In
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
on 04/18/2006
at 12:57 PM, "Schramm, Rob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>I wonder if IBM would consider providing a USERMOD that would perform
>symbol conversion on the system that the job actually executes (thus
>preserving the "just like a started task")
There's more invo
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on
04/18/2006
at 12:33 PM, "Kittendorf, Craig"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>System symbols are also allowed in "started jobs" which are similar
>to "started tasks."
Also APPC and LOGON, for APPC transactions and TSO session logons.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, Sys
On Apr 19, 2006, at 11:30 PM, Tom Schmidt wrote:
--SNIP--
Ed,
Chris' very recent post reminded me of the other issue(s). There's a
fundamental difference between the started task use of static
symbols and
the batch job use of static
I don't think it's mostly about dates and times in the dataset names (at
least my original post wasn't), but dates and times should be a separate
discussion.
Since date and time of dataset creation are not system-dependent, the OS
could supply variables and code to substitute for values in th
> -Original Message-
> From: "Ted MacNEIL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 20:30:58
> To:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Static Symbols in JCL
>
< snip >
> Here are a couple scenarios:
>
> 1. Pick execution system. The
Gibney, Dave wrote:
As a small, really small, system supporter, I think a PARMLIB driven
option with a "fail by JCL error" (YES/NO) option if execution system is
different than "resolving" system would permit most of the requested
function (It's almost always time/date in dataset names) witho
nal Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Craddock, Chris
> Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2006 8:16 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Static Symbols in JCL
>
> Ed Gould writ
On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 22:35:56 -0500, Ed Gould wrote:
>On Apr 19, 2006, at 10:19 PM, Tom Schmidt wrote:
>>
>> Ed,
>>
>> I suspect that the reason for the rejected support was the fear
>> that they would/could add an impediment to system growth (and an
>> impediment to a mainframe sale). If they pro
On Apr 19, 2006, at 10:19 PM, Tom Schmidt wrote:
On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 21:26:31 -0500, Ed Gould wrote:
John,
Indeed there have been and like you said rejected. I am not sure
there was a reason for the rejection. If SHARE was doing their job
they should have sent it back requesting a reason, IMO.
On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 21:26:31 -0500, Ed Gould wrote:
>John,
>
>Indeed there have been and like you said rejected. I am not sure
>there was a reason for the rejection. If SHARE was doing their job
>they should have sent it back requesting a reason, IMO.
>
>I think a well written request with a parmli
Ed Gould writes;
> John Eells wrote:
> > ---SNIP---
> > There have been formal requests, all of which have been rejected.
> > Feel free to submit another one, of course.
>
> Indeed there have been and like you said rejected. I am not sure
> there
On Apr 19, 2006, at 12:17 PM, John Eells wrote:
---SNIP---
There have been formal requests, all of which have been rejected.
Feel free to submit another one, of course.
John,
Indeed there have been and like you said rejected. I am not su
This was supposed to go to the list.
The REPLYTO sent it elsewhere.
-
-teD
O-KAY! BLUE! JAYS!
Let's PLAY! BALL!
-Original Message-
From: "Ted MacNEIL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 20:30:58
To:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Static Symbols in JCL
&
On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:17:44 -0400, John Eells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ted MacNEIL wrote:
>
>> 4. I have heard a lot of bitching about this, for years. But, nobody (I
know of) has made a formal request.
>> That would be more productive.
>
>
>There have been formal requests, all of which have
On Wednesday 19 April 2006 13:23, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
> no matter how you set it (or allow the customer to set it),
> there will be issues.
Of course, there will be issues, but this type of argument can be used
to get rid of just about anything. For example, should IBM remove the
FORCE key
Being the OP for the 2006 version of this thread, I'll try to end it here
by saying that doing it through an exit is fine by me, now that services
to obtain the values have been pointed out to me. I don't know what
management's feelings are, vis-a-vis dwindling amount of Assembler and/or
exit
>There have been formal requests, all of which have been rejected.
No longer working for IBM, I wasn't aware of that.
I don't think it's an important (or valid request) myself.
Because, no matter how you set it (or allow the customer to set it), there will
be issues.
Can you tell us a definitive
Ted MacNEIL wrote:
Agreed. IBM should *not* make the unilateral decision that its users (either
single-image or multi-image) can't use system symbolics in their JCL. The
users themselves should be able to decide via a PARMLIB option and suffer the
consequences if they screw up.
1. IBM ha
>Agreed. IBM should *not* make the unilateral decision that its users (either
>single-image or multi-image) can't use system symbolics in their JCL. The
>users themselves should be able to decide via a PARMLIB option and suffer the
>consequences if they screw up.
1. IBM has made unilateral de
On Wednesday 19 April 2006 10:47, Neal Eckhardt wrote:
> IBM's official line (as interpreted by me) is that they'd rather
> not substitute at all than have half or more jobs having the "wrong"
> substitution (and half or more of the people complaining about it).
>
> Yea, but it's us non-sysp
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know I can't do it (having read the manual and some SHARE
presentations), but can someone clue me in about why I can use static
system symbols such as &SYSNAME in started task JCL but not regular batch
JCL?
I presume, since they are started tasks, that these variabl
It may be just me, but I could see a parameter in IEASYMxx (pseduo-doc
follows)
-
SYMRESLV= SUBMIT / CONVERT / INITIATE
- SYMRESLV determines where system symbols are resolved for an ordinary
batch job. Note that started tasks
fast..."
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Schramm, Rob
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 12:58 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Static Symbols in JCL
I wonder if IBM would consider providing a USERMOD that would perform
sym
I wonder if IBM would consider providing a USERMOD that would perform
symbol conversion on the system that the job actually executes (thus
preserving the "just like a started task")
Just a thought.
-Rob
This e-mail transmission contains information that is confidential and may be
privileged.
On 18 Apr 2006 08:59:32 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
(Message-ID:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know I can't do it (having read the manual and some
SHARE presentations), but can someone clue me in about why
I can use static system symbols such as &SYSNAME in
started task
>System symbols are also allowed in "started jobs" which are similar to
"started tasks."
I am aware of that.
I didn't ask the question.
I supplied an answer.
Also, is it supported under TSO?
I've forgotten.
-
-teD
O-KAY! BLUE! JAYS!
Let's PLAY! BALL!
--
Subject: Re: Static Symbols in JCL
>can someone clue me in about why I can use static
system symbols such as &SYSNAME in started task JCL but not regular
batch
JCL?
This has come up many times!
Started Tasks are guaranteed to run on the same system they are
submitted on.
The problem, in si
>can someone clue me in about why I can use static
system symbols such as &SYSNAME in started task JCL but not regular batch
JCL?
This has come up many times!
Started Tasks are guaranteed to run on the same system they are submitted on.
The problem, in simple terms, is which set of system symbo
Tim,
This has been discussed at great length in the archives in the past.
I think the complexity of the issue eludes those whose world is composed
of a single
LPAR running z/OS.
The considerations ar primarily to do with when and where the symbols are
resolved.
Do you resolve them on the s
I know I can't do it (having read the manual and some SHARE
presentations), but can someone clue me in about why I can use static
system symbols such as &SYSNAME in started task JCL but not regular batch
JCL?
I presume, since they are started tasks, that these variables are
available to my jo
30 matches
Mail list logo
