In today’s IT environment, it is still common for enterprises to use two or more job schedulers – one for the mainframe and another for the remainder of the enterprise. This practice stems from the belief that mainframe-specific schedulers are superior to those that offer centralized control and automation for both the mainframe and the entire enterprise.
The following are some key misconceptions regarding legacy mainframe schedulers that often lead IT managers to believe they need to maintain two schedulers at once.
- Myth 1: A mainframe-specific scheduler is the most reliable solution for managing mainframe jobs. But actually a mainframe scheduler is limited, whereas an enterprise scheduler can be relied on to process any job throughout the entire enterprise. And: It can be implemented for non-stop operations while improving scalability across any number of CPUs and physical servers.
- Myth 2: A mainframe-specific scheduler is the most stable solution for managing mainframe jobs. In fact, an enterprise job scheduler allows the most stable scheduling by providing visibility and control – for the entire enterprise – in one location. Processes can constantly be monitored and the manager can be assured that everything is running properly through a centralized GUI.
- Myth 3: Using a mainframe-specific scheduler keeps business-critical jobs under control. But what about the business-critical jobs which are not kept on the mainframe? There is no assurance that the mainframe scheduler can see the job through to its end if the job is integrated across the entire enterprise. An enterprise-wide scheduler can monitor all business-critical jobs across an enterprise, ensuring completion.
What about you? Wanna add some more?