|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
Ravi GA
New User
Joined: 20 Mar 2020
Posts: 12
Location: India
|
|
|
|
Hi Experts,
The ACS filter lists at our shop is growing huge, and we want to rearrange the entries in the filter list in an efficient way i.e the entries that are successfully compared against more number of times should be at the top. Is there a way to obtain the statistics on comparison operations(successful and unsuccessful) being performed against each entry in the filter lists which could help us rearrange the filter list entries efficiently? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joerg.Findeisen
Senior Member
Joined: 15 Aug 2015
Posts: 1243
Location: Bamberg, Germany
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Apoorva
New User
Joined: 28 Jan 2020
Posts: 49
Location: India
|
|
|
|
I don't think ACS exit would be of any help here. ACS exits get control at the end of ACS routine execution. Using ACS exits you could 1. Override the constructs selected by ACS routines 2. Change READ-ONLY fields, and re-drive ACS routine execution. ACS exit will not get control during execution of ACS routines. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ravi GA
New User
Joined: 20 Mar 2020
Posts: 12
Location: India
|
|
|
|
Apologize for the delay. Thanks for the suggestions. But I haven't worked on exits before. Yes the routines are getting way too complicated. Need to figure out a way to handle it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joerg.Findeisen
Senior Member
Joined: 15 Aug 2015
Posts: 1243
Location: Bamberg, Germany
|
|
|
|
| Have a look at using DFP Segments for selection. If you use RACF Group, and in rare cases User assignments, you can give your ACS a lift up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Apoorva
New User
Joined: 28 Jan 2020
Posts: 49
Location: India
|
|
|
|
| Ravi GA wrote: |
Apologize for the delay. Thanks for the suggestions. But I haven't worked on exits before. Yes the routines are getting way too complicated. Need to figure out a way to handle it. |
I can understand how complicated it can become. On one of the shops that I worked for, a person had apparently made some SMS enhancements using which we could have many sets of active ACS routines in a live allocation environment (Not just the ACS routines that we activate from ACDS). There were 8 really huge applications, and this facility would invoke separate sets of ACS routines for each of those 8 huge applications, and all other allocations would go through the ACS routines activated using ACDS. With this facility, we had a lot of flexibility, and we had the advantage of not complicating our ACS routines. I was just using that facility, and never really understood how it worked. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ravi GA
New User
Joined: 20 Mar 2020
Posts: 12
Location: India
|
|
|
|
| Interesting to know that you could have multiple ACS routines active for different applications. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pete Wilson
Active Member
Joined: 31 Dec 2009
Posts: 580
Location: London
|
|
|
|
Which of your ACS routines are having these huge FILTLIST's? Are the FILTLIST's full of dataset names or what?
Often there's opportunities to use Jobname, DDnames and PGM as an alternative, or possibly in combination so the DSN's can be more generic masks. &DSTYPE is also useful.
In most cases the MGMTCLAS ACS routine has to be the most complex as that determines the lifecycle of the dataset and how it is managed. STORCLAS should be relatively simple as the only considerations these days really are if it needs to be Guaranteed_Space or RLS enabled, otherwise it would be a standard Storclas. Striping has no real benefit anymore in modern DASD controllers. DATACLAS can have code to allow Users to chose their Dataclas which would cover the majority, but some assignments might be made for things like LLQ or TAPE allocations. STORGRP can be quite simple if using things like Storclas and Mgmtclas to do the assignments. You shouldn't need lists of dataset names or masks most of the time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
