JES2 Dynamic Proclibs - Advantages?
Rabbe, Luke
My shop uses static concatenations. We haven't needed to change the proclib concatenations in several years and JCL can be used to rebuild JES2's pointers if needed. I'd like to convert to dynamic proclibs because it seems more modern and cooler. But I wonder if it's really necessary for my installation and maybe I'd just be doing work for work's sake.
Any opinions? Am I missing some benefits?
Luke Rabbe
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to list...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
drdoom6118
wrote:
> I know that using dynamic proclibs gives you the ability to change the proclib concatenations dynamically and also the ability to rebuild pointers if a library has gone into extents or been compressed.
>
> My shop uses static concatenations. We haven't needed to change the proclib concatenations in several years and JCL can be used to rebuild JES2's pointers if needed. I'd like to convert to dynamic proclibs because it seems more modern and cooler. But I wonder if it's really necessary for my installation and maybe I'd just be doing work for work's sake.
>
> Any opinions? Am I missing some benefits?
>
> Luke Rabbe
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> Search the archives athttp://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Luke,
To me, the biggest advantage is the ability to have a JES2 proc
without any of the proclib DDs that are there now. Which provides a
powerful degree of insulation between datasets going missing and the
ability of the JES2 proc to get through allocation and give JES2 a
chance to come up.
Net, in a dynamic Proclib environment, if HASPPARM will allocate, then
that's likely the only dataset-related DD in the proc, and so JES2
will start. And TSO will work and from there all things are
fixable.
As opposed to trying to figure out what symbolic overrides exist in
the JES2 proc (which you can't currently see) which might allow JES
to be brought up. That's such a depressing place to be.
My two cents, for what they're worth.
McKown, John
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:IBM-...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Rabbe, Luke
> Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 7:54 AM
> To: IBM-...@bama.ua.edu
> Subject: JES2 Dynamic Proclibs - Advantages?
>
> I know that using dynamic proclibs gives you the ability to
> change the proclib concatenations dynamically and also the
> ability to rebuild pointers if a library has gone into
> extents or been compressed.
>
> My shop uses static concatenations. We haven't needed to
> change the proclib concatenations in several years and JCL
> can be used to rebuild JES2's pointers if needed. I'd like
> to convert to dynamic proclibs because it seems more modern
> and cooler. But I wonder if it's really necessary for my
> installation and maybe I'd just be doing work for work's sake.
>
> Any opinions? Am I missing some benefits?
>
> Luke Rabbe
I did it. Why? Because we had some __USER__ proclibs in PROC00. What happens if they are deleted? JES2 stays up, but fails at the next IPL. With dynamic PROCLIB, JES2 will come up, but with error messages about what was missing. You can then manually enter the dynamic PROCLIB statements, ignoring the missing PROCLIB and continue processing. That's the only reason that I did it.
--
John McKown
Systems Engineer IV
IT
Administrative Services Group
HealthMarkets(r)
9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010
(817) 255-3225 phone * (817)-961-6183 cell
john....@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM
Mark Zelden
<luke....@COUNTRYFINANCIAL.COM> wrote:
>I know that using dynamic proclibs gives you the ability to change the
proclib concatenations dynamically and also the ability to rebuild pointers
if a library has gone into extents or been compressed.
>
>My shop uses static concatenations. We haven't needed to change the
proclib concatenations in several years and JCL can be used to rebuild
JES2's pointers if needed. I'd like to convert to dynamic proclibs because
it seems more modern and cooler. But I wonder if it's really necessary for
my installation and maybe I'd just be doing work for work's sake.
>
>Any opinions? Am I missing some benefits?
>
IMO the best benefit is the removal of the possibility of JCL error during
JES2 start because someone moved or deleted a proclib. Remember,
JES2 by default doesn't ENQ on the PROCLIBs and also PROCLIB data sets
not in the master catalog may have their volser coded. So they could
be accidentally deleted or perhaps moved by someone who didn't realize
the impact (I'm sure we could start a war stories thread here, but let's not).
With dynamic proclibs JES2 will still start and tell you about the problem
if it can't find one of the libraries. After you fix it you can issue a
$TPROCLIB(*) and it will attempt to reallocate the concatenation(s) per
the parms. This was helpful to us back when we did tape based disaster
recovery because some of the application PROCLIBs were not available
for a while after the base system was IPLed. Prior to dynamic proclibs a
different JES2 proc was used at the start and then the application proclibs
were added after they were restored and JES2 was recycled.
Cheers,
Mark
--
Mark Zelden
Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead
Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO
mailto:mark....@zurichna.com
z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/
Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html
Lizette Koehler
reallocate/compress it and cause JES2 to fail.
The other process I like my end users to use is JCLLIB dd statement. Then
they have complete control and do not need me to handle their proclib
datasets. They are responsible for backup and recovery of their proclibs at
least for their test ones. I still do dfdss dumps of all prod datasets so
that would include their production proclibs..
I have my JES2 proc down to mostly SYSTEM proclibs and only one production
proclib dataset.
Lizette
> I know that using dynamic proclibs gives you the ability to change the
proclib
> concatenations dynamically and also the ability to rebuild pointers if a
library has gone
> into extents or been compressed.
>
> My shop uses static concatenations. We haven't needed to change the
proclib
> concatenations in several years and JCL can be used to rebuild JES2's
pointers if
> needed. I'd like to convert to dynamic proclibs because it seems more
modern and
> cooler. But I wonder if it's really necessary for my installation and
maybe I'd just be
> doing work for work's sake.
>
> Any opinions? Am I missing some benefits?
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
John P Kalinich
wrote on 11/23/2009 07:54:28 AM:
> I know that using dynamic proclibs gives you the ability to change
> the proclib concatenations dynamically and also the ability to
> rebuild pointers if a library has gone into extents or been compressed.
>
> My shop uses static concatenations. We haven't needed to change the
> proclib concatenations in several years and JCL can be used to
> rebuild JES2's pointers if needed. I'd like to convert to dynamic
> proclibs because it seems more modern and cooler. But I wonder if
> it's really necessary for my installation and maybe I'd just be
> doing work for work's sake.
>
> Any opinions? Am I missing some benefits?
One benefit of JCLLIB might be reduced search time for a procedure.
Another might be documentation when looking for the source of the PROC.
Regards,
John K
Mark Zelden
>> I know that using dynamic proclibs gives you the ability to change
>> the proclib concatenations dynamically and also the ability to
>> rebuild pointers if a library has gone into extents or been compressed.
>>
>> My shop uses static concatenations. We haven't needed to change the
>> proclib concatenations in several years and JCL can be used to
>> rebuild JES2's pointers if needed. I'd like to convert to dynamic
>> proclibs because it seems more modern and cooler. But I wonder if
>> it's really necessary for my installation and maybe I'd just be
>> doing work for work's sake.
>>
>> Any opinions? Am I missing some benefits?
>
Several people responded about using JCLLIB. Just to be clear, JCLLIBs
have their advantages, but that is a different issue than converting
from static to dynamic PROCLIBs and requires JCL changes (especially
if the formerly static PROCLIBs are changed to dynamic definitions in JES2!).
Mark
--
Mark Zelden
Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead
Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO
mailto:mark....@zurichna.com
z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/
Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Zelden
wrote:
>On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 08:55:59 -0600, John P Kalinich <jkal...@CSC.COM> wrote:
>
>>> I know that using dynamic proclibs gives you the ability to change
>>> the proclib concatenations dynamically and also the ability to
>>> rebuild pointers if a library has gone into extents or been compressed.
>>>
>>> My shop uses static concatenations. We haven't needed to change the
>>> proclib concatenations in several years and JCL can be used to
>>> rebuild JES2's pointers if needed. I'd like to convert to dynamic
>>> proclibs because it seems more modern and cooler. But I wonder if
>>> it's really necessary for my installation and maybe I'd just be
>>> doing work for work's sake.
>>>
>>> Any opinions? Am I missing some benefits?
>>
>
>Several people responded about using JCLLIB. Just to be clear, JCLLIBs
>have their advantages, but that is a different issue than converting
>from static to dynamic PROCLIBs and requires JCL changes (especially
>if the formerly static PROCLIBs are changed to dynamic definitions in JES2!).
That should have been written "are NOT changed" to dynamic. :-(
Rabbe, Luke
Luke
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Rabbe, Luke
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 7:54 AM
To: IBM-...@bama.ua.edu
Subject: JES2 Dynamic Proclibs - Advantages?
Patrick Lyon
<luke....@COUNTRYFINANCIAL.COM> wrote:
>Thanks to all for the replies.
>Luke
>
I have a question if I may...
What happens if say there is a dynamic library in the concatenation missing at
JES startup? Does JES continue on notifying you of the missing library or does
it stop and make you re-enter the whole list again at the prompt like it does
when you have invalid syntax on one of the JES parmlib operands?
TIA,
PTL
Dennis Trojak
merry way. No responses necessary.
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-...@bama.ua.edu] On
Mark Zelden
or if you code UNCONDITIONAL. If you take the default, there will
be a JES2 message (not the TSO / DYNALLOC message) about the
allocation failure and you will get the standard $HASP469 parm error reply
message. See the JES2 init and tuning manual for more details.
There are pros/cons of each choice. If you have a way to
always fix the problem (from another system for example), you may
want "CONDITIONAL" so you find out about any surprises at IPL time and
not later when the phone rings if someone misses the IKJ56228I message -
which would be very easy to do with hundreds of messages scrolling by
at IPL time. Also, the entire statement is failed, which could mean no
PROCLIB concatenation at all and no way to start VTAM/TSO in order
to fix the problem easily. You can fix it via operator prompt input if you
can figure out the syntax. :-)
That being said, I still prefer UNCONDITIONAL to let JES2 start with the
PROCLIB concatenation minus the offending library. If it is an STC PROCLIB,
I'll find out soon enough. :-) If it is a user proclib, well, it's not that
critical
anyway and I can fix it later. <g,d & r>
Mark
--
Mark Zelden
Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead
Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO
mailto:mark....@zurichna.com
z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/
Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html
Patrick Lyon
Rick Fochtman
I did it. Why? Because we had some __USER__ proclibs in PROC00. What
happens if they are deleted? JES2 stays up, but fails at the next IPL.
With dynamic PROCLIB, JES2 will come up, but with error messages about
what was missing. You can then manually enter the dynamic PROCLIB
statements, ignoring the missing PROCLIB and continue processing. That's
the only reason that I did it.
That feature is also INCREDIBLY useful during a "Disaster Recovery"
scenario, when volumes might be incompletely or improperly recovered.
Saved our rears during the Chicago Flood of 1992! Evcen though the
feature was implemented vya JES2 exits and somewhat less than perfect.
:-) Bob R., I think you saw some of the last vestiges of this during
your "visit" at Clearing.
Rick
Richards, Robert B.
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Rick Fochtman
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 4:10 PM
To: IBM-...@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: JES2 Dynamic Proclibs - Advantages?