Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Jack Schudel]

My copy of the Program Contribution Form for
/HASP-II/ HOUSTON AUTOMATIC SPOOLING PRIORITY SYSTEM WITH REMOTE JOB ENTRY
dated 10 SEP 1968
lists the authors as
Tom H. Simpson
Robert P. Crabtree
Robert O. Ray

There were spaces on the form for up to 4 authors, so I don't know why Dick 
Hitt was not listed.
Simpson, Crabby and Hitt were all regulars at SHARE back in the pre-MVS 
days, but I don't remember Robert O. Ray.  (My first SHARE was in 1976, long 
after the release of HASP-I V1 in July of 1967, so a lot could have happened 
in that time.)


The first Sing-a-Long was in Atlantic City, OCT 1968, with Dick Hitt at the 
piano, so he was clearly part of the team at that time.


PS: The full history of release dates is at the bottom of 
SYS1.AHASMAC($HASPEQU).


Any information about Robert O. Ray would be appreciated.

Thanks!

Jack Schudel
University of Florida
former SHARE JES2 Project Manager


- Original Message - 
From: "Bill Fairchild" 

Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: 
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2010 10:23 AM
Subject: Re: JES2 vs. JES3


One of the other two was Dick Hitt, who also played the piano during the 
Esprit de Corps sessions at the Thursday night SCIDS at SHARE until the 
Spring, 1982 meeting in LA, when Anne Caluori began playing.


Bill Fairchild
Rocket Software

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On 
Behalf Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)

Sent: Saturday, September 11, 2010 8:08 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: JES2 vs. JES3

In <20100909135157.e41821a...@mail.ase.com.au>, on 09/09/2010
  at 11:26 PM, Graeme Gibson  said:


ISTR hearing, circa 1967, that ASP had its roots in the 7xxx world,
with a 1440 or some other 14xx series machine(s) used as the
"Attached Support Processors" effectively doing the card and printer
I/O to relieve the main processor(s?) of these I/O intensive
tasks.


Direct Couple System (DCS) used a 7040 to drive a 7090 or a 7044 to
drive a 7094[1]; a 1401, 1440 or 1460 wouldn't have been fast enough.
I might believe that the code was ported to a 1410/7010, but that
would have been a total rewrite.


I also most definitely heard in a presentation in 1967 on HASP
("Houston Automatic SPool" or some such, Shmuel will know)


Priority.


four SEs in IBM's Houston office.


Simpson, Crabtree and who else?

[1] There's nothing in the code that would have prevented a
   7040/7094 or 7044/7090 pairing, but the first would have been
   to slow and the second too expensive.

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Bill Fairchild]

One of the other two was Dick Hitt, who also played the piano during the Esprit 
de Corps sessions at the Thursday night SCIDS at SHARE until the Spring, 1982 
meeting in LA, when Anne Caluori began playing.

Bill Fairchild
Rocket Software

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of 
Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
Sent: Saturday, September 11, 2010 8:08 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: JES2 vs. JES3

In <20100909135157.e41821a...@mail.ase.com.au>, on 09/09/2010
   at 11:26 PM, Graeme Gibson  said:

>ISTR hearing, circa 1967, that ASP had its roots in the 7xxx world, 
>with a 1440 or some other 14xx series machine(s) used as the 
>"Attached Support Processors" effectively doing the card and printer 
>I/O to relieve the main processor(s?) of these I/O intensive
>tasks.

Direct Couple System (DCS) used a 7040 to drive a 7090 or a 7044 to
drive a 7094[1]; a 1401, 1440 or 1460 wouldn't have been fast enough.
I might believe that the code was ported to a 1410/7010, but that
would have been a total rewrite.

>I also most definitely heard in a presentation in 1967 on HASP 
>("Houston Automatic SPool" or some such, Shmuel will know)

Priority.

>four SEs in IBM's Houston office. 

Simpson, Crabtree and who else?

[1] There's nothing in the code that would have prevented a
7040/7094 or 7044/7090 pairing, but the first would have been
to slow and the second too expensive.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html> 
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <20100909135157.e41821a...@mail.ase.com.au>, on 09/09/2010
   at 11:26 PM, Graeme Gibson  said:

>ISTR hearing, circa 1967, that ASP had its roots in the 7xxx world, 
>with a 1440 or some other 14xx series machine(s) used as the 
>"Attached Support Processors" effectively doing the card and printer 
>I/O to relieve the main processor(s?) of these I/O intensive
>tasks.

Direct Couple System (DCS) used a 7040 to drive a 7090 or a 7044 to
drive a 7094[1]; a 1401, 1440 or 1460 wouldn't have been fast enough.
I might believe that the code was ported to a 1410/7010, but that
would have been a total rewrite.

>I also most definitely heard in a presentation in 1967 on HASP 
>("Houston Automatic SPool" or some such, Shmuel will know)

Priority.

>four SEs in IBM's Houston office. 

Simpson, Crabtree and who else?

[1] There's nothing in the code that would have prevented a
7040/7094 or 7044/7090 pairing, but the first would have been
to slow and the second too expensive.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[WalterR]

WalterR wrote:

Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:

In <1792f2.291be9b9.39b92...@aol.com>, on 09/08/2010
   at 01:30 PM, Ed Finnell  said:

 

Huh? HASP was the efforts of NASA Houston  and came out as Half ASP.



Do you have a citation for that? I never saw the term before I
suggested "HASP is Half ASP" for a project button.
 
  
I worked as an operator at the the L.A. Scientific Center in Westwood 
(data center on the U.C.L.A campus) when DCS was initially developed 
on a 7094 with a 7040 as the support processor (before that they tried 
a 1410).  Art Walters was one of the leads.  I recall the term "Half 
ASP" used a couple of times somewhat sarcastically.  I also recall 
that HASP was already known as a product (Type III?) out of Houston.  
This was around 1965.


Walter Rue

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

On second thought, I realized a mistake in my "Half ASP" recollection.  
It was a phonetic mistake, perhaps due to age.  What I actually heard 
was "Half-vast..." preceded by "Vast Concept", which while cute was 
somewhat beyond sarcastic.


Apologies!

Walter Rue
.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Anne & Lynn Wheeler]

previous ibm-main (at google) references were direct couple at la
science center and ucla (that morphed into ASP on 360)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010n.html#3
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010n.html#7

ibm 7090 wiki page mentions two 7094/7044 direct couple systems at
caltech/jpl
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_7090

jes 2/3 wiki page also mentions asp evolving from 7094/7044
direct couple
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Job_Entry_Subsystem_2/3

-- 
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Graeme Gibson]

ISTR hearing, circa 1967, that ASP had its roots in the 7xxx world, 
with a 1440 or some other 14xx series machine(s) used as the 
"Attached Support Processors" effectively doing the card and printer 
I/O to relieve the main processor(s?) of these I/O intensive tasks.


I also most definitely heard in a presentation in 1967 on HASP 
("Houston Automatic SPool" or some such, Shmuel will know) was 
initially built by four SEs in IBM's Houston office.  The story goes 
that they pushed their desks hard together so they sat in two pairs, 
facing each other, and thus kept the communication lines as short and 
responsive as possible.


Graeme

At 09:38 AM 9/09/2010, you wrote:

Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:

In <1792f2.291be9b9.39b92...@aol.com>, on 09/08/2010
   at 01:30 PM, Ed Finnell  said:



Huh? HASP was the efforts of NASA Houston  and came out as Half ASP.



Do you have a citation for that? I never saw the term before I
suggested "HASP is Half ASP" for a project button.


I worked as an operator at the the L.A. Scientific Center in 
Westwood (data center on the U.C.L.A campus) when DCS was initially 
developed on a 7094 with a 7040 as the support processor (before 
that they tried a 1410).  Art Walters was one of the leads.  I 
recall the term "Half ASP" used a couple of times somewhat 
sarcastically.  I also recall that HASP was already known as a 
product (Type III?) out of Houston.  This was around 1965.


Walter Rue

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[WalterR]

Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:

In <1792f2.291be9b9.39b92...@aol.com>, on 09/08/2010
   at 01:30 PM, Ed Finnell  said:

  

Huh? HASP was the efforts of NASA Houston  and came out as Half ASP.



Do you have a citation for that? I never saw the term before I
suggested "HASP is Half ASP" for a project button.
 
  
I worked as an operator at the the L.A. Scientific Center in Westwood 
(data center on the U.C.L.A campus) when DCS was initially developed on 
a 7094 with a 7040 as the support processor (before that they tried a 
1410).  Art Walters was one of the leads.  I recall the term "Half ASP" 
used a couple of times somewhat sarcastically.  I also recall that HASP 
was already known as a product (Type III?) out of Houston.  This was 
around 1965.


Walter Rue

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Linda Mooney]

Hi Ed, 



A dogpile search for "half asp" +NASA turned this up - 



http://nersp.nerdc.ufl.edu/~schudel/JES2/history.html 



Linda 


- Original Message - 
From: "Ed Finnell"  
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu 
Sent: Wednesday, September 8, 2010 2:56:41 PM 
Subject: Re: JES2 vs. JES3 

  
In a message dated 9/8/2010 3:52:35 P.M. Central Daylight Time,   
shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net writes: 

Do you have a citation for that? I never saw the term before  I 
suggested "HASP is Half ASP" for a project button. 


>> 
I first heard it from Sperry  contractor back in the 70's. 
Tried googling a while and NASA seems to have  reused HASP inexorably. 
Maybe somebody else has better notes or  recollection. 



-- 
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, 
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Ed Finnell]

 
In a message dated 9/8/2010 5:08:33 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
linda.lst...@comcast.net writes:

A dogpile search for "half asp" +NASA turned this up -  
>>
Thanks, should have known Mr. JES2 would have it  handy.



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Ed Finnell]

 
In a message dated 9/8/2010 3:52:35 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net writes:

Do you have a citation for that? I never saw the term before  I
suggested "HASP is Half ASP" for a project button.


>>
I first heard it from Sperry  contractor back in the 70's.
Tried googling a while and NASA seems to have  reused HASP inexorably.
Maybe somebody else has better notes or  recollection.



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Arthur Gutowski]

This has been an interesting thread, though it seems to pop up from time to 
time here, I always seem to learn some new piece of history or functionality.

As a shop that runs both JES', not because we sell software that must 
operate equally well with either, but out of acqusistions and consolidations, 
and as a former JES2 bigot, I've been in some interesting... "discussions" over 
the years about which is "better" and why.  Most of these degenerate very 
quickly into religious diatribes.

One of my favorites was the opportunity to needle one of our most senior 
(experienced and knowledgeable) operators any time we had to cycle the 
initiators to address a throughput or fragmentation problem.  "What was that 
command again?  Oh, yeah... COMMANDS."

*F G main G group INIT 0
*F G main G group OFF
*F G main C class OFF

Then repeat in reverse with ON and an INIT count > 0 (if I got the order 
right).  "Sheesh.  You know in JES2, that'd be a '$PI(xx-xx) followed by a '$SI
(xx-xx).  How hard is that to remember?  Tell me again why JES3 is so much 
better?"  I will say they got the cancel right with *F U,...

Not that JES2 is any less cryptic these days, mind you, especially since the 
rewrites in, what was it, OS/390 2.4 (and subsequent removal of the 
command translation exit)?

Now that I've been here a while, I find myself defending JES3.  The balance 
between the two is almost 50-50 in terms of image count, but the vast 
majority of our workload runs on JES3 systems.  I actually helped stave off a 
proposal to convert ten JES3 images to JES2.  As others have pointed out, 
there simply was no way to justify the time, effort, and expense just to make 
some people's lives easier and save a negligible amount of $ (pun intended).

Our biggest systems run batch applications that rely on deadline scheduling.  I 
don't know CA7 enough to know if it functionally replaces ALL that deadline 
does, but we haven't.  Ditto for DJC networks (dependent job control).

I'll admit differences in print management can be tough getting used to.  We 
had a few technical and procedural problems getting InfoPrint and JES3 to 
coexist.  With VPS, it seemed to be less of an issue.  We have little to no RJE 
remaining, so "ownership" issues mentioned before are not a big deal.

I actually like JES3-managed tape.  Works rather well, and without a CF 
structure (IEFAUTOS) or GRS Star (for ATS Star).  The down side is when the 
Global is down, all locals wait for tape, or any allocation for that matter.

Yes, allocation (DISP=NEW v DISP=MOD) takes a little getting used to, but 
CA11 (or other restart manager) can help.

JECL is different, but some things have been moved into JCL to 
make "universal" job coding a little easier.  Besides, JES3 JECL is commentary 
to JES2.  The /*ROUTE equivalent is a pain (NJB cards and passwords), but 
ftp to the destination system's internal reader is a nice alternative.

I like that JES3 job classes can be more descriptive, and you can have many, 
many more of them than the 36 in JES2.  (Though, admittedly, we abuse it.)  I 
think it did some of what WLM-managed job classes do long before WLM.

I do still prefer JES2 in terms of it's peer relationship to other JES2 systems 
in 
the MAS.  Perhaps gaining experience with DSI will change my mind, but this 
SPoF in our shop is a big deal to me.  The Global also introduces IPL and 
Hotstart/Warmstart dependencies that don't exist in a JES2 MAS, but again, 
DSI may help me change my mind some day.

Bottom line is, we have both, and unless we migrate workload, we will 
continue to have both, so we, and our vendors (this has been an issue from 
time to time) have to support it.  I think our biggest problem is the relative 
lack of people who really know JES3.

I have to agree with the posters who said, if you're starting from scratch, 
assess your needs, compare the two, and make your choice.  JES2 is arguably 
cheaper, unless you have to buy a lot of add-ons, it's simpler, and it's more 
common.  JES3 arguably does more out of the box, but it is a separate (notice 
I didn't say greater*) cost, is more complex, and may be harder to find people 
to support it (if only due to our own bias).

If you're already one or the other (or both), you're going to have to make one 
helluva business case to justify a conversion.

* During our investigation for our conversion proposal, we noted that JES3 is 
separately priced, however we had no way to quantify the difference in MVS 
base MSUs for SCRT (WLC) on a JES2 vs a JES3 system.  We postulated that 
because JES2 does less, MVS might have to do more, which might drive up our 
cost for the base.  This was not vetted, but had the project continued, it 
would have been interesting to find out.  We also considered the cost of SDSF 
(JES2) v our JES3 spool manager (SDSF for JES3 was not yet announced).

Regards,
Art Gutowski
Ford Motor Company

--
For IBM-MA

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Richard L Peurifoy]

On 9/7/2010 8:27 PM, Clark Morris wrote:

On 7 Sep 2010 15:19:03 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:



Why is JES2 better than JES3?
---
Each one has its merits and drawbacks. Jes2, in general, has more
limited capabilities but a much smaller virtual storage requirement. One
shop I recently had contact with told me that their JES3 was running a
fairly small working set: ONLY 200 MB.


My that footprint has gone up since I ran JES3 on a 4 or 8 meg 4341 in
single system image.


We are currently running JES3 on a z10BC with in a 4GB LPAR.
The JES3 working set is around 40MB. Of course we are a small
shop.

--
Richard

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <1792f2.291be9b9.39b92...@aol.com>, on 09/08/2010
   at 01:30 PM, Ed Finnell  said:

>Huh? HASP was the efforts of NASA Houston  and came out as Half ASP.

Do you have a citation for that? I never saw the term before I
suggested "HASP is Half ASP" for a project button.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Anne & Lynn Wheeler]

part of ibmmain thread from 2000 that ASP was some IBM group
that did Direct Couple at the LA Science Center (i.e. ASP
traces back to 7040/7090 direct couple system):
http://www.garli.ccom/~lynn/2000.html#77

predates the archives here (jan2005):
http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

but gatewayed to usenet as bit.listserv.ibm-main at google:
http://groups.google.com/group/bit.listserv.ibm-main/browse_thread/thread/bd6288f5d6b18d6d/c0410d4d3a5e7738?lnk=gst&q=direct+couple#c0410d4d3a5e7738
http://groups.google.com/group/bit.listserv.ibm-main/browse_thread/thread/b976844cb2604e43
http://groups.google.com/group/bit.listserv.ibm-main/browse_thread/thread/b8d52fe7172a3573
http://groups.google.com/group/bit.listserv.ibm-main/browse_thread/thread/078d193a73f2417d
http://groups.google.com/group/bit.listserv.ibm-main/browse_thread/thread/78d193a73f2417d/711120e7ed90aa32?lnk=gst&q=direct+couple#711120e7ed90aa32

-- 
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[David Andrews]

On Wed, 2010-09-08 at 14:11 -0400, Steve Comstock wrote:
> > > Nobody morphed HASP into ASP or vice versa.
> > Huh? HASP was the efforts of NASA Houston  and came out as Half ASP.
> > Renamed to Houston ASP.
> 
> I think that's just a story. I recollect HASP came first,
> out of NASA as you say, and ASP was developed separately
> out in Thousand Oaks, CA.

Notes I took at a SHARE presentation 18 years ago (!) say that the same
people who built ASP built HASP.  NASA was less than enthusiastic over
the prospect of having to spend money on a second box just for spooling,
so the SPOOL program was born, renamed to HASP.

I'd never heard the "Half ASP" part of the story, but it fits
considering that SPOOL required half the processors of ASP.

See: http://www.redbug.org/dba/sharerpt/share79/o441.html

See also Bill Fairchild's recollection where he mentions Simpson and
Crabtree:
http://www.mail-archive.com/ibm-main@bama.ua.edu/msg09350.html

-- 
David Andrews
A. Duda and Sons, Inc.
david.andr...@duda.com

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Steve Comstock]

On 9/8/2010 11:30 AM, Ed Finnell wrote:


In a message dated 9/8/2010 11:37:29 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
edja...@phoenixsoftware.com writes:

Nobody morphed HASP into ASP or vice versa. DCS became
ASP; ASP  became JES3. Meanwhile, HASP became JES2.





Huh? HASP was the efforts of NASA Houston  and came out as Half ASP.
Renamed to Houston ASP.


I think that's just a story. I recollect HASP came first,
out of NASA as you say, and ASP was developed separately
out in Thousand Oaks, CA. There was some rivalry and I
think both teams borrowed some concepts and code from
the other.

But, it's all ancient history, right?


--

Kind regards,

-Steve Comstock
The Trainer's Friend, Inc.

303-393-8716
http://www.trainersfriend.com

* To get a good Return on your Investment, first make an investment!
  + Training your people is an excellent investment

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Ed Finnell]

 
In a message dated 9/8/2010 11:37:29 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
edja...@phoenixsoftware.com writes:

Nobody morphed HASP into ASP or vice versa. DCS became 
ASP; ASP  became JES3. Meanwhile, HASP became JES2.


>>
Huh? HASP was the efforts of NASA Houston  and came out as Half ASP.
Renamed to Houston ASP.




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Edward Jaffe]

 On 9/8/2010 6:04 AM, Tom Marchant wrote:

On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 16:04:29 -0400, George Henke wrote:


I was just a lowly applications COBOL programmer at Bankers Trust when Bob
Graham suddenly appeared there, fresh out of Brown with a degree in Computer
Science, and morphed HASP into ASP.

My understanding was that ASP and HASP were developed separately, and
that ASP predated HASP.  Did I get it wrong?


You got it exactly right. Nobody morphed HASP into ASP or vice versa. DCS became 
ASP; ASP became JES3. Meanwhile, HASP became JES2.


--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
310-338-0400 x318
edja...@phoenixsoftware.com
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Tom Marchant]

On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 11:43:22 -0400, Burrell, C. Todd wrote:

>I've worked with both, and
>JES3 can be challenging for JCL and for operators...

I have much more JES2 experience than JES3, but I'd dispute your 
conclusion.  The two are quite different from an operational 
perspective and it can also be challenging for experienced JES3 
operators to work in a JES2 environment.

-- 
Tom Marchant

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[R.S.]

W dniu 2010-09-08 17:43, Burrell, C. Todd (CDC/OCOO/ITSO) (CTR) pisze:

I would look into the functions that JES3 offers that JES2 does not
offer, and if you need any of these functions then go with JES3.  But
unless you have a VERY compelling reason, then JES2 is probably the
better and easier to maintain option (IMHO).  I've worked with both, and
JES3 can be challenging for JCL and for operators...


The real choice nowadays is whether to use a system with JES or some 
without it, like AIX or (bunch of) Windoze.


I think that number of *new* JES3 customers is close to number of new 
IMS or VSE users. I also bet that number or JES2 new users is very close 
to number of new z/OS users.



--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland


--
BRE Bank SA
ul. Senatorska 18
00-950 Warszawa
www.brebank.pl

Sd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy 
XII Wydzia Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sdowego, 
nr rejestru przedsibiorców KRS 025237

NIP: 526-021-50-88
Wedug stanu na dzie 01.01.2009 r. kapita zakadowy BRE Banku SA (w caoci 
wpacony) wynosi 118.763.528 zotych. W zwizku z realizacj warunkowego 
podwyszenia kapitau zakadowego, na podstawie uchway XXI WZ z dnia 16 marca 
2008r., oraz uchway XVI NWZ z dnia 27 padziernika 2008r., moe ulec 
podwyszeniu do kwoty 123.763.528 z. Akcje w podwyszonym kapitale zakadowym 
BRE Banku SA bd w caoci opacone.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Burrell, C. Todd (CDC/OCOO/ITSO) (CTR)]

I would look into the functions that JES3 offers that JES2 does not
offer, and if you need any of these functions then go with JES3.  But
unless you have a VERY compelling reason, then JES2 is probably the
better and easier to maintain option (IMHO).  I've worked with both, and
JES3 can be challenging for JCL and for operators...  

C. Todd Burrell 
PMP, MCSE 2003:Security
Security+, Network+
ITIL V3 Foundations
CSC Lead z/OS Systems Programmer 
ITSO 
(404) 723-2017 (Cell) 


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 5:38 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: JES2 vs. JES3

In <4c86a688.7060...@bremultibank.com.pl>, on 09/07/2010
   at 10:54 PM, "R.S."  said:

>Theorethical case: If you start from scratch, then you should choose
>JES2.

Nonsense; if you start from scratch, you should analyze which one best
meets your needs.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html> 
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Thompson, Steve]

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Chase, John
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 6:28 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: JES2 vs. JES3

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Mike Schwab

> I sure would not want to to experience a pressurization loss in an
> airplane near Bolivia or Tibet.  In that case the pilot is required to
> descend to 10,000 ft above sea level.  Problem is, the runways in
> those areas are about 13,000 above sea levels, and planes are not good
> at moving through solid rock.

Submariner to pilot:  "We've never left one of ours up there."


They tell us to avoid thunderstorms by 20 Nautical miles or better. The
convective currents with the Cumulonimbus, hail, and the like can make
for a very bad day.

And we are also told to avoid Cumulogranite at all costs. Encountering
Cumulogranite could wreck your whole day.

Later,
Steve Thompson

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Tom Marchant]

On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 16:04:29 -0400, George Henke wrote:

>I was just a lowly applications COBOL programmer at Bankers Trust when Bob
>Graham suddenly appeared there, fresh out of Brown with a degree in Computer
>Science, and morphed HASP into ASP.

My understanding was that ASP and HASP were developed separately, and 
that ASP predated HASP.  Did I get it wrong?

-- 
Tom Marchant

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Chase, John]

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Mike Schwab
> 
> On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 10:03 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
>  wrote:
> >
> > Why is an airplane better than a submarine? I'd like to know whether
> > you plan to travel under the ice or over it before answering the
> > question.
> >
> > --
> >     Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
> >     ISO position; see 
> > We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
> > (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
> >
> I sure would not want to to experience a pressurization loss in an
> airplane near Bolivia or Tibet.  In that case the pilot is required to
> descend to 10,000 ft above sea level.  Problem is, the runways in
> those areas are about 13,000 above sea levels, and planes are not good
> at moving through solid rock.

Submariner to pilot:  "We've never left one of ours up there."

   -jc-

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Clark Morris]

On 7 Sep 2010 15:19:03 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:

>
>Why is JES2 better than JES3?
>---
>Each one has its merits and drawbacks. Jes2, in general, has more 
>limited capabilities but a much smaller virtual storage requirement. One 
>shop I recently had contact with told me that their JES3 was running a 
>fairly small working set: ONLY 200 MB.

My that footprint has gone up since I ran JES3 on a 4 or 8 meg 4341 in
single system image.  Take a look at the functions available only in
JES3 and see if they mean anything in your environment.  My shop
converted to JES2 when it installed CA7, CA11 and Dispatch.

Clark Morris
>
>Baser your decision on your needs, not someone else's perceptions.
>
>Rick
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Rick Fochtman]

Why is JES2 better than JES3?
---
Each one has its merits and drawbacks. Jes2, in general, has more 
limited capabilities but a much smaller virtual storage requirement. One 
shop I recently had contact with told me that their JES3 was running a 
fairly small working set: ONLY 200 MB.


Baser your decision on your needs, not someone else's perceptions.

Rick

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <4c86a688.7060...@bremultibank.com.pl>, on 09/07/2010
   at 10:54 PM, "R.S."  said:

>Theorethical case: If you start from scratch, then you should choose
>JES2.

Nonsense; if you start from scratch, you should analyze which one best
meets your needs.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Mike Schwab]

On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 10:03 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
 wrote:
>
> Why is an airplane better than a submarine? I'd like to know whether
> you plan to travel under the ice or over it before answering the
> question.
>
> --
>     Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
>     ISO position; see 
> We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
> (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
>
I sure would not want to to experience a pressurization loss in an
airplane near Bolivia or Tibet.  In that case the pilot is required to
descend to 10,000 ft above sea level.  Problem is, the runways in
those areas are about 13,000 above sea levels, and planes are not good
at moving through solid rock.

-- 
Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA
Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all?

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[R.S.]

W dniu 2010-09-07 21:36, Thompson, Steve pisze:

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
Sent: Monday, September 06, 2010 10:04 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: JES2 vs. JES3

In
<45d79eacefba9b428e3d400e924d36b903e59...@iwdubcormsg007.sci.local>,
on 09/05/2010
at 06:13 PM, "Thompson, Steve"  said:


Why is JES2 better than JES3?


Why is an airplane better than a submarine? I'd like to know whether
you plan to travel under the ice or over it before answering the
question.



Actually, I was planning on using a torpedo.


Well...
My goal is to meet business goals. I use mainframe, because:
a) my application is designed for mainframe
(lng gap)
b) it is very good (maybe optimal) platform for that.

My business is not interested in (almost) any technical issues. I don't 
ask them about torpedos, 24 vs 31 vs 64-bit addressing, JES2 vs JES3, 
etc, etc.
IMHO both JESes are for the same thing: to run the applications, 
especially batch jobs. The better is the cheaper - udoubtly JES2 - 
UNLESS (!) there are other factors to analyze. Usually (vast majority!) 
it is history: existing apps would need to be migrated, which could be 
costly and cumbersome.

Theorethical case: If you start from scratch, then you should choose JES2.


--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland


--
BRE Bank SA
ul. Senatorska 18
00-950 Warszawa
www.brebank.pl

Sd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy 
XII Wydzia Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sdowego, 
nr rejestru przedsibiorców KRS 025237

NIP: 526-021-50-88
Wedug stanu na dzie 01.01.2009 r. kapita zakadowy BRE Banku SA (w caoci 
wpacony) wynosi 118.763.528 zotych. W zwizku z realizacj warunkowego 
podwyszenia kapitau zakadowego, na podstawie uchway XXI WZ z dnia 16 marca 
2008r., oraz uchway XVI NWZ z dnia 27 padziernika 2008r., moe ulec 
podwyszeniu do kwoty 123.763.528 z. Akcje w podwyszonym kapitale zakadowym 
BRE Banku SA bd w caoci opacone.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[George Henke]

I was just a lowly applications COBOL programmer at Bankers Trust when Bob
Graham suddenly appeared there, fresh out of Brown with a degree in Computer
Science, and morphed HASP into ASP.  He is rightfully regarded as the father
of ASP, if not JES3 as well.

Until recently, when I started my first assigment at a JES3 client last
month, I too, was a JES2 bigot.

But in the short time I have been here, I have seen the power of JES3, viz,
its Workload Manager.  You can run almost anything anywhere and the Workload
Manager decides where to run it,  what is available where, ie initiators,
storage, CPU.

You get maximum utilization from your hardware,  no idle CPU cycles, or
storage.  No artificially imposed physical system contraints, like not
enough memory or CPU or initiators to run workloads on a certain "box" at a
certain time.

There is literally no physical system distinction between Test and
Production here, ie no Test LPARs vs Production LPARs.  Everything runs
together physically, Security keeps things separated logically.

Albeit, there is still a sandbox under z/VM.

Afterall, sandboxes are "sacred".  They belong to us.

Does all of this sound a bit familiar?

It has taken IBM only some 40 odd years to catch up to Bob Graham's initial
ASP vision and superior design vis-a-vis Parallel Sysplex and IRD to try to
achieve the same functionality with JESPLEX.

btw, this JES3 shop also is SYSPLEXed and runs IRD which simply further
extends and enhances the power of JES3 with their unique features.

It is truly a remarkably beautiful thing to see, ie the near perfect
allocation of resources with minimal waste of hardware and system resources.

I have never seen a shop get more "bang for the buck" out of their
hardware, thanks to JES3.





On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) <
shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net > wrote:

> In <201009060837.mll29...@c2beaomr03.btconnect.com>, on 09/06/2010
>   at 09:37 AM, Terry Sambrooks  said:
>
> >Many of the more senior members of the list will know that the two
> >Job Entry Systems existed prior to MVS but were developed
> >independently for different purposes.
>
> FSVO two, one larger than the standard.
>
> >As I understood it at the time HASP was classified
> >as a Field Developed Product
>
> 360D-05.1.007 and 360D-05.1.014 Were Type III or IV, both being
> contributed programs.
>
> >whereas ASP was a bona fide development.
>
> >The biggest benefit of HASP that the installation I was at; was
> >better use of printers without having to dedicated devices, as
> >previously,
>
> What issue did you have with ASP handling of printers?
>
> >or spool prints to tape for subsequent printing.
>
> When did HASP support tape?
>
> 360A-CX-15X was Type II
>
> >The real issue these days I think is, "Is there a need for both JES2
> >and JES3?"
>
> What ever happened to "JES 5"?
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
> ISO position; see 
> We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
> (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
> Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
>



-- 
George Henke
(C) 845 401 5614

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Thompson, Steve]

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
Sent: Monday, September 06, 2010 10:04 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: JES2 vs. JES3

In
<45d79eacefba9b428e3d400e924d36b903e59...@iwdubcormsg007.sci.local>,
on 09/05/2010
   at 06:13 PM, "Thompson, Steve"  said:

>Why is JES2 better than JES3? 

Why is an airplane better than a submarine? I'd like to know whether
you plan to travel under the ice or over it before answering the
question.
 


Actually, I was planning on using a torpedo.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <201009060837.mll29...@c2beaomr03.btconnect.com>, on 09/06/2010
   at 09:37 AM, Terry Sambrooks  said:

>Many of the more senior members of the list will know that the two
>Job Entry Systems existed prior to MVS but were developed
>independently for different purposes.

FSVO two, one larger than the standard.

>As I understood it at the time HASP was classified
>as a Field Developed Product

360D-05.1.007 and 360D-05.1.014 Were Type III or IV, both being
contributed programs.

>whereas ASP was a bona fide development.

>The biggest benefit of HASP that the installation I was at; was 
>better use of printers without having to dedicated devices, as 
>previously, 

What issue did you have with ASP handling of printers?

>or spool prints to tape for subsequent printing. 

When did HASP support tape?

360A-CX-15X was Type II

>The real issue these days I think is, "Is there a need for both JES2
>and JES3?" 

What ever happened to "JES 5"?
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In
<45d79eacefba9b428e3d400e924d36b903e59...@iwdubcormsg007.sci.local>,
on 09/05/2010
   at 06:13 PM, "Thompson, Steve"  said:

>Why is JES2 better than JES3? 

Why is an airplane better than a submarine? I'd like to know whether
you plan to travel under the ice or over it before answering the
question.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Tony Harminc]

On 5 September 2010 18:13, Thompson, Steve  wrote:

> I created a new thread out of this because I think this is a bit more
> important a topic -- so why let it get lost in O/T IBM blah blah?
>
> Why is JES2 better than JES3? Why is JES3 better than JES2?
>
> Why would JES3 be preferred over JES2?

Back in the 1970s, it was said that if you had two 168s, you should
not even think about JES3, but if you had two 168s and a 158, JES3
would be OK because JES3 would consume a 158's worth of CPU time on
its own, leaving the 168s to run the application workload.

Tony H.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Mon, 6 Sep 2010 15:28:50 -0400, Thompson, Steve wrote:
>
>drives/mounts and JES3 requires the data sets to exist before the JOB
>starts (otherwise you get a JCL error -- UNLESS the data set is created
>in the JOB via JCL) is hard for some to get their hands around.
>
And if you code DISP=NEW you get a JCL error if the data set
already exists.  And JES3 setup is oblivious to COND, IF, THEN,
ELSE, etc, and operates as if every step will be executed, even
those in both branches of THEN and ELSE.  And it doesn't count
if you create or delete a data set in an IDCAMS step -- JES3
setup only understands JCL allocation.  And the diagnostics are
unsatisfactory to someone minimally familiar with JES3.

Circumventions take the form such as:

//STEP0 EXEC PGM=IEFBR14
//STEP1 EXEC PGM=IEFBR14,COND=(0,LE)
//DD1   DD   DISP=(MOD,CATLG),DSN=DATA.SET.ONE
//DD2   DD   DISP=(MOD,CATLG),DSN=DATA.SET.TWO
   etc.

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Anne & Lynn Wheeler]

before being con'ed into going to POK to be in charge of loosely-coupled
architecture, my wife did a stint in the JES group ... including working
on spec. for JESUS (JES Unified System) ... taking all the features,
that customers couldn't live w/o, from both JES (slightly earlier, she
had been part of the catchers for ASP in the JES group). However, the
polarization of the two sides prevented much progress being made.

in POK, she did "peer-coupled shared data" architecture ... which saw
little uptake (except for IMS hotstandby) until sysplex (contributing to
her not staying long in that position; that & periodic battles with SNA
organization about demands that SNA be mandated for peer-coupled
coordination communication).

-- 
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Thompson, Steve]

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Thompson, Steve
Sent: Sunday, September 05, 2010 5:14 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: JES2 vs. JES3



I have worked in both environments, and have migrated between the
environments, and even started a VSE to MVS/JES3 project -- my specialty
was ALC and operations (just before I was hired by Amdahl) with CTG.

Going back to the '70s, I vaguely remember a rule of thumb (if you were
building a shop or converting from non-IBM to IBM):  If you are going to
run up to 3 CPUs (basically a Box, or CEC as it would be called today)
in a site, you would use JES2 because JES3 Global was expensive (in CPU
cycles).

If you were going to have 3 or more CECs in a site, you would give
strong consideration to JES3.

Today, I have been looking at features I was familiar with in JES3 and
it appears to me that many of them have been moved to BCP (basic control
program) to make SYSPLEX operations easier to do. A good example of this
is the change in console support and command routing.

>From my perspective, and this is just my opinion having NOT used JES3
under z/OS, the only thing that JES3 would buy "us" today is the JOB
scheduler that JES3 had, and Job Set Up.

JOB Setup is a foreign concept to anyone who has done JES2 only. And it
causes heartburn for people having to provide a JOB stream to/for a JES3
environment. The idea that JES3 and MVS can both manage tape
drives/mounts and JES3 requires the data sets to exist before the JOB
starts (otherwise you get a JCL error -- UNLESS the data set is created
in the JOB via JCL) is hard for some to get their hands around.

I have done work for a US Gov't agency, that was running a single CEC
with JES3 Global and no locals. As I understood it, they did this
because they were dependent on the JES3 job management (job scheduler)
system. But they could not otherwise justify JES3. And if they had not
been a JES3 shop in years gone by, they would have just gotten a simple
job scheduler.

I would like to hear from current JES3 users and what they think.

Regards,
Steve Thompson

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Norman Hollander on DesertWiz]

"It depends" definitely fits here.

 I would say at this point of the JESes and z/OS, that probably 70-80% of
the code is common between them.
JES3 has the GLOBAL concept of managing the environment, while JES2 is a
collection of LOCAL environments.
With MAS, JES2 has certainly become more global in nature.  JES3 does have a
lot of features over JES2, if you
plan to use them.  Most sites that I have seen running JES3 run in "JES2
mode".  JES3 does have the pre-setup
requirement, can have up to 255 unique Job classifications, has a built-in
Job Scheduler, and definitely has a bit
different JCL coding requirements (nothing that can't be overcome).  From an
operator perspective, JES3 may 
be a bit more challenging to run (no emails from the seasoned JES3 folks).
Many sites that run JES3 are left over
from historical environments, and have never changed.  You can still find
several shops with a single or dual  JES3 
Global/Local setup.  In my opinion this might be a waste of JES3
capabilities.  You really need to decide what your
JES needs are, and then the right one will fall out for you.  And your
mileage WILL vary.

zNorman

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Lizette Koehler
Sent: Monday, September 06, 2010 Monday 4:45 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: JES2 vs. JES3

I am sure there will be some opinions on this.  But the basic functions of
JES2 and JES3 are different.

I have only used JES2 and know very little of JES3.  So I am a little
biased.

JES3 has resource functions where JES2 does not.  In JES3, as I understand
it, a job cannot get into the system unless all allocations are met.
However, you can submit a job to JES2 and it could begin to run without all
allocations (dasd, tape, etc.) being available.  To handle that problem in
JES2 you have add-on products like ThruPut Manager, DTS Software SCC, ACS,
and so on.

So to me the bottom line is more like:
JES2 comes with the operating system, but how many more products do you need
to add-on before it behaves (okay I will say it) like JES3?

I like JES2 because it is simpler in concept than JES3.  However, both
products have their pros and cons.

I am not sure that this can be a apples to apples type of choice.  They are
both apples, but do you like sweet ones or tart?  Do you like Washington or
Delicious?  Do you like Red or Green?

  I think it all comes down to what you have worked on and how you have
adapted to using it.  Both are good systems and do their jobs very well.

Lizette

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email
to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Terry Draper]

Having worked with both JES2 and JES3 (JES3 first), I would say it depends on 
what functionality you require.
 
JES3 has some multisystem capability that you may like. If there is no 
requirement for this then definitely go JES2.
 
JES2 can handle multisystems adequately. JES2 has tended to get support before 
JES3.
 
Many JES3 systems have been converted to JES2.
 
Someone new should definitely look to use JES2.
 
Now I will be shot down by the JES3 bigots. All I say is have have no axe to 
grind for either.


Terry Draper
zSeries Performance Consultant
w...@btopenworld.com
mobile:  +66 811431287

--- On Sun, 5/9/10, Thompson, Steve  wrote:


From: Thompson, Steve 
Subject: JES2 vs. JES3
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Date: Sunday, 5 September, 2010, 23:13


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Clark Morris
Sent: Sunday, September 05, 2010 4:55 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: O/T IBM to Ship World's Fastest Computer Chip



As someone who was in a field where you can't get a consensus on
whether JES2 is better than JES3 and who is a follower of
transportation issues (and a member of Transport Action Atlantic), I
doubt a reporter would be able to determine easily which side of an
argument is flat out wrong, even with some hours of research.



I created a new thread out of this because I think this is a bit more
important a topic -- so why let it get lost in O/T IBM blah blah?

Why is JES2 better than JES3? Why is JES3 better than JES2?

Why would JES3 be preferred over JES2?

Regards,
Steve Thompson

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Lizette Koehler]

I am sure there will be some opinions on this.  But the basic functions of
JES2 and JES3 are different.

I have only used JES2 and know very little of JES3.  So I am a little
biased.

JES3 has resource functions where JES2 does not.  In JES3, as I understand
it, a job cannot get into the system unless all allocations are met.
However, you can submit a job to JES2 and it could begin to run without all
allocations (dasd, tape, etc.) being available.  To handle that problem in
JES2 you have add-on products like ThruPut Manager, DTS Software SCC, ACS,
and so on.

So to me the bottom line is more like:
JES2 comes with the operating system, but how many more products do you need
to add-on before it behaves (okay I will say it) like JES3?

I like JES2 because it is simpler in concept than JES3.  However, both
products have their pros and cons.

I am not sure that this can be a apples to apples type of choice.  They are
both apples, but do you like sweet ones or tart?  Do you like Washington or
Delicious?  Do you like Red or Green?

  I think it all comes down to what you have worked on and how you have
adapted to using it.  Both are good systems and do their jobs very well.

Lizette

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[Terry Sambrooks]

Hi,

I think the question "Which is better JES2 or JES3?" is one for the bigots,
and is akin to "Which is better z/OS, z/VM or z/VSE?"

Many of the more senior members of the list will know that the two Job Entry
Systems existed prior to MVS but were developed independently for different
purposes.
JES2 being developed from the Houston Automatic Spooling System (HASP), and
JES3 was begat from ASP. As I understood it at the time HASP was classified
as a Field Developed Product being created by IBM employees outside of the
product cycle, whereas ASP was a bona fide development. (1969 was a long
time ago so I now have Virtual Memory, in that I remember virtually
everything.)

One of the design constraints for ASP was to assist Attached Processor
Support and aid scientific calculations which were CPU intensive. It
therefore found favour in those environments. The biggest benefit of HASP
that the installation I was at; was better use of printers without having to
dedicated devices, as previously, or spool prints to tape for subsequent
printing. All of these predated MAS and NJE. 

In terms of IBM preference, it is always difficult to be certain. On the one
hand IBM did seem to adopt JES2, but shipped both arguably for compatibility
reasons I guess. In the 1980s I did get involved with a small, 4381 site,
which had been talked into purchasing JES3 even though it was unlikely that
they would benefit from many of its features. (This was at the time there
was a drive to move installations from VSE to MVS.)

The real issue these days I think is, "Is there a need for both JES2 and
JES3?" To what extent if any does SysPlex align the products such that IBM
could concentrate development on only one?

In the meantime it is horses for courses, although I doubt that anybody will
convert from one to the other, as it is not necessarily a trivial exercise.

Kind Regards - Terry
 
Director
KMS-IT Limited
228 Abbeydale Road South
Dore
Sheffield
S17 3LA
UK
 
Reg : 3767263
 
Outgoing e-mails have been scanned, but it is the recipients responsibility
to ensure their anti-virus software is up to date.
 
 


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: JES2 vs. JES3

[R.S.]

Thompson, Steve pisze:

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Clark Morris
Sent: Sunday, September 05, 2010 4:55 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: O/T IBM to Ship World's Fastest Computer Chip



As someone who was in a field where you can't get a consensus on
whether JES2 is better than JES3 and who is a follower of
transportation issues (and a member of Transport Action Atlantic), I
doubt a reporter would be able to determine easily which side of an
argument is flat out wrong, even with some hours of research.



I created a new thread out of this because I think this is a bit more
important a topic -- so why let it get lost in O/T IBM blah blah?

Why is JES2 better than JES3? Why is JES3 better than JES2?

Why would JES3 be preferred over JES2?


To my knowledge JES2 is preferred by IBM. A kind of evidence would be 
pricing: JES2 price is included in z/OS, JES3 is separately priced.
I also heard that JES3 is used by minority of customers (1000?), but 
large ones. They are willing to pay instead of migrate to JES2.


BTW: the topic does IMHO fall into "neverending story" category, like 
"what's your no 1 thing to change in JCL".

No consensus expected as well as no effect.  ;-)

--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland


--
BRE Bank SA
ul. Senatorska 18
00-950 Warszawa
www.brebank.pl

Sd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy 
XII Wydzia Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sdowego, 
nr rejestru przedsibiorców KRS 025237

NIP: 526-021-50-88
Wedug stanu na dzie 01.01.2009 r. kapita zakadowy BRE Banku SA (w caoci 
wpacony) wynosi 118.763.528 zotych. W zwizku z realizacj warunkowego 
podwyszenia kapitau zakadowego, na podstawie uchway XXI WZ z dnia 16 marca 
2008r., oraz uchway XVI NWZ z dnia 27 padziernika 2008r., moe ulec 
podwyszeniu do kwoty 123.763.528 z. Akcje w podwyszonym kapitale zakadowym 
BRE Banku SA bd w caoci opacone.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

JES2 vs. JES3

[Thompson, Steve]

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Clark Morris
Sent: Sunday, September 05, 2010 4:55 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: O/T IBM to Ship World's Fastest Computer Chip



As someone who was in a field where you can't get a consensus on
whether JES2 is better than JES3 and who is a follower of
transportation issues (and a member of Transport Action Atlantic), I
doubt a reporter would be able to determine easily which side of an
argument is flat out wrong, even with some hours of research.



I created a new thread out of this because I think this is a bit more
important a topic -- so why let it get lost in O/T IBM blah blah?

Why is JES2 better than JES3? Why is JES3 better than JES2?

Why would JES3 be preferred over JES2?

Regards,
Steve Thompson

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html