Thank you all.
// SCHEDULE HOLDUNTL='+01:00' works like a champ! Thanks all.
I have a slightly different member (other tweaks in addition to the HOLDUNTL)
that I use for the re-run, which works out well.
Charles
--
For
Sorry to double ply. One of the things I was waiting on was OMVS. BPXBATCH
Sleep doesn't sleep if OMVS isn't there.
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
> Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
> Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2023 7:50 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject:
My primary use was to pause a few things at IPL so that needed services had a
chance to start.
In this case, the OP seemed to have a system where holding an init wouldn't
hurt much
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
> Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
> Sent: Sunday,
On Mon, 20 Mar 2023 02:39:51 +, Gibney, Dave wrote:
>A different approach is to add a additional step at or near the top that
>waits. I had a very short assembler program that called STIMER based on parm
>input.
>
Ah! the old way. Nowadays, BPXBATCH sleep.
In those days, it was
True
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
> Behalf Of Jeremy Nicoll
> Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2023 7:46 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Scheduling a job to run after a delay
>
> [EXTERNAL EMAIL]
>
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2023, at 02:39, Gibney, Dave
On Mon, 20 Mar 2023, at 02:39, Gibney, Dave wrote:
> A different approach is to add a additional step at or near the top
> that waits. I had a very short assembler program that called STIMER
> based on parm input.
Does that not mean holding up an initiator for an hour, doing nothing?
It's not
A different approach is to add a additional step at or near the top that waits.
I had a very short assembler program that called STIMER based on parm input.
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
> Behalf Of Charles Mills
> Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2023 5:06 PM
>
On Sun, 19 Mar 2023 21:25:52 -0500, Charles Mills wrote:
>The question is more "justify" than "afford." Not sure changing one string in
>one job submission qualifies.
>
And it may be less a hurdle to justify the license fee than to justify the
learning experience,
unless you're already
The question is more "justify" than "afford." Not sure changing one string in
one job submission qualifies.
I can have two different members, or I can tolerate a one-hour delay in a
single job. Either approach is totally satisfactory to me. I will probably go
with the "two members" approach; I
On Sun, 19 Mar 2023 19:56:55 -0500, Charles Mills wrote:
>
>There is no need for the follow-on job to be identical. Heck, as I read
>HOLDUNTL, they could be
>
Changing // SCHEDULE HOLDUNTL='+00:00:01'
to: // SCHEDULE HOLDUNTL='+01:00:00'
feels like the sort of thing DFSORT loves to do.
Ed, thanks, yes, // SCHEDULE HOLDUNTL='+01:00' should do the trick. I sat
through the session in Poughkeepsie on those scheduling features that IBM was
adding to z/OS, but they did not really sink in, because I had no day-to-day
need.
There is no need for the follow-on job to be identical.
On 3/19/2023 5:05 PM, Charles Mills wrote:
Can I somehow conditionally submit a JES2 command to run the job in an hour?
Can you add a // SCHEDULE JCL statement to the job with a HOLDUNTL=
specification? Or must it be identical to the original JCL in every way?
--
Phoenix Software
12 matches
Mail list logo
