--------------------<snip>-----------------------------
I have worked for a number of different companies since I entered the
mainframe arena in the late 70's. And all of these shops worked along the
same lines:
- TSO - submitted jobs are named "userid + 1 or more characters".
I don't see any good reason for this, other than inertia.
------------------------<unsnip>---------------------------
Agreed. I never followed this "standard" myself, preferring to use more
descriptive jobnames.
-------------------------<snip>---------------------------
- Output from these jobs goes to the Hold Queue.
This is OK as long as it can be overriden when desired.
------------------------<unsnip>------------------------
AFAIK, this has always been possible.
--------------------------<snip>----------------------------
- Default setup in SDSF "H" shows you your jobs, by jobname prefix and
owner.
I don't use SDSF "H" generally because of it defaulting to your userID as prefix (must
use "H ALL" to override).
I almost always use SDSF "ST" to look at my output
- You are allowed to submit jobs using other jobnames (e.g., program
compiles: jobname = pgmname) at your discretion, but ...
Generous! :-)
--------------------<unsnip>---------------------------
Generous but MIGHT be a problem.
-----------------------<snip>--------------------------
- You are NOT allowed to submit production jobs / reruns from your TSO (must
go through the job scheduler)
Absolutely agree.
- You are NOT allowed to submit test jobs using a production jobname.
Period. No discussion. Not even on a separate system.
Bizarre. Why not?
--------------------------<unsnip>------------------------
Some automation packages are quite capable of triggering product streams when a
particular ad-hoc jobname completes. You wouldn't want your development team
triggering production streams at the wrong time of day would you?
----------------------------------<snip>--------------------------
The tradition of using your TSO userid for batch job names dates back to the
invention of TSO and has been a default (or should I say, de-facto standard)
ever since then. Some shops enforce this rule more strictly than others, but
I found that I could live with these rules, without any trouble whatsoever.
Obviously I have not found I can live with it, at least not without being
grumpy. And since I have some pull with how our z/OS systems are being set up
I will push for what I like. Won't win all the time, of course, but I see no
reason not to try. I've been here 18 years (13 in IT, on VSE) and have no
plans to go elsewhere, so...
Thanks for your comments!
------------------------------<unsnip>-------------------------------
I agree that this "de-facto standard" is unnecessarily rigid. But the idea of not
submitting test jobs with production jobnames makes perfect sense to me. As the non-believer said
at the seance, "It's time to strike a happy medium."
Rick
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
