To solve the maximum finite number of steps per job problem, where n is the maximum number of steps allowed by the rules of JCL, the first n-1 steps do useful work and step n executes a utility program to submit another job with another n steps to the internal reader. Or convert part of the data center to JES3 and use its dependent job control facility.
Regarding how easy it is to change the job name, it's probably even easier to forget that one needs to change the job name. At least it is for me. Originally HASP allowed only one job to execute with any given job name. Then IBM changed that to allow more than one. The HASP community complained, saying that they had implemented automated job scheduling systems that relied on the previous behavior. So IBM changed it back. Then they made it optional. Or maybe they made it optional at the same time that they changed it back. Too many decades ago for me to remember perfectly. I can't even remember any more that I need to change the job name. Bill Fairchild Software Developer Rocket Software 275 Grove Street * Newton, MA 02466-2272 * USA Tel: +1.617.614.4503 * Mobile: +1.508.341.1715 Email: [email protected] Web: www.rocketsoftware.com -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dave Salt Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 2:34 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: multiple jobs / same name Hi Frank, I used to work at a place that HEAVILY relied on the fact that jobs with the same name would only run one at a time. For example, job one might stop the areas of hundreds of IMS data bases, job 2 might delete and define all the areas, and job 3 might start all the areas. Obviously these jobs have to run in the right sequence, so the ability to set them all as the same job name is extremely convenient. And we couldn't put all the steps in a single job, as it would exceed the number of steps allowed (256 if memory serves?). As others have pointed out, there's no guarantee that creating jobs with the same name means they'll all run in the same order that they're submitted. But in practice they did, especially as there was usually a gap of several seconds between each job being submitted. In my opinion, the fact that jobs with the same name only run one at a time is a very good thing. And if you want jobs to run in parallel, it's not that difficult to change the jobcard from //myjobA to //myjobB before submitting. Dave Salt ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
