Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Eileen McClintock]

Does anyone have an opinion as to whether or not VOLCATs should use ECS ?

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 07/16/2005
   at 12:43 PM, Rolf Ernst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>That's because TSO spawns a subtask for every command.

No. It's because the TMP waits for the subtask to complete. Also, note
that I was suggesting multiple address spaces to avoid running out of
virtual storage when running concurrent commands.
 
-- 
 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Rolf Ernst]

That's because TSO spawns a subtask for every command. There is probably 
little you can do about it besides VLF.


/re

Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:


In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 07/12/2005
  at 10:34 AM, Paul Gilmartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

 


I find that when I go to ISPF 3.4 and type 'D' before a few dozen
data set names, my terminal is unavailable for an uncomfortably long
time during processing.
   



That ties into the issue of allowing multiple sessions for the same
userid. A restructuring of TSO[1] to support multiple legacy (not
Unix) address spaces could solve your problem.

[1] Including VTIOC.

 




--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
on 07/14/2005
   at 08:07 AM, Martin Kline <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>Oh boo hoo! If you're afraid of the -potential- for errors, you're in
>the wrong business.

Au contraire, if you're indifferent to the possibility of error, then
you're in the wrong business. The issue is risk versus benefit, and
when there is essentially no benefit then it doesn't take much risk to
make it a bad idea.

>The extra overhead for non-IEFBR14 steps is two instructions, CLC
>and BC.

Maybe,  but don't count on it. The smart money says that you aren't
aware of what would actually have to be changed, much less what it
would cost.
 
-- 
 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Mike Bell]

One of the companies I worked for had a standard that was required for
their restart procedures.  Output datasets were created in iefbr14
step and then referenced as disp=old in the program step.  All the
programs were checkpoint restartable but not with IBM checkpoint. The
default CA7/11 restart would delete disp=new datasets when it
attempted to restart the job step.  since the dataset was disp=old, it
left the dataset and the paritial data was available for the restart. 
Sounds like your shop setup a lot of JCL that way.

Mike

On 7/14/05, Martin Kline <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'd estimate we use IEFBR14 10,000 times per day.
> 
> Correction - after further analysis, we run IEFBR14
> over 30,000 times per day. This seems high.
> 
> Does anyone else have actual counts?
> 
> 
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This electronic transmission (including any
> accompanying attachments) is intended solely for its authorized
> recipient(s), and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged
> information.  If you are not an intended recipient, or responsible for
> delivering some or all of this transmission to an intended recipient, be
> aware that any review, copying, printing, distribution, use or disclosure of
> the contents of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you have received
> this electronic message in error, please contact us immediately by
> electronic mail at [EMAIL PROTECTED] or notify us
> immediately by telephone at 1-800-345-2021 or 816-531-5575 and destroy the
> original and all copies of this transmission (including any attachments).
> Thank you.
> 
> --
> 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
> 


-- 
Mike

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Martin Kline]

> I'd estimate we use IEFBR14 10,000 times per day.

Correction - after further analysis, we run IEFBR14
over 30,000 times per day. This seems high.

Does anyone else have actual counts?


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This electronic transmission (including any
accompanying attachments) is intended solely for its authorized
recipient(s), and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged
information.  If you are not an intended recipient, or responsible for
delivering some or all of this transmission to an intended recipient, be
aware that any review, copying, printing, distribution, use or disclosure of
the contents of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you have received
this electronic message in error, please contact us immediately by
electronic mail at [EMAIL PROTECTED] or notify us
immediately by telephone at 1-800-345-2021 or 816-531-5575 and destroy the
original and all copies of this transmission (including any attachments).
Thank you.

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Craddock, Chris]

> 
> One interesting result was that one MVCL for 1K takes about 
> as long as four MVCs of 256; below that MVCs are faster on
> every processor I tested.

Probably not as surprising as you think. There is only one
"move" instruction on the z Series. MVCL and other complex
moves are implemented in millicode. That said, I always use
MVCL when the length(s) are not known at assembly time because
even with the setup cost, an MVCL beats an EX of an MVC.

> Another surprise (?) was that two STs were faster than an STM 
> for two registers.

Once again, no big surprise in terms of cache and memory 
design. It might even turn out that the advantage holds true
for a larger number of registers. Try it.

And in any case "who cares"? We should not be obsessing about
which instruction is faster. They are all stupidly fast and 
it doesn't matter a lick anymore unless you are the exquisitely
hand-crafted z/OS dispatcher or some similar thing that runs
a billion times a minute.

CC

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[R.S.]

Martin Kline wrote:


If it ain't broke don't fix it? That would introduce new
potentiality for errors and would increase the overhead
for everything other than IEFBR14. How expensive is one
ATTACH and how much are you willing to pay to get rid
of it?



Oh boo hoo! If you're afraid of the -potential- for errors,
you're in the wrong business.

The extra overhead for non-IEFBR14 steps is two instructions,
CLC and BC. Since the cost of setting up the step, attaching
the program, generating stats, etc is likely many thousands
of instructions, it's a simple tradeoff.

Suppose the cost is 1/1000 of one cent per ATTACH and
ignore the other associated costs like SMF data. I'd
estimate we use IEFBR14 10,000 times per day. That's $36.50
per year. Maybe $36.60 for leap years. Do that for 30 years
for $1095.70. Do that for 1000 data centers for $1,095,700.


We don't use 1 IEFBR14's daily, I'm pretty sure of that.
Our programmers are smart enough to code DISP=(,CATLG) just in step when 
the dataset will be opened. Nevermind, let's back to the economy:
where can I get my (or my company's) $36.50 ? Oh, we're open for several 
years!
But seriously: this way of cost counting is completely false. It is 
obvious, that cost of CPU cycle is different during businness hours and 
after hours, it is obvious that IEFBR14 will be invoked with lower 
priority than online transaction, it is obvious that all the time when 
CPU is not 100% busy it mean some CPU cycles are LOST.


IMHO this change is one of the least important in JCL, batch processing, 
z/OS and whole mainframe industry. What would be less important ?


Just my $0.02
--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Martin Kline]

> If it ain't broke don't fix it? That would introduce new
> potentiality for errors and would increase the overhead
> for everything other than IEFBR14. How expensive is one
> ATTACH and how much are you willing to pay to get rid
> of it?

Oh boo hoo! If you're afraid of the -potential- for errors,
you're in the wrong business.

The extra overhead for non-IEFBR14 steps is two instructions,
CLC and BC. Since the cost of setting up the step, attaching
the program, generating stats, etc is likely many thousands
of instructions, it's a simple tradeoff.

Suppose the cost is 1/1000 of one cent per ATTACH and
ignore the other associated costs like SMF data. I'd
estimate we use IEFBR14 10,000 times per day. That's $36.50
per year. Maybe $36.60 for leap years. Do that for 30 years
for $1095.70. Do that for 1000 data centers for $1,095,700.

As an individual, I wouldn't pay 2 cents. It's already
covered in our service contract. I merely offered the
suggestion.

Along the same lines, what's it cost to do one DC 0H vs.
one DS 0H? Probably less than it cost to ask that
question. But, there you are - arguing about it.


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This electronic transmission (including any
accompanying attachments) is intended solely for its authorized
recipient(s), and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged
information.  If you are not an intended recipient, or responsible for
delivering some or all of this transmission to an intended recipient, be
aware that any review, copying, printing, distribution, use or disclosure of
the contents of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you have received
this electronic message in error, please contact us immediately by
electronic mail at [EMAIL PROTECTED] or notify us
immediately by telephone at 1-800-345-2021 or 816-531-5575 and destroy the
original and all copies of this transmission (including any attachments).
Thank you.

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Bill Fairchild]

 
In a message dated 7/14/2005 5:33:58 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

The  model 30 had  a simple set of numbers with 
>no variables.   Load Address was something like  19 microseconds no matter  
>what.
> 
>  
>
Not quite, IIRC if the index  register is not zero then add a few  
microseconds for any instruction  with index reg.





You remembered more correctly than I did.  I forgot about that one  variable. 
 Since I was just beginning to write code, I never did anything  complex like 
use index registers on RX instructions.  :-)
 
Bill Fairchild

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Bill Fairchild]

In a message dated 7/14/2005 1:25:33 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Bill  Fairchild wrote:
> However, even though it is not of much value, it is  certainly of  
interest.  
> If you really want to know how to  speed instructions up, you  must be 
prepared 
> to read lots of  highly arcane technical papers on  instruction processing 
> units,  pipelines, instruction caches, translation  lookaside buffers, data 
 
> caches, bus width, look-ahead instruction preprocessing,   multiple 
processor 
> serialization effects, instruction predecessor  relationships,  et alia.  

 


Or  you could use a little assembler program, using STCK or TIMEUSED, and  
execute contemplated code several hundred to several thousand times  
each, and compare the results. No reading of papers, no head scratching,  
just numbers for your environment.
 
Right.  If I wanted to know how long instruction op code XYZ takes to  
execute, I would certainly do it the way you suggested.  Reading of papers  and 
head 
scratching would be interesting to me since I am interested in learning  how 
instruction processing takes place on a low level - in general.  But  for any 
one particular op code I would perform the experiment you  described.  I also 
once put a STCK immediately in front of and immediately  behind an instruction 
that I wanted to learn about - Store SCHIB - and found it  took something 
like 60 microseconds, which was a huge amount of time compared to  all other 
instructions.  After I saw that, I removed the Store SCHIB since  it wasn't 
necessary.  The Princ. of Ops even warns about using this  instruction a lot - 
can 
cause performance problems - must be doing some  serialization in the channel 
subsystem.  To be really, really accurate, you  must also first find out how 
much overhead you are imposing on your experiment  by using STCK and any 
looping 
instructions, so you have to test each of them  several thousand times and 
get averages.
 

One  interesting result was that one MVCL for 1K takes about as long as 
four  MVCs of 256; below that MVCs are faster on every processor I 
tested.  Another surprise (?) was that two STs were faster than an STM 
for two  registers.

 
These are surprising and interesting results.  But I would still not  be 
motivated to perform a timing experiment unless the code I was thinking  about 
optimizing was going to be executed a very large number of times per  second in 
some critical path or perhaps in a tight loop.  If I were  building a compiler, 
however, I would be concerned about trying to optimize code  execution as 
much as possible in a generalized way, which means you would not  know what 
machine the code was to be run on with individual machine  peculiarities to 
consider.  But I don't build compilers.
 
Bill Fairchild

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Chris Langford]

Bill Fairchild wrote:



In a message dated 7/13/2005 8:35:47 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


Wouldn't  XR  R15,R15 have been more efficient?

No. Yes. On what  processor?

Even in the S/360 days the answer would depend on the box.  Likewise SR
versus SLR vs LA.



Right on, Shmuel.

I learned Assembler's op codes on a S/360 model 30.  I still prefer to  do a 
SLR to clear a register over SR and XR because SLR was the fastest way on  the 
model 30.  But on today's big-end processors, the time to execute any  one 
given instruction depends on 853 variables, give or take πr².  But  the real 
bottom line is that the difference in how long it takes any of the  different 
possible ways is vanishingly minute, and only of practical value if  that 
instruction must be executed thousands of times per second.  The  amount of time it 
takes a programmer to think about which of three different  instructions to use 
costs millions of times more than the cost recovered by  executing the 
optimal instruction.


However, even though it is not of much value, it is certainly of  interest.  
If you really want to know how to speed instructions up, you  must be prepared 
to read lots of highly arcane technical papers on  instruction processing 
units, pipelines, instruction caches, translation  lookaside buffers, data 
caches, bus width, look-ahead instruction preprocessing,  multiple processor 
serialization effects, instruction predecessor relationships,  et alia.  That's where 
the 853 variables comes from.  The model 30 had  a simple set of numbers with 
no variables.  Load Address was something like  19 microseconds no matter 
what.


 

Not quite, IIRC if the index register is not zero then add a few  
microseconds for any instruction with index reg.



Bill Fairchild

--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



 



--
Chris Langford,
Cestrian Software:
Consulting services for: VM, VSE, MVS, z/VM, z/OS, OS/2, P/3x0 etc. 


z/FM  - A toolbox for VM & MVS at http://zfm.cestrian.com
Deva Woodcrafting:
Furniture creation, House remodeling, Wagon restoration etc.

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Gerhard Postpischil]

Bill Fairchild wrote:
However, even though it is not of much value, it is certainly of  interest.  
If you really want to know how to speed instructions up, you  must be prepared 
to read lots of highly arcane technical papers on  instruction processing 
units, pipelines, instruction caches, translation  lookaside buffers, data 
caches, bus width, look-ahead instruction preprocessing,  multiple processor 
serialization effects, instruction predecessor relationships,  et alia.  That's where 
the 853 variables comes from.  The model 30 had  a simple set of numbers with 
no variables.  Load Address was something like  19 microseconds no matter 
what.


Or you could use a little assembler program, using STCK or TIMEUSED, and 
 execute contemplated code several hundred to several thousand times 
each, and compare the results. No reading of papers, no head scratching, 
just numbers for your environment.


One interesting result was that one MVCL for 1K takes about as long as 
four MVCs of 256; below that MVCs are faster on every processor I 
tested. Another surprise (?) was that two STs were faster than an STM 
for two registers.


Gerhard Postpischil
Bradford, VT

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Bill Fairchild]

 
In a message dated 7/13/2005 8:35:47 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Wouldn't  XR  R15,R15 have been more efficient?

No. Yes. On what  processor?

Even in the S/360 days the answer would depend on the box.  Likewise SR
versus SLR vs LA.



Right on, Shmuel.
 
I learned Assembler's op codes on a S/360 model 30.  I still prefer to  do a 
SLR to clear a register over SR and XR because SLR was the fastest way on  the 
model 30.  But on today's big-end processors, the time to execute any  one 
given instruction depends on 853 variables, give or take πr².  But  the real 
bottom line is that the difference in how long it takes any of the  different 
possible ways is vanishingly minute, and only of practical value if  that 
instruction must be executed thousands of times per second.  The  amount of 
time it 
takes a programmer to think about which of three different  instructions to use 
costs millions of times more than the cost recovered by  executing the 
optimal instruction.
 
However, even though it is not of much value, it is certainly of  interest.  
If you really want to know how to speed instructions up, you  must be prepared 
to read lots of highly arcane technical papers on  instruction processing 
units, pipelines, instruction caches, translation  lookaside buffers, data 
caches, bus width, look-ahead instruction preprocessing,  multiple processor 
serialization effects, instruction predecessor relationships,  et alia.  That's 
where 
the 853 variables comes from.  The model 30 had  a simple set of numbers with 
no variables.  Load Address was something like  19 microseconds no matter 
what.
 
Bill Fairchild

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
on 07/12/2005
   at 07:27 AM, Martin Kline <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>Why hasn't IBM come out with a JCL option that says, "There is no
>program, just set return code zero?"  It could avoid all the setup
>for calling IEFBR14 - LOAD, DELETE, RB setup, save area, recovery,
>etc.

If it ain't broke don't fix it? That would introduce new potentiality
for errors and would increase the overhead for everything other than
IEFBR14. How expensive is one ATTACH and how much are you willing to
pay to get rid of it?
 
-- 
 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
on 07/11/2005
   at 04:51 PM, Steve Grimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>Wouldn't XR  R15,R15 have been more efficient?

No. Yes. On what processor?

Even in the S/360 days the answer would depend on the box. Likewise SR
versus SLR vs LA.
 
-- 
 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 07/11/2005
   at 04:26 PM, Richard Peurifoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>Many people use this to create/delete datasets. 

Or, at least, so they believe. At least it's a less expensive
placeholder than IEHPROGM.
 
-- 
 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 07/12/2005
   at 10:34 AM, Paul Gilmartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>I find that when I go to ISPF 3.4 and type 'D' before a few dozen
>data set names, my terminal is unavailable for an uncomfortably long
>time during processing.

That ties into the issue of allowing multiple sessions for the same
userid. A restructuring of TSO[1] to support multiple legacy (not
Unix) address spaces could solve your problem.

[1] Including VTIOC.
 
-- 
 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Ted MacNEIL]

...

Say hi to the pope as well
...

I meant it by the second meaning:
(V): to deliver dogmatic opinions

(Interesting roots for the Pope & the opinion)


-teD

In God we Trust!
All others bring data!
  --Deming

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Ed Gould]

On Jul 11, 2005, at 7:00 PM, Ted MacNEIL wrote:


...

...
Why do anything? DOS 1.0 worked, too
..

...

The above was not from me.
It was included as quoted text so I could pontificate on it.

-teD



Ted,

Say hi to the pope as well;_0

Ed

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[ibm-main]

From: "Edward E. Jaffe"
> ...
> Speaking of parallel sysplex, I just set one up for testing purposes
> using z/VM's "Coupling Facility Simulation" feature which neither uses
> nor supports real links to real coupling facilities. Though it loads and
> uses the CFCC LIC from the hardware, z/VM prevents CFCC from spinning
> without requiring use of the kludgey, stupid, and slow DYNDISP setting.

C'mon Ed, this hasn't been an issue since z/OS 1.2.
Certainly on z/900 and 990 - I'll check the z/890 we have running a CF LPAR,
but I'd be *mighty* surprised if it wasn't true there as well.

Shane ...

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Ted MacNEIL]

...
Besides  who would ever need more than 640k?
...

With QEMM V7 I got over 690.

-teD

In God we Trust!
All others bring data!
  --Deming

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Ted MacNEIL]

...

Ted,

Besides who would ever need more than 640k?
...

I guess my point is not getting across.

I'm saying a simple load of IEFBR14 is better than re-writing JES to have 
special cases.
No more! No less!

The fewer boundary conditions we have, the fewer bugs!


De-Bugging:
The art of removing software flaws.

Programming:
The art of inserting software flaws.

We have a fairly good interface; why add kludges to it.


-teD

In God we Trust!
All others bring data!
  --Deming

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Ted MacNEIL]

...
> ...
> Why do anything? DOS 1.0 worked, too
> ..
...

The above was not from me.
It was included as quoted text so I could pontificate on it.

-teD

In God we Trust!
All others bring data!
  --Deming

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Bill Fairchild]

 
In a message dated 7/12/2005 3:43:40 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Besides  who would ever need more than 640k?


 
I squeezed all my application code into a 16K model 30 in 1967, and there  
was still 6K for the DOS/360 Supervisor.  We had "oceans of core"  available.
 
Also, regarding ABEND806's being copywrighted, I think XPECT806 is an alias  
of ABEND806.  So, depending on which entries are in the load library's  
directory, using XPECT806 might or might not be an infringement (to weave  an 
already expunged thread into this one).
 
Bill Fairchild

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Ed Finnell]

 
In a message dated 7/12/2005 3:43:40 P.M. Central Standard Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Besides  who would ever need more than 640k?

Ed



>>
Same department that only needs 5 M/F worldwide(for  everybody!).

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Gary Green]

No one according the Mr. Bill back in 80-something-or-other... 

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Ed Gould
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 4:42 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there?
IDCAMS, IEFBR14

On Jul 11, 2005, at 7:00 PM, Ted MacNEIL wrote:

> ...
> Why do anything? DOS 1.0 worked, too
> ...
>
> Yes, but special kludges are NOT the way to go.
> Boundary conditions are the great bug-a-boo!
>
>

Ted,

Besides who would ever need more than 640k?

Ed

--
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

--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.12/46 - Release Date: 7/11/2005
 

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Ed Gould]

On Jul 11, 2005, at 7:00 PM, Ted MacNEIL wrote:


...
Why do anything? DOS 1.0 worked, too
...

Yes, but special kludges are NOT the way to go.
Boundary conditions are the great bug-a-boo!




Ted,

Besides who would ever need more than 640k?

Ed

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Edward E. Jaffe]

Mark Zelden wrote:


On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 09:57:33 -0700, Edward E. Jaffe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

 


Issue the 'f catalog,ecshr(status)' system command to find out if you're
using this important catalog performance enhancement.
   


After first asking yourself "am I running a parallel sysplex?" and
"am I not sharing catalogs outside the sysplex boundries?".

 


Neither of which is required to issue the command I suggested.

   



Certainly true! But a moot point if not running a parallel sysplex
(which I would have at least mentioned or asked first). Someone not
familiar with ECS might not realize that a parallel sysplex is
required to get that important catalog performance enhancement.
 



I usually leave such trivialities as an exercise for the reader. Indeed, 
if one asks for ECSHR(STATUS) on a system that is not part of a parallel 
sysplex (or simply doesn't have the structure defined), you will get "CF 
Connection: Connect FailureRC:   RSN: ". I figured 
Gil -- working for STK .. er ... SUN -- probably had some b!tchin' 
hardware available -- including coupling facilities.


Speaking of parallel sysplex, I just set one up for testing purposes 
using z/VM's "Coupling Facility Simulation" feature which neither uses 
nor supports real links to real coupling facilities. Though it loads and 
uses the CFCC LIC from the hardware, z/VM prevents CFCC from spinning 
without requiring use of the kludgey, stupid, and slow DYNDISP setting. 
(Since it virtualizes the CF links themselves, z/VM probably intercepts 
the instruction used in the so-called "active wait" polling loop and 
suspends CFCC until it detects messages directed to it from the z/OS 
guests.)


It's somewhat like ICMF reborn for zSeries processors -- albeit for z/VM 
guest use only. Awesome!


--
-
| Edward E. Jaffe||
| Mgr, Research & Development| [EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| Phoenix Software International | Tel: (310) 338-0400 x318   |
| 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 | Fax: (310) 338-0801|
| Los Angeles, CA 90045  | 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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[R.S.]

Edward E. Jaffe wrote:

Mark Zelden wrote:


On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 09:02:01 -0700, Edward E. Jaffe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 


Or one of my favorites:

//***/
//* Generate S806 Abend */
//***/
//ABEND806 EXEC PGM=ABEND806

This job step works as advertised without a load module of *any* kind!

  



I've always used PGM=XPECT806 to do that.  I wonder if yours is
a better replacement. :-)
 



I may have to switch over to using XPECT806 since Richard Pinion says he 
owns the "copy write" [sic] to ABEND806. Is XPECT806 freeware? :-)




Gentlemen,
No one of you can own copyright for ABEND806, because there is no such 
program! It does not exist.




Or, maybe I haven't installed it...
--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Howard Brazee]

On 12-Jul-2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Edward E. Jaffe) wrote:

> Or one of my favorites:
>
> //***/
> //* Generate S806 Abend */
> //***/
> //ABEND806 EXEC PGM=ABEND806
>
> This job step works as advertised without a load module of *any* kind!

Especially useful when your EasyTrieve program returns a return code that tells
us to abend.

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Mark Zelden]

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 09:57:33 -0700, Edward E. Jaffe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


>>
>>>Issue the 'f catalog,ecshr(status)' system command to find out if you're
>>>using this important catalog performance enhancement.
>>
>>
>>After first asking yourself "am I running a parallel sysplex?" and
>>"am I not sharing catalogs outside the sysplex boundries?".
>>
>
>Neither of which is required to issue the command I suggested.
>

Certainly true! But a moot point if not running a parallel sysplex
(which I would have at least mentioned or asked first). Someone not
familiar with ECS might not realize that a parallel sysplex is
required to get that important catalog performance enhancement.

Cheers,

Mark
--
Mark Zelden
Sr. Software and Systems Architect
mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Systems Programming expert at http://Search390.com/ateExperts/
Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Ray Mullins]

Not in the EU!  They've seen the light!

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of McKown, John
Sent: Tuesday July 12 2005 10:06
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there?
IDCAMS, IEFBR14

Hum, I am sure that you, and all the others with similar programs, are in
violation of my soon to patented process for "use of non existant computer
programs in order to control the subsequent execution and processing of
computer based information structures". 

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[McKown, John]

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Edward E. Jaffe
> Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 11:02 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements 
> out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14
> 
> 



> 
> Or one of my favorites:
> 
> //***/
> //* Generate S806 Abend */
> //***/
> //ABEND806 EXEC PGM=ABEND806
> 
> This job step works as advertised without a load module of *any* kind!

Hum, I am sure that you, and all the others with similar programs, are
in violation of my soon to patented process for "use of non existant
computer programs in order to control the subsequent execution and
processing of computer based information structures". 


--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
UICI Insurance Center
Information Technology

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its'
content is protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you
should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking any action
based on it, is strictly prohibited.

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Edward E. Jaffe]

Mark Zelden wrote:


On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 09:48:12 -0700, Edward E. Jaffe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 


Issue the 'f catalog,ecshr(status)' system command to find out if you're
using this important catalog performance enhancement.

   



After first asking yourself "am I running a parallel sysplex?" and
"am I not sharing catalogs outside the sysplex boundries?".
 



Neither of which is required to issue the command I suggested.

--
-
| Edward E. Jaffe||
| Mgr, Research & Development| [EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| Phoenix Software International | Tel: (310) 338-0400 x318   |
| 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 | Fax: (310) 338-0801|
| Los Angeles, CA 90045  | 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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Edward E. Jaffe]

Mark Zelden wrote:


On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 09:02:01 -0700, Edward E. Jaffe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 


Or one of my favorites:

//***/
//* Generate S806 Abend */
//***/
//ABEND806 EXEC PGM=ABEND806

This job step works as advertised without a load module of *any* kind!

   



I've always used PGM=XPECT806 to do that.  I wonder if yours is
a better replacement. :-)
 



I may have to switch over to using XPECT806 since Richard Pinion says he 
owns the "copy write" [sic] to ABEND806. Is XPECT806 freeware? :-)


--
-
| Edward E. Jaffe||
| Mgr, Research & Development| [EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| Phoenix Software International | Tel: (310) 338-0400 x318   |
| 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 | Fax: (310) 338-0801|
| Los Angeles, CA 90045  | 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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[John Eells]

Ted MacNEIL wrote:


...
Did you tell him about the IEFBR15 utility?
...
IBM used to use one in the early days of bench-mark(ett)ing to get rid of the 
low utilisation effect.



I'm not sure what that had to do with either benchmarking or 
marketing.


It's been a Long Time, but as I recall, sometime in MVS/XA 
Version 2 or MVS/ESA Version 3 the dispatcher was changed in such 
a way that it created an LUE.  That is, at low utilization 
levels, the processor appeared to have less available capacity 
than it actually did.  As a capacity planning aid, someone (WSC, 
if I remember right) suggested running one BR15 program per 
processor at a very low dispatching priority and in their own 
RPGN, to keep the machines 100% busy while providing a number 
that could be subtracted from the system's capacity to get the 
true utilization.


This effect got smaller as the machine got busier.  Our capacity 
planning and performance measurement team, when queried, did not 
want us to run the BR15s because they only cared about peak time 
measurements, when they found the LUE insignificant for their 
purposes.


Corrections welcome...like I said, it's been a Long Time.

--
John Eells
z/OS Technical Marketing
IBM Poughkeepsie
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Mark Zelden]

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 09:48:12 -0700, Edward E. Jaffe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Issue the 'f catalog,ecshr(status)' system command to find out if you're
>using this important catalog performance enhancement.
>

After first asking yourself "am I running a parallel sysplex?" and
"am I not sharing catalogs outside the sysplex boundries?".

Mark
--
Mark Zelden
Sr. Software and Systems Architect
mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Systems Programming expert at http://Search390.com/ateExperts/
Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Ted MacNEIL]

Sorry about that.
Some times the (fat) finger is quicker than the eye.
-Original Message-
From: Ted MacNEIL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 00:00:00 
To:IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, 
IEFBR14

-Original Message-
From: Paul Gilmartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 10:34:34 
To:IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, 
IEFBR14

In a recent note, Martin Kline said:

> Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 07:43:18 -0500
> 
> It's a serious suggestion, but I do not expect IBM to
> give it serious consideration. There's no money to make.
> 
IBM will respond to serious customer requirements.  But you
need to make a business case.  You probably need to enlist
the support of your colleagues.  You haven't succeded in
that.  It would help if you provided some real statistics:
How much resource is your site expending on IEFBR14?

It's my suspicion (no hard numbers here, either) that creating,
cataloguing, or deleting a single data set is more expensive
than the IEFBR14 overhead; that's where the optimization
effort should be concentrated.  Short of that, heed the
suggestion of John Eells (and others) to use IDCAMS instead
of IEFBR14.  Now, is IDCAMS itself susceptible to optimization?

I find that when I go to ISPF 3.4 and type 'D' before a few
dozen data set names, my terminal is unavailable for an
uncomfortably long time during processing.  I wish that could
be done in parallel, or, better, in background, so I could use
the terminal, or at least the other screen split, for the
duration.

-- gil
-- 
StorageTek
INFORMATION made POWERFUL

--
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

-teD

In God we Trust!
All others bring data!
  --Deming

--
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

-teD

In God we Trust!
All others bring data!
  --Deming

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Edward E. Jaffe]

Paul Gilmartin wrote:


I find that when I go to ISPF 3.4 and type 'D' before a few
dozen data set names, my terminal is unavailable for an
uncomfortably long time during processing.



I used to experience similar delays when deleting large numbers of data 
sets. Then came Enhanced Catalog Sharing (ECS) and that changed everything.


Issue the 'f catalog,ecshr(status)' system command to find out if you're 
using this important catalog performance enhancement.


--
-
| Edward E. Jaffe||
| Mgr, Research & Development| [EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| Phoenix Software International | Tel: (310) 338-0400 x318   |
| 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 | Fax: (310) 338-0801|
| Los Angeles, CA 90045  | 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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Ted MacNEIL]

-Original Message-
From: Paul Gilmartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 10:34:34 
To:IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, 
IEFBR14

In a recent note, Martin Kline said:

> Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 07:43:18 -0500
> 
> It's a serious suggestion, but I do not expect IBM to
> give it serious consideration. There's no money to make.
> 
IBM will respond to serious customer requirements.  But you
need to make a business case.  You probably need to enlist
the support of your colleagues.  You haven't succeded in
that.  It would help if you provided some real statistics:
How much resource is your site expending on IEFBR14?

It's my suspicion (no hard numbers here, either) that creating,
cataloguing, or deleting a single data set is more expensive
than the IEFBR14 overhead; that's where the optimization
effort should be concentrated.  Short of that, heed the
suggestion of John Eells (and others) to use IDCAMS instead
of IEFBR14.  Now, is IDCAMS itself susceptible to optimization?

I find that when I go to ISPF 3.4 and type 'D' before a few
dozen data set names, my terminal is unavailable for an
uncomfortably long time during processing.  I wish that could
be done in parallel, or, better, in background, so I could use
the terminal, or at least the other screen split, for the
duration.

-- gil
-- 
StorageTek
INFORMATION made POWERFUL

--
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

-teD

In God we Trust!
All others bring data!
  --Deming

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Mark Zelden]

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 09:02:01 -0700, Edward E. Jaffe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Or one of my favorites:
>
>//***/
>//* Generate S806 Abend */
>//***/
>//ABEND806 EXEC PGM=ABEND806
>
>This job step works as advertised without a load module of *any* kind!
>

I've always used PGM=XPECT806 to do that.  I wonder if yours is
a better replacement. :-)

Mark
--
Mark Zelden
Sr. Software and Systems Architect
mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Systems Programming expert at http://Search390.com/ateExperts/
Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Paul Gilmartin]

In a recent note, Martin Kline said:

> Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 07:43:18 -0500
> 
> It's a serious suggestion, but I do not expect IBM to
> give it serious consideration. There's no money to make.
> 
IBM will respond to serious customer requirements.  But you
need to make a business case.  You probably need to enlist
the support of your colleagues.  You haven't succeded in
that.  It would help if you provided some real statistics:
How much resource is your site expending on IEFBR14?

It's my suspicion (no hard numbers here, either) that creating,
cataloguing, or deleting a single data set is more expensive
than the IEFBR14 overhead; that's where the optimization
effort should be concentrated.  Short of that, heed the
suggestion of John Eells (and others) to use IDCAMS instead
of IEFBR14.  Now, is IDCAMS itself susceptible to optimization?

I find that when I go to ISPF 3.4 and type 'D' before a few
dozen data set names, my terminal is unavailable for an
uncomfortably long time during processing.  I wish that could
be done in parallel, or, better, in background, so I could use
the terminal, or at least the other screen split, for the
duration.

-- gil
-- 
StorageTek
INFORMATION made POWERFUL

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Richard Pinion]

I guess I failed spelling, copy write!!

I have the copyright on that program, ABEND806.

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/12/05 12:03 PM >>>
Sorry I have the copy write on that program!!!

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/12/05 12:02 PM >>>
Rob Scott wrote:

>If only there was an easy way to do this ...h..
>
>How about a program that just sets the return code to zero and returned
>to the usereven better than that - why don't we put it in LPA so
>that there is no LOAD/DELETE overhead.
>  
>

Or one of my favorites:

//***/
//* Generate S806 Abend */
//***/
//ABEND806 EXEC PGM=ABEND806

This job step works as advertised without a load module of *any* kind!

-- 

 -
| Edward E. Jaffe||
| Mgr, Research & Development| [EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| Phoenix Software International | Tel: (310) 338-0400 x318   |
| 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 | Fax: (310) 338-0801|
| Los Angeles, CA 90045  | 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

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Edward E. Jaffe]

Richard Pinion wrote:


Sorry I have the copy write on that program!!!
 



OK. Just so long as you don't own the copyright.

--
-
| Edward E. Jaffe||
| Mgr, Research & Development| [EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| Phoenix Software International | Tel: (310) 338-0400 x318   |
| 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 | Fax: (310) 338-0801|
| Los Angeles, CA 90045  | 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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Richard Pinion]

Sorry I have the copy write on that program!!!

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/12/05 12:02 PM >>>
Rob Scott wrote:

>If only there was an easy way to do this ...h..
>
>How about a program that just sets the return code to zero and returned
>to the usereven better than that - why don't we put it in LPA so
>that there is no LOAD/DELETE overhead.
>  
>

Or one of my favorites:

//***/
//* Generate S806 Abend */
//***/
//ABEND806 EXEC PGM=ABEND806

This job step works as advertised without a load module of *any* kind!

-- 

 -
| Edward E. Jaffe||
| Mgr, Research & Development| [EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| Phoenix Software International | Tel: (310) 338-0400 x318   |
| 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 | Fax: (310) 338-0801|
| Los Angeles, CA 90045  | 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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Edward E. Jaffe]

Rob Scott wrote:


If only there was an easy way to do this ...h..

How about a program that just sets the return code to zero and returned
to the usereven better than that - why don't we put it in LPA so
that there is no LOAD/DELETE overhead.
 



Or one of my favorites:

//***/
//* Generate S806 Abend */
//***/
//ABEND806 EXEC PGM=ABEND806

This job step works as advertised without a load module of *any* kind!

--
-
| Edward E. Jaffe||
| Mgr, Research & Development| [EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| Phoenix Software International | Tel: (310) 338-0400 x318   |
| 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 | Fax: (310) 338-0801|
| Los Angeles, CA 90045  | 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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Ted MacNEIL]

...
Did you tell him about the IEFBR15 utility?
...
IBM used to use one in the early days of bench-mark(ett)ing to get rid of the 
low utilisation effect.

-teD

In God we Trust!
All others bring data!
  --Deming

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Ron and Jenny Hawkins]

Did the same guy go looking for left handed screwdrivers and buckets of blue
steam?

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of David Andrews
> Sent: Tuesday, 12 July 2005 9:34 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there?
> IDCAMS, IEFBR14
> 
> On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 00:00 +, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
> > I didn't intend to talk down, but I know many APPDEV-types
> > who think of this as the only way to create/delete.
> 
> I once had an applications guy (a new hire) ask me where "the IEFBR14
> manual" was.  He didn't last very long.
> 
> --
> David Andrews
> A. Duda and Sons, Inc.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> --
> 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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Ray Mullins]

Did you tell him about the IEFBR15 utility?

-- 
M. Ray Mullins 
Roseville, CA, USA 
http://www.catherdersoftware.com/
http://www.mrmullins.big-bear-city.ca.us/ 
http://www.the-bus-stops-here.org/ 

 

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Andrews
> Sent: Tuesday 12 July 2005 06:34
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements 
> out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14
> 
> On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 00:00 +, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
> > I didn't intend to talk down, but I know many APPDEV-types 
> who think 
> > of this as the only way to create/delete.
> 
> I once had an applications guy (a new hire) ask me where "the 
> IEFBR14 manual" was.  He didn't last very long.

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[John Eells]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


Why code the special case?
What we have works; why complicate it with special code paths?


Why do anything? DOS 1.0 worked, too.



Actually there are alternatives already.  IEFBR14 is not the best 
choice for data set allocation or deletion in my view, 
particularly for scheduled production jobs, and especially for 
jobs that others must support.  IEFBR14 offers no indication of 
success or failure.  The condition code set by the SR 15,15 is 
always zero.  The indication of success or failure thus moves to 
a subsequent jobstep or even a subsequent job...if you're 
reasonably lucky.


This complicates diagnosis at best and leads to incorrect results 
at worst.  To me, IDCAMS DEFINE and ALLOCATE, TSO/E ALLOCATE, and 
JCL allocation in the same jobstep (at least, for new data sets) 
all seem far preferable.  If you simply must use IEFBR14, 
consider a subsequent IDCAMS step to verify that it did what you 
expected.  (But hey!, if you're using IDCAMS anyway...you get the 
idea. ;-)


A JCL option to return condition code zero while processing DD 
statements would do nothing to help the situation; indeed, it 
would exacerbate it by encouraging behaviors I'd rather we 
discouraged.  One that passed an appropriate condition code might 
be interesting...but I don't know how much overhead we would 
really save after adding all the necessary logic to such new 
processing.


Having said all that, I know (I do!) that "The world runs on 
IEFBR14."  That does nothing to change my opinion, though.


--
John Eells
z/OS Technical Marketing
IBM Poughkeepsie
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[David Andrews]

On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 00:00 +, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
> I didn't intend to talk down, but I know many APPDEV-types
> who think of this as the only way to create/delete.

I once had an applications guy (a new hire) ask me where "the IEFBR14
manual" was.  He didn't last very long.

-- 
David Andrews
A. Duda and Sons, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Howard Brazee]

On 11-Jul-2005, "Abbacabba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> IEFBR14 is one of our most USED program with ~1500 uses a day.

You won't gain anything by trying to make a more efficient IEFBR14.   But that
isn't your goal.   We don't have any business needs to have IEFBR14 run.   What
we have are needs to do stuff such as delete datasets or set switches or other
stuff.

If you want efficiency here, you need to analyze the real stuff that that
IEFBR14 step is designed to accomplish.

There are some other things to analyze here - sometimes you don't need to have
your job wait while some tape is marked for deletion, for instance.

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Martin Kline]

> I've tried teaching them better (use IDCAMS), but
> "this is the way that I've done it since 1975 and
> I'm not changing!"

"What we have works; why complicate it?"


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This electronic transmission (including any
accompanying attachments) is intended solely for its authorized
recipient(s), and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged
information.  If you are not an intended recipient, or responsible for
delivering some or all of this transmission to an intended recipient, be
aware that any review, copying, printing, distribution, use or disclosure of
the contents of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you have received
this electronic message in error, please contact us immediately by
electronic mail at [EMAIL PROTECTED] or notify us
immediately by telephone at 1-800-345-2021 or 816-531-5575 and destroy the
original and all copies of this transmission (including any attachments).
Thank you.

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[McKown, John]

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Shannon
> Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 7:39 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements 
> out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14
> 
> 
> >Please reread my suggestion. It says nothing about
> >IEBGENER. I also wouldn't expect anyone to eliminate
> >IEFBR14. Just have the initiator recognize that the
> >program is effectively a null operation if so
> >specified. Of course, still perform any JCL functions
> >like dataset allocation and deletion.
> 
> I will modify my comment. Is this just noise or do you 
> seriously expect
> IBM to implement this?
> 
> Bob Shannon

Well, if IBM were to do this, I would hope that they would also change
the DD processing so that, in this case, if the DSN is migrated and the
disp is (OLD,DELETE,DELETE) that the initiator would issue an HDELETE.
At present, we have programmers who run an IEFBR14 job step with like 80
DD statements with DSN=...,DISP=(OLD,DELETE,DELETE) and all 80 DSNs are
migrated. DFSMShsm then recalls theses DSNs, usually from tape, only to
delete them. I've tried teaching them better (use IDCAMS), but "this is
the way that I've done it since 1975 and I'm not changing!"


--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
UICI Insurance Center
Information Technology

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its'
content is protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you
should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking any action
based on it, is strictly prohibited.

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Ted MacNEIL]

...
Why do anything? DOS 1.0 worked, too
...

Yes, but special kludges are NOT the way to go.
Boundary conditions are the great bug-a-boo!

-teD

In God we Trust!
All others bring data!
  --Deming

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Rob Scott]

If only there was an easy way to do this ...h..

How about a program that just sets the return code to zero and returned
to the usereven better than that - why don't we put it in LPA so
that there is no LOAD/DELETE overhead.



-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Martin Kline
Sent: 12 July 2005 08:37
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there?
IDCAMS, IEFBR14

>> Why hasn't IBM come out with a JCL option that
>> says, "There is no program, just set return code
>> zero?"  It could avoid all the setup for calling
>> IEFBR14 - LOAD, DELETE, RB setup, save area,
>> recovery, etc.

>Is this comment just noise or do you seriously expect
>IBM to change/eliminate IEBGENER?

Please reread my suggestion. It says nothing about
IEBGENER. I also wouldn't expect anyone to eliminate
IEFBR14. Just have the initiator recognize that the
program is effectively a null operation if so
specified. Of course, still perform any JCL functions
like dataset allocation and deletion.


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This electronic transmission (including any
accompanying attachments) is intended solely for its authorized
recipient(s), and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged
information.  If you are not an intended recipient, or responsible for
delivering some or all of this transmission to an intended recipient, be
aware that any review, copying, printing, distribution, use or
disclosure of
the contents of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you have
received
this electronic message in error, please contact us immediately by
electronic mail at [EMAIL PROTECTED] or notify us
immediately by telephone at 1-800-345-2021 or 816-531-5575 and destroy
the
original and all copies of this transmission (including any
attachments).
Thank you.

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Martin Kline]

> Why code the special case?
> What we have works; why complicate it with special code paths?

Why do anything? DOS 1.0 worked, too.


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This electronic transmission (including any
accompanying attachments) is intended solely for its authorized
recipient(s), and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged
information.  If you are not an intended recipient, or responsible for
delivering some or all of this transmission to an intended recipient, be
aware that any review, copying, printing, distribution, use or disclosure of
the contents of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you have received
this electronic message in error, please contact us immediately by
electronic mail at [EMAIL PROTECTED] or notify us
immediately by telephone at 1-800-345-2021 or 816-531-5575 and destroy the
original and all copies of this transmission (including any attachments).
Thank you.

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Martin Kline]

> Is this just noise or do you seriously expect
> IBM to implement this?

It's a serious suggestion, but I do not expect IBM to
give it serious consideration. There's no money to make.


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This electronic transmission (including any
accompanying attachments) is intended solely for its authorized
recipient(s), and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged
information.  If you are not an intended recipient, or responsible for
delivering some or all of this transmission to an intended recipient, be
aware that any review, copying, printing, distribution, use or disclosure of
the contents of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you have received
this electronic message in error, please contact us immediately by
electronic mail at [EMAIL PROTECTED] or notify us
immediately by telephone at 1-800-345-2021 or 816-531-5575 and destroy the
original and all copies of this transmission (including any attachments).
Thank you.

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Ted MacNEIL]

...
Just have the initiator recognize that the
program is effectively a null operation if so
specified.
...

Why code the special case?
What we have works; why complicate it with special code paths?


-teD

In God we Trust!
All others bring data!
  --Deming

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Ted MacNEIL]

>Why hasn't IBM come out with a JCL option that says, "There is no
program, >just set return code zero?"  It could avoid all the setup for
calling >IEFBR14 - LOAD, DELETE, RB setup, save area, recovery, etc.

...
Eh?

IEFBR14 is simpler to maintain than a special case in JCL processing 
(especially with two JES sub-systems)


-teD

In God we Trust!
All others bring data!
  --Deming

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Bob Shannon]

>Please reread my suggestion. It says nothing about
>IEBGENER. I also wouldn't expect anyone to eliminate
>IEFBR14. Just have the initiator recognize that the
>program is effectively a null operation if so
>specified. Of course, still perform any JCL functions
>like dataset allocation and deletion.

I will modify my comment. Is this just noise or do you seriously expect
IBM to implement this?

Bob Shannon

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Martin Kline]

>> Why hasn't IBM come out with a JCL option that
>> says, "There is no program, just set return code
>> zero?"  It could avoid all the setup for calling
>> IEFBR14 - LOAD, DELETE, RB setup, save area,
>> recovery, etc.

>Is this comment just noise or do you seriously expect
>IBM to change/eliminate IEBGENER?

Please reread my suggestion. It says nothing about
IEBGENER. I also wouldn't expect anyone to eliminate
IEFBR14. Just have the initiator recognize that the
program is effectively a null operation if so
specified. Of course, still perform any JCL functions
like dataset allocation and deletion.


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This electronic transmission (including any
accompanying attachments) is intended solely for its authorized
recipient(s), and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged
information.  If you are not an intended recipient, or responsible for
delivering some or all of this transmission to an intended recipient, be
aware that any review, copying, printing, distribution, use or disclosure of
the contents of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you have received
this electronic message in error, please contact us immediately by
electronic mail at [EMAIL PROTECTED] or notify us
immediately by telephone at 1-800-345-2021 or 816-531-5575 and destroy the
original and all copies of this transmission (including any attachments).
Thank you.

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Bob Shannon]

>Why hasn't IBM come out with a JCL option that says, "There is no
program, >just set return code zero?"  It could avoid all the setup for
calling >IEFBR14 - LOAD, DELETE, RB setup, save area, recovery, etc.

 

Is this comment just noise or do you seriously expect IBM to
change/eliminate IEBGENER?

 

Bob Shannon

 


--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Martin Kline]

> IEFBR14 already does as near to nothing as possible
> (SR R15,R15   BR R14

Why hasn't IBM come out with a JCL option that says, "There is no
program, just set return code zero?"  It could avoid all the setup for
calling IEFBR14 - LOAD, DELETE, RB setup, save area, recovery,
etc.


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This electronic transmission (including any
accompanying attachments) is intended solely for its authorized
recipient(s), and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged
information.  If you are not an intended recipient, or responsible for
delivering some or all of this transmission to an intended recipient, be
aware that any review, copying, printing, distribution, use or disclosure of
the contents of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you have received
this electronic message in error, please contact us immediately by
electronic mail at [EMAIL PROTECTED] or notify us
immediately by telephone at 1-800-345-2021 or 816-531-5575 and destroy the
original and all copies of this transmission (including any attachments).
Thank you.

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Ted MacNEIL]

...
Yes, I realize IEFBR14 doesn't actually do 
allocation/creation/deletion/catalog/uncatalog.
The INTIATOR/TERMINATOR process the dispostion on the DD statements and calls 
other system routines to accomplish this. But many people use it to for this 
purpose.
...

I do too. I didn't intend to talk down, but I know many APPDEV-types
who think of this as the only way
to create/delete.
What do they think the master/merge files in their
COBOL programmes are doing with the same DISP statements?

-teD

In God we Trust!
All others bring data!
  --Deming

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Richard Peurifoy]

Ted MacNEIL wrote:


..
IEFBR14 already does as near to nothing as possible (SR R15,R15   BR 
R14,   well I guess you

could remove the SR but that wouln't save much).
..

IEFBR14 used to not have the SR instruction, but then the contents
of R15 were causing problems because that was/is the RC.

So, IEFBR14 became the only programme to double in size because of a
PTS/APAR.

By the way, the programme doesn't do allocation.
It's just a placeholder for the initiator (in simple terms).

 

Yes, I realize IEFBR14 doesn't actually do 
allocation/creation/deletion/catalog/uncatalog.
The INTIATOR/TERMINATOR process the dispostion on the DD statements and 
calls
other system routines to accomplish this. But many people use it to for 
this purpose.


Richard

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Frank Yaeger]

Abbacabba wrote:
>We have switched to ICEGENER over the IEB version and I was wondering
>if any type of replacement or better program existed for these two.

DFSORT's ICEGENER is a better replacement for IEBGENER.  It uses
DFSORT copy when possible and uses IEBGENER when necessary
(e.g. when IEBGENER control statements are specified).

Frank Yaeger - DFSORT Team (IBM)
 Specialties: ICETOOL, IFTHEN, OVERLAY, Symbols, Migration
 => DFSORT/MVS is on the Web at http://www.ibm.com/storage/dfsort/

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Steve Grimes]

Re:  SR  R15,R15

Wouldn't XR  R15,R15 have been more efficient?  Or are 32 bit subtractions 
now single cycle instructions?

(Just curious.)

Stg

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Ted MacNEIL]

...
IEFBR14 already does as near to nothing as possible (SR R15,R15   BR 
R14,   well I guess you
could remove the SR but that wouln't save much).
...

IEFBR14 used to not have the SR instruction, but then the contents
of R15 were causing problems because that was/is the RC.

So, IEFBR14 became the only programme to double in size because of a
PTS/APAR.

By the way, the programme doesn't do allocation.
It's just a placeholder for the initiator (in simple terms).

-teD

In God we Trust!
All others bring data!
  --Deming

--
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

Re: Highly used programs: any better replacements out there? IDCAMS, IEFBR14

[Richard Peurifoy]

IEFBR14 already does as near to nothing as possible (SR R15,R15   BR 
R14,   well I guess you
could remove the SR but that wouln't save much). It is also in LPA, so 
you don't even have to
load it when you run it. Many people use this to create/delete 
datasets.  The only thing I think
you can do is move what ever DD cards are use to other steps so that you 
don't use IEFBR14
at all. This may not allways be feasable, and I doubt it is woth the 
trouble anyway. Why do you
care what program is run most often any way? If it is not a big resource 
user what difference

does it make.

As to IDCAMS, I am supprised it is a big CPU user, but without knowing 
what is being
done by it, or what other programs you run it is hard to say if this is 
a problem. Depending
on what it is being used for, their may or may not be replacements 
available.


Richard



Abbacabba wrote:


At my shop I have been pulling usage stats and IDCAMS is always our #1
CPU user right after 2 custom programs.

IEFBR14 is one of our most USED program with ~1500 uses a day.


We have switched to ICEGENER over the IEB version and I was wondering
if any type of replacement or better program existed for these two.


I know the request is very broad and the details weak, if anyone would
like me to see just how IDCAMS is being used and post that I will
tomorrow.


Thank you,
John F.

 



--
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