In a recent note, Mark Zelden said:
> Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 08:25:50 -0600
>
> On Mon, 6 Mar 2006 13:03:11 +0100, Chris Mason <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> >Isn't the "internal reader" trick the simpler way to implement this
> >excellent idea?
>
> INTRDR submission is usually frowned upon in a production environment
> because the job scheduler usually can't track the job (nor trigger
> jobs afterwards / satisfy dependencies). I happen to agree with that.
> If you let the programmers (that control JCL changes at many shops)
> new jobs would be added all the time without scheduling them.
>
Hmmm. Clearly I work in a development environment, not a
production environment, so I'm curious about protocols.
What's a "job scheduler" Is it made of silicon or carbon?
I thought that nowadays almost all jobs (barring those actually
submitted on physical, necrodendritic cards) go through an
INTRDR; it's simply a matter of how they get there. Are
programmers in a production environment likewise discouraged
from using the TSO SUBMIT command (which, AFAIK, also uses
an INTRDR)? How do jobs get submitted? Must a human
bureaucrat ("job scheduler") sign off on each one?
If the process is in fact automated, can't one job submit
another through the automated sanctioned channel, as opposed
to via INTRDR?
-- gil
--
StorageTek
INFORMATION made POWERFUL
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
