> It was: 'why is the SYSPROG out of the loop?'. If the sysprog is out of the loop then an IEFUSI,SMF parm or JES limit will bring them automaticly in the loop. So this just help to force the sysprog as a partner. Haven't seen any sysprog refusing requests to change limits if they understand the issue and the reason. Of course sometimes it's hard to speak the same language.
Roland -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 1:00 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: MEMLIMIT and IEFUSI >so why the hell introduced IBM an exit like IEFUSI? There must be an >reason in the past and in the future. It's not because of missing planing, communication and so on. It's just to ensure the health of operating system in case of ...... ... There are two kinds of fallacies: 1. This is old, therefore good. 2. This is new, therefor better. Most of the exits to limit storage were introduced before Virtual. The reasons are long out of date. I would rather have DB2 in control, than some SYSPROG who 'knows better'. But, my point (in the post you replied to) was not about exits. It was: 'why is the SYSPROG out of the loop?'. That is a much bigger issue than what the exit(s) should control. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
