IBM Power Ideas Portal
This portal is to open public enhancement requests against IBM Power Systems products, including IBM i. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com).
Shape the future of IBM!
We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:
Search existing ideas
Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,
Post your ideas
Post an idea.
Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.
Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.
Specific links you will want to bookmark for future use
Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal (https://www.ibm.com/ideas) - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.
IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com) - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM.
ideasibm@us.ibm.com - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.
Hi team,
Sorry, wrong use case.
The real use case I am talking about is the fact that when moving to a remote manager (i.e. not on local system), we need some objects (*PGM, *CMD, display files) to allow users running their jobs.
So currently, when we have the full installed product on the system, the objects are accessible to the job by its library list.
But if we switch to remote managing, there are no locally installed objects needed.
The idea is that the managing service job will create those objects (restore from SAVF) onto its QTEMP, then submit the user job with all these objects accessible to the user programs in that job's QTEMP.
Users doesn't have to change programs, we can provide the objects they need.
Thanks
Arbel
Hi team,
I am well aware of the risks, but the benefits are great as well.
And as I mentioned, there must be a switch to do this, with a default like today (no copy).
By SBMJOB new parameter, or by ENVVAR.
On other platforms like Linux that have many options for kind of remote service jobs to prepare an environment before spawning user process that uses these files.
Like they build a wrapper script that first read the environments and prepare the spawned job environment.
With IBM i SBMJOB, we can't tell the command within the SBMJOB to prepare an environment from somewhere.
All that will execute is the command of the SBMJOB, no wrapper, no nothing.
Please reconsider
Thanks
There are many programs that create objects into QTEMP with the understanding that it is scoped to a job and copying the object to another job's QTEMP may have unintended consequences. Initialization may be bypassed if the object already exists, cached data may be dirty, indicators may be inaccurate, etc. A single switch to indicate whether to copy or not still applies to all objects within the QTEMP (it's not like you can pick and choose only the objects scoped to an application, for example). For these reasons I am declining the request.
IBM Power Systems Development