Ed, Not matter how simple it sounds to hang a CADS on *MASTER*'s back like some sort of "KICK ME" sign - if it was up to me to design the software I would endevour to find a less intrusive method (like a CADS-owning STC).
Accessing the CADS afterwards would typically require storing the ALET somewhere in some anchored storage. The CADS-owning STC can protect itself with ESTAE and RESMGR to ensure that if the started task dies then the anchored storage indicates this by some method that the CADS-using programs/exits recognise. The CADS-owning STC is worth it from an ISV point of view (IMHO) purely because you do not want to be involved in any finger-pointing for problems in ASID(1). Any issues in there and you can bet that once IPCS highlights your CADS existence, then you are only a few minutes away from some problem ticket asking you to prove/state that your software was not the cause of the system problem. Rob Scott Rocket Software, Inc 275 Grove Street Newton, MA 02466 617-614-2305 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Edward Jaffe Sent: 08 December 2007 07:39 To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Common Dataspace Shane wrote: > The benefit (as stated earlier) is that it is *NOT* in *MASTER*. > It's a CADS. It's not "in" *MASTER*. It's simply "owned" by *MASTER*. There's no code running there, and no storage living, there. And, *MASTER* is the only address space guaranteed for the life of IPL. It's routinely used for this purpose by IBM and ISV code alike. Creating the CADS there is trivial. It's the simplest solution. It's not easy to write an STC that will never terminate. If you try to protect it via SCHEDxx, someone will complain that your ISV program isn't smart enough if must resort such updates. And, the more function you add to it over time, the more likely it will be to crash on its own, need to be canceled, and/or need to be recycled to pick up new code, etc. thus creating exposures for the CADS you were trying to protect in the first place. In the old days, we used to say the best option was KISS. But, Richard Gabriel superseded with his "Worse is Better" philosophy. A MUST READ for anyone in the software development business. A good synopsis can be found here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worse_is_Better Follow the links if you want more detail. The MIT method was a predominant factor in nearly every software project I've ever seen get "shelved". -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 Los Angeles, CA 90045 310-338-0400 x318 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
