In , on 10/10/2009
at 01:41 PM, Paul Gilmartin said:
>The OUTPUT JCL statement,
Then you're talking about a length restriction of OUTPUT, not of SJF.
>The vendor appears to be IBM,
Not even close; you gave the right answer to a question that nobody asked.
It should have been clear from cont
On Fri, 9 Oct 2009 17:08:30 -0500, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
>In , on 10/09/2009
> at 09:45 AM, Paul Gilmartin said:
>
>>FSVO "arbitrary". This is the USERDATA parameter, isn't it?.
>
>Userdata parameter of what?
>
The OUTPUT JCL statement, which I found by following a chain of
references
In , on 10/09/2009
at 09:45 AM, Paul Gilmartin said:
>FSVO "arbitrary". This is the USERDATA parameter, isn't it?.
Userdata parameter of what?
There are vendors adding their own DD keywords via SJF; I don't know
whether they are under NDA's. If not, perhaps one of them could comment on
len
On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 17:52:00 -0500, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
>
>>There's a smoldering need here for a means to pass arbitrary name/value
>>pairs from JCL to job processing components other than by steganographic
>>jobname coding.
>
>SJF. Unfortunately, IBM has only documented its use for DD a
In , on 10/03/2009
at 03:26 PM, Paul Gilmartin said:
>There's a smoldering need here for a means to pass arbitrary name/value
>pairs from JCL to job processing components other than by steganographic
>jobname coding.
SJF. Unfortunately, IBM has only documented its use for DD and OUTPUT
state
Arthur Gutowski wrote:
... AFAIK, JES3 still does not allow for
duplicate jobnames to exeute in tandem without modification (other than the
bypass for UNIX tasks).
I agree it's crazy. I suspect nearly every JES3 shop in the world has
this (very old) one line modification in place:
++SRC
On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 16:53:47 -0700, Edward Jaffe
wrote:
>I have personally not put my userid into a job name in nearly 25 years.
>If I submit a job to compress a PDS, it's called "COMPRESS". That's what
>makes sense to me.
Except when there are hundreds or thousands of applications to support (n
On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 16:53:47 -0700, Edward Jaffe wrote:
>
>(E)JES taught me the "hard" way that a VERY significant number--possibly
>the vast majority--of JES2/SDSF installations still do job/spool
>security by job name. And, most of them don't want to invest one iota of
>extra time to convert from
Frank Swarbrick wrote:
Edward Jaffe wrote:
It's not at all surprising to me that IBM completely dropped support for
ISFPARMS with SDSF for JES3 in z/OS 1.10.
Ed, you just made my day!
Though I have no idea what ISFPARMS is, it sounds like that may be a good
thing. :-)
I'm usin
>>> On 10/2/2009 at 5:53 PM, in message <4ac6928b.7000...@phoenixsoftware.com>,
Edward Jaffe wrote:
> Frank Swarbrick wrote:
>> I am not a system programmer, but I am certainly trying to control my own
> destiny. Which is why I am arguing for reasonable standards, or better yet
> in this case,
Frank Swarbrick wrote:
I am not a system programmer, but I am certainly trying to control my own destiny. Which
is why I am arguing for reasonable standards, or better yet in this case, the ability to
name my job what ever I want and not be forced to some silly standard from the 1960's.
So y
11 matches
Mail list logo
