With the current CICS and COBOL, you must compile your COBOL with NODYNAM, as I'm sure you know. "static" CALLs in CICS are still "not supported". However, with LE, it is now supported to do dynamic CALLs in COBOL. The dynamically CALLed subroutine still needs to be defined to CICS. The CICS Language Environment run-time does a CICS LOAD of the program, then the usual BALR/BASR to actually invoke the subroutine. The problem that I have with it is that this is not the equivalent of EXEC CICS LINK. CICS does not "know" that you've transferred control to a different program. And so any CICS messages, such as abends, in the CALL'd program have the name of the last program that was invoked via the EXEC CICS LINK type interface, instead of the real program name.
-- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Fred Hoffman > Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 9:35 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu > Subject: Re: CICS vs IMS > > > They both have their +s and -s, The logging for IMS is very > good. Easy to use in recovery. I thought that CICS was > quicker and also had a pretty good log system. Some of it > depends upon the application you are using. I'm a CICS bigot > but, I'm also an IMS DBA. > > It's you pick and how experienced your staff is. BTW, calls > in cics are frowned upon, the last time I checked. > > HTH, > Fred > > ________________________________ > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Roberts, John J > Sent: Wed 2/15/2012 6:30 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu > Subject: Re: CICS vs IMS > > > > >>We are a CICS shop with IMS DB (DBCTL), but I've been > curious for a while about the differences between how CICS > works >>and how IMS TM works. I couldn't find anything on > the web. Anyone have a link to a good reference? > > Try Google for "IMS DC". The IMS Transaction Manager used to > be called IMS/DC (for Data Communication). > > It has been a long time since I touched it, but my > recollection is that it was a cleaner implementation within > the Operating System. It used CALL level API's (no EXEC IMS > precompiler) and exploited all the OS capabilities for > multitasking and multiprocessing. CICS on the other hand > tried to isolate apps from the OS, becoming its own mini-OS > within a single OS address space. This was an advantage for > CICS back in the 70's. But I suspect the table has turned under z/OS. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
