FWIW, I finally managed to cobble-up a Hartmann-like pipelines
implementation following the POSIX model.
HAVE NOT tested it on USS, but it presumably would work there.
It was announced at the VM Workshop last year as "pervasive plumbing",
providing similar functionality to CMS Pipelines but for platforms other
than z/VM.
The downside is a dearth of stages, where CMS Pipelines has more than
200 (similar for TSO Pipelines). The worst miss is the SPEC stage, which
we're working on (when the day job does not consume all time and energy).
Like Phil says, many "haven't really seen the power", especially those
who are only familiar with shell pipes (like the Linux/Unix masses at
whom this project is targeted, but also users of shell pipes in USS).
As for COBOL, the project includes a sample COBOL stage. Stages can be
written in any language and run as separate processes, much like shell
pipes (but with proper record boundaries and flow control).
*I say "Hartmann-like" because CMS/TSO Pipelines was originated by John
Hartmann, then with IBM, and to distinguish from other designs.
-- R; <><
On 9/8/25 6:39 PM, Phil Smith III wrote:
Sorry, but I don't think the evidence exists to support your assertion. TSO
Pipes were never generally available, so people didn't get to use them much.
That means we don't know whether they would have, but the huge uptake on CMS --
where the kinds of things that one tends to do with a Pipe are generally easier
to do than in TSO anyway -- suggests (does NOT prove) otherwise.
You saying "TSO PIPEs aren't useful" suggests to me that you haven't really
seen the power of Pipes. Many of us have written products that comprised mostly Pipes, or
condensed hundreds of lines of Rexx code down to a dozen-stage pipeline that ran orders
of magnitude faster.
Yes, COBOL might (sometimes!) be faster to run -- but is (generally) slower to
develop, debug, maintain. People's time is expensive...
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Jon
Perryman
Sent: Monday, September 8, 2025 5:05 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Pipelines = you don't understand z/OS
On Sun, 7 Sep 2025 18:24:29 -0500, Hobart Spitz <[email protected]> wrote:
Why haven't customers jumped on Pipes (CMS/TSO Pipelines), like they
should? Here are some possible answers:
Native TSO PIPEs existed but customers refused to buy it. z/OS Unix pipes has
nothing to do with TSO PIPEs. If today, you absolutely needed pipes in TSO,
then use z/OS Unix pipes despite it's downside.
I repeat, TSO PIPEs aren't useful otherwise it would still exist. It appears no
one noticed it's demise. There are better ways to solve problems that people
perceive CMS PIPEs is supposed to address.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
--
-- R; <><
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
