I saw your response for CTG or MQ. I want to know which one would be better from performance (both CICS and mainframe performance and overall performance of the system) point of view.If the application is let us say, EJB based, the call to CICS programs comes from a session bean (synchronous) and the bean (client) waits for the response from the CICS program to proceed further. In this scenario which one would be more performing -- CTG or MQ based solution?
I don't really accept that performance is the issue here, it's UnitOfWork and associated considerations. However, in overall terms I expect it should cost less to use a CTG than MQ but don't forget the accounting is done in a lot of places so the calculation will be difficult.
CICS Technical Strategist -- CICS expert at Search390.com
Editor's note: Do you agree with this expert's response? If you have more to share, post it in one of our .VO7aaqqaAFk.0@/search390>discussion forums.
Dig Deeper on IBM system z and mainframe systems
Related Q&A from Robert Crawford
For better mainframe capacity planning, how do I convert CPU hours to MIPS? And is there a way to calculate the relationship between MIPS and MSUs? Continue Reading
I have two years of experience in mainframe technology, currently working as a mainframe developer. I want to change to Java technology. Continue Reading
I want to replicate DB2 from the mainframe to an AIX box since it's cheaper and the copy can be used for testing. Is this possible? Continue Reading