Pinned topic chrg vs. rgreq
do you use chrg to online or offline a resourcegroup,
or do you handle requests by rgreq?
We came from TSAfZOS, so we are used to request a resource offline and cancel the request for startup.
This supports nested groups and comments on every request.
I would like to start this discussion, as the last, good HOWTO lists chrg:
ThomasLumpp 120000EDEY1 Post
Re: chrg vs. rgreq2012-06-14T10:14:00ZThis is the accepted answer. This is the accepted answer.
- nukite8d 060001JV1D
Especially, when you use the adapter rgrequ needs to be used to avoid side effects that you do not want.
thomas.quadflieg 270001867X27 Posts
Re: chrg vs. rgreq2012-06-20T13:26:21ZThis is the accepted answer. This is the accepted answer.
- ThomasLumpp 120000EDEY
Gareth Holl 100000C8M72 Posts
Re: chrg vs. rgreq2013-04-19T14:47:16ZThis is the accepted answer. This is the accepted answer.
There are many customers that don't understand the concept of requests. Sure if you've come from a SA z/OS background, you are more likely to be request oriented. But that population seems small from the perspective of the customers I work with on a daily basis.
I found so many more problems (PMRs) because of customers trying to use requests incorrectly. Whether they are queuing multiple requests without knowing, using different priorities for each request, or the worst is the case where they use requests on individual resources instead of keeping it simple and limiting requests to the group level ... and they wonder why those individual requests don't change when they alter the group goal/request.
In my opinion, using Nominal state to set the automation "goal' is more natural given that TSAMP is a goal driven tool. I don't consider use of chrg the old way of doing it. In fact it is the most common practice, by far. Granted, those customers using TSAAM in conjunction with TSAMP would be more likely to exploit requests, but use of TSAAM with TSAMP is small in comparison to stand-alone TSAMP environments.
In the end, the difference depends on the environment and the user, but clearly chrg is still a valid option and the most common option. TSAMP Support will continue to push use of chrg because its easier for the novice user to comprehend and therefore will limit the number of PMRs generated.
Maybe we have DB2 HADR to blame for this ... but its the current reality in my world :-)
Re: chrg vs. rgreq2013-04-22T14:05:10ZThis is the accepted answer. This is the accepted answer.
- Gareth Holl 100000C8M7
thank you for the good summary.
So it really depends on the environment, you are automating.
And instead of calling chrg the "old way", we may call it the "beginner way" :)
I would say, the more you are using TSAMP (even without TSAAM) the more requests become reasonable.
Should there be a Documentation for "Extending use of TSAMP" or somelike, for interested users to explain the concepts of requests?