Sean Gleann wrote: >2. I was not specific enough in my original query. You say that zHPF should >work automagically with BSAM, etc. Apologies for my oversight here, but >what we're looking for is information on creating a channel program that >uses TCWs as opposed to CCWs (our software generates its own channel >programs).
I would refer you to the "front door": the IBM Z software vendor support team(s). I occasionally see the "back side" of such inquiries, though. As another software vendor's example (a vendor that has been down this path, successfully), in this paper SAS Institute discusses the results they obtained when they exploit zHPF: https://support.sas.com/resources/papers/proceedings15/SAS1715-2015.pdf Adding some color to Ed's remarks (taken note of/cannot vouch for), there are occasions when IBM doesn't document particular interfaces for various reasons. A common reason is IBM's fear of interface volatility, but I don't know in this case. Although here's some wild speculation (frequently dangerous, especially when uninformed :-)).... "Smarter I/O" is a general trend. For example, z/OS Data Set Encryption is available and super important, and it might have something to do with IBM's conservatism here. This z/OS encryption/decryption is application transparent -- IBM handles it "automagically" -- but not when you're creating your own channel programs. If you haven't done it already, it'll be your job to implement and maintain encryption/decryption in some way hopefully consistent with IBM's implementation. Lately compression, too (zEDC/Integrated Accelerator for zEDC). - - - - - - - - - - Timothy Sipples I.T. Architect Executive Digital Asset & Other Industry Solutions IBM Z & LinuxONE - - - - - - - - - - E-Mail: sipp...@sg.ibm.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
