Re: An equivalent of JCL's DUMMY parm

[Mark Lazarus <mlazarus@xxxxxxxx>]

Dan,

At 11:06 PM 9/23/98 -0500, you wrote:
>
>I had an ex-mainframe developer ask me today if the 400 has an equivalent
>of the DUMMY parameter.  My only thought was to use QTEMP, but that may
>not solve the problem.
>
>According to the developer, there was a JCL statement that read:
>
>//DDNAME1 DD DUMMY
>
>where DUMMY meant for the system to ignore writes to whatever was
>assigned to DUMMY.  
>
>The need is to save DASD during testing without corrupting the original
>code.  My suggestion of QTEMP may fall short, because (I suspect) a write
>to a QTEMP file, while destroyed at the end of the job/session, still uses
>the DASD while the job runs.  The site I am at is a little short on DASD
>and knocking on the 90% threshhold.
>
>Is there a way to ignore all writes to a file via a CL command (probably
>some type of OVRDBF) ???

 Yes.  Look at the INHWRT( *YES / *NO ) parm of the OVRDBF command.  Just
understand that there is a potential for the test not to be valid, i.e. if
the next processsing step of a job is depending on the output of the prior
step.

 -mark

+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---