|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
mchanapa
New User
Joined: 17 Nov 2011
Posts: 36
Location: India
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I have a requirement to start two steps simultaneously in a single JCL.
Kindly let me know.
Regards,
Kishore ch. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Pandora-Box
Global Moderator
.jpg)
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1592
Location: Andromeda Galaxy
|
|
|
|
Do you mean
Job zzz has 2 steps and you wanted them to execute parallely once zzzz is submitted ?
But if you could explain what you are trying to achieve someone could help |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
expat
Global Moderator
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 8797
Location: Welsh Wales
|
|
|
|
Can't be done in the way you want to do it.
However, you can parallel run two jobs together, where JOB1 feeds data to JOB2, however the software required does not come free from IBM. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Sample
Global Moderator
Joined: 06 Jun 2008
Posts: 8696
Location: Dubuque, Iowa, USA
|
|
|
|
| A job executes sequentially -- step 1 is followed by step 2 is followed by step 3 .... There is no way to change this behavior, hence as has been stated what you wanted to do is not possible -- PERIOD. As expat indicates, though, it can be done via multiple jobs -- but not in a z/OS system straight out of the box (so to speak); other software is needed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
daveporcelan
Active Member
Joined: 01 Dec 2006
Posts: 792
Location: Pennsylvania
|
|
|
|
I know everyone here loves to be technical.....
Is a JCL the same as a JOB?
Back in my day a JCL would refer to a 'deck' of punch cards that could contain many JOB cards.
In fact we would load a huge JCL deck into the card reader with that nights schedule, all Jobs were TYPRUN=HOLD. We would release them from the input queue as needed.
With that being said, the JCL could look like this:
| Code: |
//XXXJOB1 JOB (&SYSUID,TEST,350-751),CLASS=Q,MSGCLASS=Z,
// NOTIFY=&SYSUID
//*
//STEP1 EXEC PGM=IEFBR14,
// ACCT=(XXX,TEST,260-300)
//*
//XXXJOB2 JOB (&SYSUID,TEST,350-751),CLASS=Q,MSGCLASS=Z,
// NOTIFY=&SYSUID
//*
//STEP2 EXEC PGM=IEFBR14,
// ACCT=(XXX,TEST,260-300)
//* |
The Jobs would be submitted to JES sequentially, but would probably run at the same time, with different names if there were enough initiators available.
Just some thoughts... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anuj Dhawan
Superior Member
Joined: 22 Apr 2006
Posts: 6250
Location: Mumbai, India
|
|
|
|
| Let's assume the almight had made this happen - what will you achieve out of it? I don't seem to guess good, can you please help? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dick scherrer
Moderator Emeritus
Joined: 23 Nov 2006
Posts: 19244
Location: Inside the Matrix
|
|
|
|
Hello,
Why does someone believe there is such a requirement . . .  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
daveporcelan
Active Member
Joined: 01 Dec 2006
Posts: 792
Location: Pennsylvania
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| Why does someone believe there is such a requirement . . . |
My bet is that this related to the other thread about two jobs with the same name....
Both TS are on a 'treasure hunt'. The first to come up with the answer, wins the prize.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
enrico-sorichetti
Superior Member
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 10873
Location: italy
|
|
|
|
nope
not the same TS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dick scherrer
Moderator Emeritus
Joined: 23 Nov 2006
Posts: 19244
Location: Inside the Matrix
|
|
|
|
Hi Dave,
I believe the "other" thread has mis-spoken in the sugject. There is no need for both running at the same time. It just needs a way to determine which of 2 is to be run.
The same may apply here . . . |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Terry Heinze
JCL Moderator
Joined: 14 Jul 2008
Posts: 1249
Location: Richfield, MN, USA
|
|
|
|
| enrico-sorichetti wrote: |
nope
not the same TS |
... or the same Thread Starter with 2 different user names. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
daveporcelan
Active Member
Joined: 01 Dec 2006
Posts: 792
Location: Pennsylvania
|
|
|
|
Just seems to much of coincidence to me.
Very similar 'requirements'.
Also looks like one of those cases where the 'solution' comes before the design. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
