This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofcomputers,computing, andinformation technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
Support. I'm late to the party, but this article seems hopelessly jumbled and doesn't have much info on JES3. A reader who didn't know anything about the topic would be hopelessly confused. I think there's a lot of material that could be added for both JESs.Peter Flass (talk)00:35, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I would tend to agree. There are enough differences between JES2 and JES3 that they really ought to be split into separate articles. --kewlgrapes (talk)04:51, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support. However, I would suggest as a first step changing the name toMVS Job Entry Subsystems and adding these sections:
That sounds like a good idea. A little organization would go a long way. Adding more information for each JES would provide additional justification for separating them into individual articles. I'm going to go ahead and remove the tag from the article for now and do some expansion/organization in the coming weeks. --kewlgrapes (talk,contribs)21:37, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
While the initial versions of ASP were called Attached Support Processor, theimmediate precursor to JES3 was called Asymmetric Multiprocessor. SeeIBM,IBM System/360 and System/370 Asymmetric Multiprocessing System: General Information Manual, Program Number 360A-CX-15X, GH20-1173.
The current text mentions the Converter but not the Interpreter. JES2 calls the Interpreter in a separate stage and writes the control blocks to SPOOL. JES3 call the Interpreter as part of the Execution stage. Would this be TMI?Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk)
In my opinion, the difference is an idiosyncrasy that probably wouldn't be interesting to most readers. Of course, if there are profound implications of the difference (I am not aware of any), then it'd certainly warrant a mention in the article. --kewlgrapes (talk,contribs)21:32, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Just jotting down some things that I'd like to see improve with this article.
Need to add inline refs for a lot of unsourced claims
History section is OK, but it'd be nice to include some info about JES2/JES3 in the modern era, e.g. a "Current development" section.
Currently the article is just an intro and history. We should talk about the core features of "a" JES, as well as the features that differentiate JES2 and JES3 - as mentioned above in the merge discussion. These days JES does more than just batch job processing.
I think a section that goes more in-depth on job processing would be useful. Along with that, I'd really like to see some examples such as what a job looks like (JCL), various commands, maybe even screenshots of some panels in SDSF?
We need to establish notability better. Anyone who has used a mainframe knows how important JES2/JES3 are for getting work done, but I think the average person would read this article and think "who cares?" One thing we could do is to mention cases where there have been outages due to JES-related problems. These events tend to get substantial media coverage.
I'd really like to see some pictures/diagrams in the article. Job processing would be good to have a diagram for. It'd be great if we could add some pictures of the various buttons that people used to wear at SHARE to proclaim their allegiance to either of the two JESes. :)
Also, I've basically flooded the article history with various edits - most of them minor formatting/organization stuff. I want to give people a chance to review my changes before I move ahead with any of the above. --kewlgrapes (talk,contribs)09:02, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Some comments, in no particular order:
There probably should be an article on the MVS SubSystem Interface (SSI), referenced from the MVS JES article.
Thanks for the comments. We should definitely mention the SSI in this article. Not sure if there's enough info/notability for it to have its own article, though. The "MSTR" subsystem is mentioned in the introduction. Is that what you mean by the "Master JES"?
Stumbled upon this document today while looking for some references. Might be some interesting stuff in here to include in the article. If nothing else, it's interesting read.[1] --kewlgrapes (talk,contribs)05:02, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The following is a closed discussion of arequested move.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider amove reviewafter discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The discussion above is closed.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
