|
Jim, Do a WRKACTJOB SBS(QSYSWRK) and take a look at the number of jobs running there nowdays. My guess is it has to do with the number of jobs running in QSYSWRK. With a full complement of TCP/IP stuff running in QSYSWRK, they probably felt it was time to move that workload to another subsystem. Thus the SBS QUSRWRK. <hth> Regards, Mike Shaw -------------- Original message -------------- > I do wonder why IBM chose qusrwrk and not qsyswrk? > jim >
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
midrange.com
