My thinking was that part of the parallel allocation would be to free existing 
allocations, but there might be issues with that.

If there is no business case for an incremental improvement than there 
certainly isn't one for a total replacement. Given the control block structure 
for starting a new address space and allocating its data sets, that would be a 
massive effort.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3

________________________________________
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu> on behalf of 
Paul Gilmartin <0000000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2018 2:51 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu
Subject: Re: REXX as JCL replacement

On Wed, 11 Jul 2018 18:09:21 +0000, Seymour J Metz wrote:

>You keep missing the point that REXX does not currently provide the 
>serialization
>that is available through JCL. Rewriting the job as a REXX script that does 
>not do
>the necessary serialization is a CLM.
>
??CLM??

>That's why I suggested a parallel allocation facility usable from REXX.
>
In order to avoid deadlocks, that parallel allocation facility must be invoked
only once, and before any other SYSDSN ENQs are extant.

There might be a way:  launch the Rexx script from Unix System Services.
Better yet, support //SYSEXEC DD PATH='/...' so no static ENQs are needed.
RFE material?

>I don't like JCL, but I don't see any way forward other than incremental 
>improvements.
>
Business case for those?  And trimming the whiskers from JCL would
create compatibility problems for users who have come to depend on
them, even if only as circumventions.

-- gil

----------------------------------------------------------------------
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