IMHO, doing a STC wont make your processing "Online". STC is just a STC - making your process running under a STC wont turn it "online".
If you plan to process the "records" one by one, I would advice to use a transaction system, such as CICS or IMS. Using a STC like you described will just turn your current process into a "batch process that processes a record at time". There are several ways to trigger transactions based on events - just choose one that you have on your installation If you plan to process the "records" in batches - I would advice do that in batch. You can trigger batch jobs on most of Scheduling softwares based on events - even on record arrival or file creation. You can take a look at your Scheduling software to see what options it has available. Personally i would use the second approach - doing a batch triggered job. A batch job can process any "kind" of "file" (seq, vsam, databases) and you can program nice recovery without creating a maintenance nightmare. The only exception to this is if you have a business need to process each record as soon it arrives. ET Lima ---- Mensagem Original ---- From: "Jan MOEYERSONS" <jan.moeyers...@adelior.be> To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Sent: Seg, Fevereiro 20, 2012 9:47 am Subject: Re: Batch process VS Started task On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 15:25:32 -0600, Magen Margalit <syste...@gmail.com> wrote: >One idea that came up is to convert the process to a "self developed" STC >which will be triggered by a record on an MQ queue and will run as STC all the >batch process programs I think MQ is indeed a very good way to collect these records. You have plenty of configuration options in there to cater for recoverability (or not, if you don't need it), etc. And CICS or IMS can be used at the other end to drain the queue; using MQ triggering it becomes even simpler to start these processing transactions. Both CICS and IMS can easily handle the number of transactions and offer excelent recoverability. >To me it seems like a bad idea because having a "self developed" STC in production >create a maintenance gap (and where there is one STC a second one >will soon to follow...)... I agree on that. Most shops I know are working to eliminate as much as possible the home-grown stuff for exactly that reason: maintenance headache... >Are there any "self developed" STC's at your shop? We do have one. It caters for a very specific need of authentication in a client/server context. And each time we upgrade z/OS, we spend a lot of time testing... Cheers, Jantje. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
