Thanks.   Since the only thing using DDF where query tools before this, we 
wanted to treat it the same as if the client was using QMF/TSO.   

Brad Wissink 
Information Technology Services 
Iowa State University 
515-294-3088 
"If it ain't broke, you ain't trying" - Red Green

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Scott Chapman
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 5:41 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM Sub-rule question?

Yes.  I structure my rules the opposite way (subsystems within user ids), but 
that's just a matter of preference.  Your way does avoid having to have a 
catch-all at the bottom of the rules.  For example I have...

Subsystem Type . : DDF         Fold qualifier names?   Y  (Y or N)         
Description  . . . DB2 Distributed Transactions                            
                                                                           
Action codes:   A=After     C=Copy        M=Move     I=Insert rule         
                B=Before    D=Delete row  R=Repeat   IS=Insert Sub-rule    
                                                             More ===>     
          --------Qualifier--------               -------Class--------     
Action    Type       Name     Start                Service     Report      
                                         DEFAULTS: DDFDEV      DDFD        
 ____  1  UI         CNPREAD  ___                  DDFDEV      DDFCASW     
 ____  2    SI         P*       ___                DDF         DDFPCASW    
 ____  2    SI         T*       ___                DDFDEV      DDFTCASW    
 ____  2    SI         D*       ___                DDFDEV      DDFDCASW    
 ____  1  UI         COINS*   ___                  DDFDEV      DDFCOIN     
 ____  2    SI         P*       ___                DDF2        DDFPCOIN    
 ____  2    SI         T*       ___                DDFDEV      DDFTCOIN    
 ____  2    SI         D*       ___                DDFDEV      DDFDCOIN    
 ____  1  UIG        OMSDDF   ___                  DDFDEV      DDFOMS      
 ____  2    SI         P*       ___                DDF2        DDFPOMS     
 ____  2    SI         T*       ___                DDFDEV      DDFTOMS     
...
____  1  SI         P*       ___                  DDF         DDFP      
____  1  SI         T*       ___                  DDFDEV      DDFT      
____  1  SI         D*       ___                  DDFDEV      DDFD      

I wouldn't lump DDF and TSO together in the same service class, but perhaps 
that might makes sense at a sufficiently low transaction volume?  Or there 
might be non-technical reasons for doing so?  Just curious...

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to