?

The analogy is cute, but I think it fails The problem is that in some
circumstances that's a perfectly reasonable way to manage a car.
Depending on the age, how much you depend on it, whether you ever
drive a significant distance from home, etc. etc. there may be nothing
wrong with deferring or not doing some maintenance.

I live in a city, mostly walk or use transit, and I have very little
need for reliability in a car.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

AW: Re: STC as batch

[Peter Hunkeler]

​>Can you run an STC as a batch job? Most of the time you can simply by 
>putting the proper JOB card ​in front of it: 
 >
>//STCNAME JOB (ACCT),'RUN STCNAME',CLASS=A,MSGCLASS=X 
>//STCNAME EXEC PROC=STCNAME 
>// 
 >
>
>However, this will _NOT_ work properly if the STC is a single step STC 
>which runs a program which is in the PPT; set up in the SCHEDnn member of 
>PARMLIB. 


Only if the task needs the SYST (system task attribute) wil this not work. All 
of the other PPT attributes will be honoured for jobs as well.


Some differences to consider:
- WLM classification is done under subsys STC or JESx, resp.
- STCs are demand selected, i.e. started immediately on the system where the 
START command is issued.
- Multiple instances of an STC may run in parallel on the same or different 
systems in the sysplex
- Jobs are submitted to JESx and are only started when an initiator is 
available to run the job. They also may run on any system (if not directed to a 
specific system via SYSAFF, SYSTEM, or SCHED parameters).
- Only one job with a given jobname can usually run at a time in the sysplex 
(unless JESx is setup to allow otherwise).  


--
Peter Hunkeler


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Interesting economic post on LinkedIn

[John McKown]

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/want-success-think-long-term-take-risks-sir-martin-sorrell

This addresses part of what we've discussed around here in "stay out of my
sever room" thread. I especially liked:

[quote]

This cocktail of pressures is not conducive to long-term strategic
thinking, and the financial world’s obsession with quarterly results
doesn’t help. One survey revealed that nearly 80% of executives admit they
would “take actions to improve quarterly earnings at the expense of
long-term value creation”.

In this environment, procurement and finance departments (rather than
growth-drivers such as marketing and R) have the whip hand. Risk-aversion
and short-termism rule in the world’s boardrooms. This attitude is entirely
understandable—and entirely wrong. Calculated risk-taking, in the form of
investment, is the lifeblood of any business that wants to be successful in
the long-term.
[quote/]

-- 
Heisenberg may have been here.

Unicode: http://xkcd.com/1726/

Maranatha! <><
John McKown

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: STC as batch

[John McKown]

On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 6:00 AM, Peter  wrote:

> Hi
>
> Is it possible to invoke a STC by submitting a batch Job ? If so will it
> just run by adding Job card ? I am sorry for being ignorant. Any
> suggestions would help.
>
> Peter
>
>
​What we do to start an STC using a batch job, which is scheduled by CA-7
is a job similar to:

//JOBNAME JOB (ACCT),'START STC',CLASS=A,MSGCLASS=H
// COMMAND 'S STCNAME'
//IEFBR14 EXEC PGM=IEFBR14
//

​This works _only_ if you internal reader is set to allow it.
ref:
https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSLTBW_2.1.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r1.hasa400/has2u600104.htm
[quote]

Auth=(Job=Yes|No,Device=Yes|No,System=Yes|No)Specifies the command
authority for internal readers. These values authorize certain JES2
commands to be submitted through an internal reader.
Note: This parameter has no effect when the associated resource class and
profile in RACF® 1.9 or higher are active. For more information about using
JES2 security facilities, see z/OS JES2 Initialization and Tuning Guide

.
Job=Yes|NoSpecifies that the device can (Yes) or cannot (No) issue commands
that require job authority.Device=Yes|NoSpecifies that the device can (Yes)
or cannot (No) issue commands that require device
authority.System=Yes|NoSpecifies
that the device can (Yes) or cannot (No) issue commands that require system
authority.

This parameter affects JES2 control statements only. Use the AUTH parameter
of the JOBCLASS initialization statement to specify the authorization for
JCL statements. (JES2 control statements begin with /* in columns 1 and 2.
JCL statements begin with // in columns 1 and 2.)

*Modification:* $T INTRDR operator command.

[quote/]​

Many consider the above to be a security issue. They use other, more
complex, methods to do this; often an in-house (or CBTtape) APF authorized
program which uses the MGCRE macro to issue the START command.

​Can you run an STC as a batch job? Most of the time you can simply by
putting the proper JOB card ​in front of it:

//STCNAME JOB (ACCT),'RUN STCNAME',CLASS=A,MSGCLASS=X
//STCNAME EXEC PROC=STCNAME
//

We used to do this to run CICS regions.

However, this will _NOT_ work properly if the STC is a single step STC
which runs a program which is in the PPT; set up in the SCHEDnn member of
PARMLIB.
ref:
https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSLTBW_2.1.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r1.ieae200/ieae200540.htm


-- 
Heisenberg may have been here.

Unicode: http://xkcd.com/1726/

Maranatha! <><
John McKown

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: STC as batch

[Vernooij, Kees (ITOPT1) - KLM]

Strange question: an STC is JCL that is started with a START command, a batch 
job is JCL that is submitted by submitting a batch job. 
What are you looking for?

Kees.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Peter
Sent: 25 November, 2016 13:00
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: STC as batch

Hi

Is it possible to invoke a STC by submitting a batch Job ? If so will it
just run by adding Job card ? I am sorry for being ignorant. Any
suggestions would help.

Peter

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: 
http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and 
privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the 
addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be 
disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this 
e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have 
received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail, and delete this message. 

Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its 
employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of 
this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt. 
Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch 
Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered number 
33014286




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

STC as batch

[Peter]

Hi

Is it possible to invoke a STC by submitting a batch Job ? If so will it
just run by adding Job card ? I am sorry for being ignorant. Any
suggestions would help.

Peter

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Test

[Sean Gleann]

test - please ignore.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN