On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 00:15:07 -0500, Tim Hare wrote: >Yes - exactly - we had a talk with the hogsters, but that after-the-fact >action really doesn't calm down managers who are freaking out because work >can't be submitted while it's happening. We ended up, I think, ensuring that >the maximum number of internal readers was greater than the maximum number of >TSO users plus some amount for other use. > Better add the maximum number of processes UNIX users can start. After a half century, IBM has finally arrived in the world of multiprocessing.
>The suggestion of FREE=CLOSE is a good one, the person who wrote the CLIST >that did this really didn't research anything much, I don't even know where >they got the idea to do ALLOC of an INTRDR rather than using SUBMIT. > Perhaps they read the manual? People are often telling each other to do that. If you want users to restrict themselves to the SUBMIT command, you should submit RFEs to: o Relax the fixed-80 restriction imposed by SUBMIT but not by INTRDR. o SUBMIT from DDNAMES, UNIX files, and POSIX pipes, all of which are supported by INTRDR but not by SUBMIT. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
