text:
CICS

IBM CICS (Customer Information Control System) is a family of mixed-language application servers that provide online transaction management and connectivity for applications on IBM mainframe systems under z/OS and z/VSE.

CICS family products are designed as middleware and support rapid, high-volume online transaction processing. A CICS transaction is a unit of processing initiated by a single request that may affect one or more objects. This processing is usually interactive (screen-oriented), but background transactions are possible.

CICS Transaction Server (CICS TS) sits at the head of the CICS family and provides services that extend or replace the functions of the operating system. These services can be more efficient than the generalized operating system services and also simpler for programmers to use, particularly with respect to communication with diverse terminal devices.

Applications developed for CICS may be written in a variety of programming languages and use CICS-supplied language extensions to interact with resources such as files, database connections, terminals, or to invoke functions such as web services. CICS manages the entire transaction such that if for any reason a part of the transaction fails all recoverable changes can be backed out.

While CICS TS has its highest profile among large financial institutions, such as banks and insurance companies, many Fortune 500 companies and government entities are reported to run CICS. Other, smaller enterprises can also run CICS TS and other CICS family products. CICS can regularly be found behind the scenes in, for example, bank-teller applications, ATM systems, industrial production control systems, insurance applications, and many other types of interactive applications.

Recent CICS TS enhancements include new capabilities to improve the developer experience, including the choice of APIs, frameworks, editors, and build tools, while at the same time providing updates in the key areas of security, resilience, and management. In earlier, recent CICS TS releases, support was provided for Web services and Java, event processing, Atom feeds, and RESTful interfaces.

History
CICS was preceded by an earlier, single-threaded transaction processing system, IBM MTCS. An 'MTCS-CICS bridge' was later developed to allow these transactions to execute under CICS with no change to the original application programs. IBM's Customer Information Control System (CICS), first developed in conjunction with Michigan Bell in 1966. Ben Riggins was an IBM systems engineer at Virginia Electric Power Co. when he came up with the idea for the online system.

CICS was originally developed in the United States out of the IBM Development Center in Des Plaines, Illinois, beginning in 1966 to address requirements from the public utility industry. The first CICS product was announced in 1968, named Public Utility Customer Information Control System, or PU-CICS. It became clear immediately that it had applicability to many other industries, so the Public Utility prefix was dropped with the introduction of the first release of the CICS Program Product on July 8, 1969, not long after IMS database management system.

For the next few years, CICS was developed in Palo Alto and was considered a less important "smaller" product than IMS which IBM then considered more strategic. Customer pressure kept it alive, however. When IBM decided to end development of CICS in 1974 to concentrate on IMS, the CICS development responsibility was picked up by the IBM Hursley site in the United Kingdom, which had just ceased work on the PL/I compiler and so knew many of the same customers as CICS. The core of the development work continues in Hursley today alongside contributions from labs in India, China, Russia, Australia, and the United States.

Early evolution
CICS originally only supported a few IBM-brand devices like the 1965 IBM 2741 Selectric (golf ball) typewriter-based terminal. The 1964 IBM 2260 and 1972 IBM 3270 video display terminals were widely used later.

In the early days of IBM mainframes, computer software was free – bundled at no extra charge with computer hardware. The OS/360 operating system and application support software like CICS were "open" to IBM customers long before the open-source software initiative. Corporations like Standard Oil of Indiana (Amoco) made major contributions to CICS.

The IBM Des Plaines team tried to add support for popular non-IBM terminals like the ASCII Teletype Model 33 ASR, but the small low-budget software development team could not afford the $100-per-month hardware to test it. IBM executives incorrectly felt that the future would be like the past, with batch processing using traditional punch cards.

IBM reluctantly provided only minimal funding when public utility companies, banks and credit-card companies demanded a cost-effective interactive system (similar to the 1965 IBM Airline Control Program used by the American Airlines Sabre computer reservation system) for high-speed data access-and-update to customer information for their telephone operators (without waiting for overnight batch processing punch card systems).

When CICS was delivered to Amoco with Teletype Model 33 ASR support, it caused the entire OS/360 operating system to crash (including non-CICS application programs). The majority of the CICS Terminal Control Program (TCP – the heart of CICS) and part of OS/360 had to be laboriously redesigned and rewritten by Amoco Production Company in Tulsa Oklahoma. It was then given back to IBM for free distribution to others.

In a few years, CICS generated over $60 billion in new hardware revenue for IBM, and became their most-successful mainframe software product.

In 1972, CICS was available in three versions – DOS-ENTRY (program number 5736-XX6) for DOS/360 machines with very limited memory, DOS-STANDARD (program number 5736-XX7), for DOS/360 machines with more memory, and OS-STANDARD V2 (program number 5734-XX7) for the larger machines which ran OS/360.

In early 1970, a number of the original developers, including Ben Riggins (the principal architect of the early releases) relocated to California and continued CICS development at IBM's Palo Alto Development Center. IBM executives did not recognize value in software as a revenue-generating product until after federal law required software unbundling. In 1980, IBM executives failed to heed Ben Riggins' strong suggestions that IBM should provide their own EBCDIC-based operating system and integrated-circuit microprocessor chip for use in the IBM Personal Computer as a CICS intelligent terminal (instead of the incompatible Intel chip, and immature ASCII-based Microsoft 1980 DOS).

Because of the limited capacity of even large processors of that era every CICS installation was required to assemble the source code for all of the CICS system modules after completing a process similar to system generation (sysgen), called CICSGEN, to establish values for conditional assembly-language statements. This process allowed each customer to exclude support from CICS itself for any feature they did not intend to use, such as device support for terminal types not in use.

CICS owes its early popularity to its relatively efficient implementation when hardware was very expensive, its multi-threaded processing architecture, its relative simplicity for developing terminal-based real-time transaction applications, and many open-source customer contributions, including both debugging and feature enhancement.

Z notation
Part of CICS was formalized using the Z notation in the 1980s and 1990s in collaboration with the Oxford University Computing Laboratory, under the leadership of Tony Hoare. This work won a Queen's Award for Technological Achievement.

CICS as a distributed file server
In 1986, IBM announced CICS support for the record-oriented file services defined by Distributed Data Management Architecture (DDM). This enabled programs on remote, network-connected computers to create, manage, and access files that had previously been available only within the CICS/MVS and CICS/VSE transaction processing environments.

In newer versions of CICS, support for DDM has been removed. Support for the DDM component of CICS z/OS was discontinued at the end of 2003, and was removed from CICS for z/OS in version 5.2 onward. In CICS TS for z/VSE, support for DDM was stabilised at V1.1.1 level, with an announced intention to discontinue it in a future release. In CICS for z/VSE 2.1 onward, CICS/DDM is not supported.

CICS and the World Wide Web
CICS Transaction Server first introduced a native HTTP interface in version 1.2, together with a Web Bridge technology for wrapping green-screen terminal-based programs with an HTML facade. CICS Web and Document APIs were enhanced in CICS TS V1.3 to enable web-aware applications to be written to interact more effectively with web browsers.

CICS TS versions 2.1 through 2.3 focused on introducing CORBA and EJB technologies to CICS, offering new ways to integrate CICS assets into distributed application component models. These technologies relied on hosting Java applications in CICS. The Java hosting environment saw numerous improvements over many releases. A multi-threaded JVM resource called the JVMSERVER was introduced during the CICS TS version 4.1 release, this was further enhanced to use 64-bit JVM technology in version 5.1. Version 5.1 also saw the introduction of the WebSphere Liberty profile web-container. Ultimately WebSphere Liberty was fully embedded into CICS Transaction Server in version 5.3. Numerous web facing technologies could be hosted in CICS using Java, this ultimately resulted in the removal of the native CORBA and EJB technologies.

CICS TS V3.1 added a native implementation of the SOAP and WSDL technologies for CICS, together with client side HTTP APIs for outbound communication. These twin technologies enabled easier integration of CICS components with other Enterprise applications, and saw widespread adoption. Tools were included for taking traditional CICS programs written in languages such as COBOL, and converting them into WSDL defined Web Services, with little or no program changes. This technology saw regular enhancements over successive releases of CICS.

CICS TS V4.1 and V4.2 saw further enhancements to web connectivity, including a native implementation of the Atom publishing protocol.

Many of the newer web facing technologies were made available for earlier releases of CICS using delivery models other than a traditional product release. This allowed early adopters to provide constructive feedback that could influence the final design of the integrated technology. Examples include the Soap for CICS technology preview SupportPac for TS V2.2, or the ATOM SupportPac for TS V3.1. This approach was used to introduce JSON support for CICS TS V4.2, a technology that went on to be integrated into CICS TS V5.2.

The JSON technology in CICS is similar to earlier SOAP technology, both of which allowed programs hosted in CICS to be wrapped with a modern facade. The JSON technology was in turn enhanced in z/OS Connect Enterprise Edition, an IBM product for composing JSON APIs that can leverage assets from several mainframe subsystems.

Many partner products have also been used to interact with CICS. Popular examples include using the CICS Transaction Gateway for connecting to CICS from JCA compliant Java application servers, and IBM DataPower appliances for filtering web traffic before it reaches CICS.

Modern versions of CICS provide many ways for both existing and new software assets to be integrated into distributed application flows. CICS assets can be accessed from remote systems, and can access remote systems; user identity and transactional context can be propagated; RESTful APIs can be composed and managed; devices, users and servers can interact with CICS using standards-based technologies; and the IBM WebSphere Liberty environment in CICS promotes the rapid adoption of new technologies.

MicroCICS
By January, 1985 a 1969-founded consulting company, having done "massive on-line systems" for Hilton Hotels, FTD Florists, Amtrak, and Budget Rent-a-Car, announced what became MicroCICS. The initial focus was the IBM XT/370 and IBM AT/370.

CICS Family
Although when CICS is mentioned, people usually mean CICS Transaction Server, the CICS Family refers to a portfolio of transaction servers, connectors (called CICS Transaction Gateway) and CICS Tools.

CICS on distributed platforms—not mainframes—is called IBM TXSeries. TXSeries is distributed transaction processing middleware. It supports C, C++, COBOL, Java™ and PL/I applications in cloud environments and traditional data centers. TXSeries is available on AIX, Linux x86, Windows, Solaris, and HP-UX platforms. CICS is also available on other operating systems, notably IBM i and OS/2. The z/OS implementation (i.e., CICS Transaction Server for z/OS) is by far the most popular and significant.

Two versions of CICS were previously available for VM/CMS, but both have since been discontinued. In 1986, IBM released CICS/CMS, which was a single-user version of CICS designed for development use, the applications later being transferred to an MVS or DOS/VS system for production execution. Later, in 1988, IBM released CICS/VM. CICS/VM was intended for use on the IBM 9370, a low-end mainframe targeted at departmental use; IBM positioned CICS/VM running on departmental or branch office mainframes for use in conjunction with a central mainframe running CICS for MVS.

CICS Tools
Provisioning, management and analysis of CICS systems and applications is provided by CICS Tools. This includes performance management as well as deployment and management of CICS resources. In 2015, the four core foundational CICS tools (and the CICS Optimization Solution Pack for z/OS) were updated with the release of CICS Transaction Server for z/OS 5.3. The four core CICS Tools: CICS Interdependency Analyzer for z/OS, CICS Deployment Assistant for z/OS, CICS Performance Analyzer for z/OS and CICS Configuration Manager for z/OS.

Releases and versions
CICS Transaction Server for z/OS has used the following release numbers:

Programming considerations
Multiple-user interactive-transaction application programs were required to be quasi-reentrant in order to support multiple concurrent transaction threads. A software coding error in one application could block all users from the system. The modular design of CICS reentrant / reusable control programs meant that, with judicious "pruning," multiple users with multiple applications could be executed on a computer with just 32K of expensive magnetic core physical memory (including the operating system).

Considerable effort was required by CICS application programmers to make their transactions as efficient as possible. A common technique was to limit the size of individual programs to no more than 4,096 bytes, or 4K, so that CICS could easily reuse the memory occupied by any program not currently in use for another program or other application storage needs. When virtual memory was added to versions OS/360 in 1972, the 4K strategy became even more important to reduce paging and thrashing unproductive resource-contention overhead.

The efficiency of compiled high-level COBOL and PL/I language programs left much to be desired. Many CICS application programs continued to be written in assembler language, even after COBOL and PL/I support became available.

With 1960s-and-1970s hardware resources expensive and scarce, a competitive "game" developed among system optimization analysts. When critical path code was identified, a code snippet was passed around from one analyst to another. Each person had to either (a) reduce the number of bytes of code required, or (b) reduce the number of CPU cycles required. Younger analysts learned from what more-experienced mentors did. Eventually, when no one could do (a) or (b), the code was considered optimized, and they moved on to other snippets. Small shops with only one analyst learned CICS optimization very slowly (or not at all).

Because application programs could be shared by many concurrent threads, the use of static variables embedded within a program (or use of operating system memory) was restricted (by convention only).

Unfortunately, many of the "rules" were frequently broken, especially by COBOL programmers who might not understand the internals of their programs or fail to use the necessary restrictive compile time options. This resulted in "non-re-entrant" code that was often unreliable, leading to spurious storage violations and entire CICS system crashes.

Originally, the entire partition, or Multiple Virtual Storage (MVS) region, operated with the same memory protection key including the CICS kernel code. Program corruption and CICS control block corruption was a frequent cause of system downtime. A software error in one application program could overwrite the memory (code or data) of one or all currently running application transactions. Locating the offending application code for complex transient timing errors could be a very-difficult operating-system analyst problem.

These shortcomings persisted for multiple new releases of CICS over a period of more than 20 years, in spite of their severity and the fact that top-quality CICS skills were in high demand and short supply. They were addressed in TS V3.3, V4.1 and V5.2 with the Storage Protection, Transaction Isolation and Subspace features respectively, which utilize operating system hardware features to protect the application code and the data within the same address space even though the applications were not written to be separated. CICS application transactions remain mission-critical for many public utility companies, large banks and other multibillion-dollar financial institutions.

Additionally, it is possible to provide a measure of advance application protection by performing test under control of a monitoring program that also serves to provide Test and Debug features.

Macro-level programming
When CICS was first released, it only supported application transaction programs written in IBM 360 Assembler. COBOL and PL/I support were added years later. Because of the initial assembler orientation, requests for CICS services were made using assembler-language macros. For example, the request to read a record from a file were made by a macro call to the "File Control Program" of CICS might look like this:

DFHFC TYPE=READ,DATASET=myfile,TYPOPER=UPDATE,....etc.

This gave rise to the later terminology "Macro-level CICS."

When high-level language support was added, the macros were retained and the code was converted by a pre-compiler that expanded the macros to their COBOL or PL/I CALL statement equivalents. Thus preparing a HLL application was effectively a "two-stage" compile – output from the preprocessor fed into the HLL compiler as input.

COBOL considerations: unlike PL/I, IBM COBOL does not normally provide for the manipulation of pointers (addresses). In order to allow COBOL programmers to access CICS control blocks and dynamic storage the designers resorted to what was essentially a hack. The COBOL Linkage Section was normally used for inter-program communication, such as parameter passing. The compiler generates a list of addresses, each called a Base Locator for Linkage (BLL) which were set on entry to the called program. The first BLL corresponds to the first item in the Linkage Section and so on. CICS allows the programmer to access and manipulate these by passing the address of the list as the first argument to the program. The BLLs can then be dynamically set, either by CICS or by the application to allow access to the corresponding structure in the Linkage Section.

Command-level programming
During the 1980s, IBM at Hursley Park produced a version of CICS that supported what became known as "Command-level CICS" which still supported the older programs but introduced a new API style to application programs.

A typical Command-level call might look like the following:

The values given in the SEND MAPSET command correspond to the names used on the first DFHMSD macro in the map definition given below for the MAPSET argument, and the DFHMSI macro for the MAP argument. This is pre-processed by a pre-compile batch translation stage, which converts the embedded commands (EXECs) into call statements to a stub subroutine. So, preparing application programs for later execution still required two stages. It was possible to write "Mixed mode" applications using both Macro-level and Command-level statements.

Initially, at execution time, the command-level commands were converted using a run-time translator, "The EXEC Interface Program", to the old Macro-level call, which was then executed by the mostly unchanged CICS nucleus programs. But when the CICS Kernel was re-written for TS V3, EXEC CICS became the only way to program CICS applications, as many of the underlying interfaces had changed.

Run-time conversion
The Command-level-only CICS introduced in the early 1990s offered some advantages over earlier versions of CICS. However, IBM also dropped support for Macro-level application programs written for earlier versions. This meant that many application programs had to be converted or completely rewritten to use Command-level EXEC commands only.

By this time, there were perhaps millions of programs worldwide that had been in production for decades in many cases. Rewriting them often introduced new bugs without necessarily adding new features. There were a significant number of users who ran CICS V2 application-owning regions (AORs) to continue to run macro code for many years after the change to V3.

It was also possible to execute old Macro-level programs using conversion software such as APT International's Command CICS.

New programming styles
Recent CICS Transaction Server enhancements include support for a number of modern programming styles.

CICS Transaction Server Version 5.6 introduced enhanced support for Java to deliver a cloud-native experience for Java developers. For example, the new CICS Java API (JCICSX) allows easier unit testing using mocking and stubbing approaches, and can be run remotely on the developer's local workstation. A set of CICS artifacts on Maven Central enable developers to resolve Java dependencies using popular dependency management tools such as Apache Maven and Gradle. Plug-ins for Maven (cics-bundle-maven) and Gradle (cics-bundle-gradle) are also provided to simplify automated building of CICS bundles, using familiar IDEs like Eclipse, IntelliJ IDEA, and Visual Studio Code. In addition, Node.js z/OS support is enhanced for version 12, providing faster startup, better default heap limits, updates to the V8 JavaScript engine, etc. Support for Jakarta EE 8 is also included.

CICS TS 5.5 introduced support for IBM SDK for Node.js, providing a full JavaScript runtime, server-side APIs, and libraries to efficiently build high-performance, highly scalable network applications for IBM Z.

CICS Transaction Server Version 2.1 introduced support for Java. CICS Transaction Server Version 2.2 supported the Software Developers Toolkit. CICS provides the same run-time container as IBM's WebSphere product family so Java EE applications are portable between CICS and Websphere and there is common tooling for the development and deployment of Java EE applications.

In addition, CICS placed an emphasis on "wrapping" existing application programs inside modern interfaces so that long-established business functions can be incorporated into more modern services. These include WSDL, SOAP and JSON interfaces that wrap legacy code so that a web or mobile application can obtain and update the core business objects without requiring a major rewrite of the back-end functions.

Transactions
A CICS transaction is a set of operations that perform a task together. Usually, the majority of transactions are relatively simple tasks such as requesting an inventory list or entering a debit or credit to an account. A primary characteristic of a transaction is that it should be atomic. On IBM Z servers, CICS easily supports thousands of transactions per second, making it a mainstay of enterprise computing.

CICS applications comprise transactions, which can be written in numerous programming languages, including COBOL, PL/I, C, C++, IBM Basic Assembly Language, Rexx, and Java.

Each CICS program is initiated using a transaction identifier. CICS screens are usually sent as a construct called a map, a module created with Basic Mapping Support (BMS) assembler macros or third-party tools. CICS screens may contain text that is highlighted, has different colors, and/or blinks depending on the terminal type used. An example of how a map can be sent through COBOL is given below. The end user inputs data, which is made accessible to the program by receiving a map from CICS.

For technical reasons, the arguments to some command parameters must be quoted and some must not be quoted, depending on what is being referenced. Most programmers will code out of a reference book until they get the "hang" or concept of which arguments are quoted, or they'll typically use a "canned template" where they have example code that they just copy and paste, then edit to change the values.

Example of BMS Map Code
Basic Mapping Support defines the screen format through assembler macros such as the following. This was assembled to generate both the physical map set – a load module in a CICS load library –  and a symbolic map set –  a structure definition or DSECT in PL/I, COBOL, assembler, etc. which was copied into the source program.

Structure
In the z/OS environment, a CICS installation comprises one or more "regions" (generally referred to as a "CICS Region"), spread across one or more z/OS system images. Although it processes interactive transactions, each CICS region is usually started as a batch processing|batch address space with standard JCL statements: it's a job that runs indefinitely until shutdown. Alternatively, each CICS region may be started as a started task. Whether a batch job or a started task, CICS regions may run for days, weeks, or even months before shutting down for maintenance (MVS or CICS). Upon restart a parameter determines if the start should be "Cold" (no recovery) or "Warm"/"Emergency" (using a warm shutdown or restarting from the log after a crash). Cold starts of large CICS regions with many resources can take a long time as all the definitions are re-processed.

Installations are divided into multiple address spaces for a wide variety of reasons, such as:

 * application separation,
 * function separation,
 * avoiding the workload capacity limitations of a single region, or address space, or mainframe instance in the case of a z/OS SysPlex.

A typical installation consists of a number of distinct applications that make up a service. Each service usually has a number of "Terminal-Owning Region" (TORs) that route transactions to multiple "Application-Owning Regions" (AORs), though other topologies are possible. For example, the AORs might not perform File I/O. Instead there would be a "File-Owning Region" (FOR) that performed the File I/O on behalf of transactions in the AOR – given that, at the time, a VSAM file could only support recoverable write access from one address space at a time.

But not all CICS applications use VSAM as the primary data source (or historically other single-address-space-at-a-time datastores such as CA Datacom) − many use either IMS/DB or Db2 as the database, and/or MQ as a queue manager. For all these cases, TORs can load-balance transactions to sets of AORs which then directly use the shared databases/queues. CICS supports XA two-phase commit between data stores and so transactions that spanned MQ, VSAM/RLS and Db2, for example, are possible with ACID properties.

CICS supports distributed transactions using SNA LU6.2 protocol between the address spaces which can be running on the same or different clusters. This allows ACID updates of multiple datastores by cooperating distributed applications. In practice there are issues with this if a system or communications failure occurs because the transaction disposition (backout or commit) may be in-doubt if one of the communicating nodes has not recovered. Thus the use of these facilities has never been very widespread.

Sysplex exploitation
At the time of CICS ESA V3.2, in the early 1990s, IBM faced the challenge of how to get CICS to exploit the new zOS Sysplex mainframe line.

The Sysplex was to be based on CMOS (Complementary Metal Oxide Silicon) rather than the existing ECL (Emitter Coupled Logic) hardware. The cost of scaling the mainframe-unique ECL was much higher than CMOS which was being developed by a keiretsu with high-volume use cases such as Sony PlayStation to reduce the unit cost of each generation's CPUs. The ECL was also expensive for users to run because the gate drain current produced so much heat that the CPU had to packaged into a special module called a Thermal Conduction Module (TCM ) that had inert gas pistons and needed plumbed with high-volume chilled water to be cooled. However, the air-cooled CMOS technology's CPU speed initially was much slower than the ECL (notably the boxes available from the mainframe-clone makers Amdahl and Hitachi). This was especially concerning to IBM in the CICS context as almost all the largest mainframe customers were running CICS and for many of them it was the primary mainframe workload.

To achieve the same total transaction throughput on a Sysplex, multiple boxes would need to be used in parallel for each workload. However, a CICS address space, due to its quasi-reentrant application programming model, could not exploit more than about 1.5 processors on one box at the time – even with use of MVS sub-tasks. Without enhanced parallelism, customers would tend to move to IBM's competitors rather than use Sysplex as they scaled up the CICS workloads. There was considerable debate inside IBM as to whether the right approach would be to break upward compatibility for applications and move to a model like IMS/DC which was fully reentrant, or to extend the approach customers had adopted to more fully exploit a single mainframe's power – using multi-region operation (MRO).

Eventually the second path was adopted after the CICS user community was consulted. The community vehemently opposed breaking upward compatibility given that they had the prospect of Y2K to contend with at that time and did not see the value in re-writing and testing millions of lines of mainly COBOL, PL/I, or assembler code.

The IBM-recommended structure for CICS on Sysplex was that at least one CICS Terminal Owning Region was placed on each Sysplex node which dispatched transactions to many Application Owning Regions (AORs) spread across the entire Sysplex. If these applications needed to access shared resources they either used a Sysplex-exploiting datastore (such as IBM Db2 or IMS/DB) or concentrated, by function-shipping, the resource requests into singular-per-resource Resource Owing Regions (RORs) including File Owning Regions (FORs) for VSAM and CICS Data Tables, Queue Owning Regions (QORs) for MQ, CICS Transient Data (TD) and CICS Temporary Storage (TS). This preserved compatibility for legacy applications at the expense of operational complexity to configure and manage many CICS regions.

In subsequent releases and versions, CICS was able to exploit new Sysplex-exploiting facilities in VSAM/RLS, MQ for zOS and placed its own Data Tables, TD, and TS resources into the architected shared resource manager for the Sysplex -> the Coupling Facility or CF, dispensing with the need for most RORs. The CF provides a mapped view of resources including a shared timebase, buffer pools, locks and counters with hardware messaging assists that made sharing resources across the Sysplex both more efficient than polling and reliable (utilizing a semi-synchronized backup CF for use in case of failure).

By this time, the CMOS line had individual boxes that exceeded the power available by the fastest ECL box with more processors per CPU. When these were coupled together, 32 or more nodes would be able to scale two orders of magnitude greater in total power for a single workload. For example, by 2002, Charles Schwab was running a "MetroPlex" consisting of a redundant pair of mainframe Sysplexes in two locations in Phoenix, AZ, each with 32 nodes driven by one shared CICS/DB/2 workload to support the vast volume of pre-dotcom-bubble web client inquiry requests.

This cheaper, much more scalable CMOS technology base, and the huge investment costs of having to both get to 64-bit addressing and independently produce cloned CF functionality drove the IBM-mainframe clone makers out of the business one by one.

CICS Recovery/Restart
The objective of recovery/restart in CICS is to minimize and if possible eliminate damage done to Online System when a failure occurs, so that system and data integrity is maintained. If the CICS region was shutdown instead of failing it will perform a "Warm" start exploiting the checkpoint written at shutdown. The CICS region can also be forced to "Cold" start which reloads all definitions and wipes out the log, leaving the resources in whatever state they are in.

Under CICS, following are some of the resources which are considered recoverable. If one wishes these resources to be recoverable then special options must be specified in relevant CICS definitions:

 * VSAM files
 * CMT CICS-maintained data tables
 * Intrapartition TDQ
 * Temporary Storage Queue in auxiliary storage
 * I/O messages from/to transactions in a VTAM network
 * Other database/queuing resources connected to CICS that support XA two-phase commit protocol (like IMS/DB, Db2, VSAM/RLS)

CICS also offers extensive recovery/restart facilities for users to establish their own recovery/restart capability in their CICS system. Commonly used recovery/restart facilities include:

 * Dynamic Transaction Backout (DTB)
 * Automatic Transaction Restart
 * Resource Recovery using System Log
 * Resource Recovery using Journal
 * System Restart
 * Extended Recovery Facility

Components
Each CICS region comprises one major task on which every transaction runs, although certain services such as access to IBM Db2 data use other tasks (TCBs). Within a region, transactions are cooperatively multitasked – they are expected to be well-behaved and yield the CPU rather than wait. CICS services handle this automatically.

Each unique CICS "Task" or transaction is allocated its own dynamic memory at start-up and subsequent requests for additional memory were handled by a call to the "Storage Control program" (part of the CICS nucleus or "kernel"), which is analogous to an operating system.

A CICS system consists of the online nucleus, batch support programs, and applications services.

Nucleus
The original CICS nucleus consisted of a number of functional modules written in 370 assembler until V3:
 * Task Control Program (KCP)
 * Storage Control Program (SCP)
 * Program Control Program (PCP)
 * Program Interrupt Control Program (PIP)
 * Interval Control Program (ICP)
 * Dump Control Program (DCP)
 * Terminal Control Program (TCP)
 * File Control Program (FCP)
 * Transient Data Control Program (TDP)
 * Temporary Storage Control Program (TSP)

Starting in V3, the CICS nucleus was rewritten into a kernel-and-domain structure using IBM's PL/AS language – which is compiled into assembler.

The prior structure did not enforce separation of concerns and so had many inter-program dependencies which led to bugs unless exhaustive code analysis was done. The new structure was more modular and so resilient because it was easier to change without impact. The first domains were often built with the name of the prior program but without the trailing "P". For example, Program Control Domain (DFHPC) or Transient Data Domain (DFHTD). The kernel operated as a switcher for inter-domain requests – initially this proved expensive for frequently called domains (such as Trace) but by utilizing PL/AS macros these calls were in-lined without compromising on the separate domain design.

In later versions, completely redesigned domains were added like the Logging Domain DFHLG and Transaction Domain DFHTM that replaced the Journal Control Program (JCP).

Support programs
In addition to the online functions CICS has several support programs that run as batch jobs.
 * High-level language (macro) preprocessor
 * Command language translator
 * Dump utility – prints formatted dumps generated by CICS Dump Management
 * Trace utility – formats and prints CICS trace output
 * Journal formatting utility – prints a formatted dump of the CICS region in case of error

Applications services
The following components of CICS support application development.
 * Basic Mapping Support (BMS) provides device-independent terminal input and output
 * APPC Support that provides LU6.1 and LU6.2 API support for collaborating distributed applications that support two-phase commit
 * Data Interchange Program (DIP) provides support for IBM 3770 and IBM 3790 programmable devices
 * 2260 Compatibility allows programs written for IBM 2260 display devices to run on 3270 displays
 * EXEC Interface Program – the stub program that converts calls generated by   commands to calls to CICS functions
 * Built-in Functions – table search, phonetic conversion, field verify, field edit, bit checking, input formatting, weighted retrieval

Pronunciation
Different countries have differing pronunciations
 * Within IBM (specifically Tivoli) it is referred to as.
 * In the US, it is more usually pronounced by reciting each letter.
 * In Australia, Belgium, Canada, Hong Kong, the UK and some other countries, it is pronounced.
 * In Denmark, it is pronounced kicks.
 * In Finland, it is pronounced
 * In France, it is pronounced.
 * In Germany, Austria and Hungary, it is pronounced and, less often,.
 * In Greece, it is pronounced kiks.
 * In India, it is pronounced kicks.
 * In Iran, it is pronounced kicks.
 * In Italy, is pronounced.
 * In Poland, it is pronounced.
 * In Portugal and Brazil, it is pronounced.
 * In Russia, it is pronounced kiks.
 * In Slovenia, it is pronounced kiks.
 * In Spain, it is pronounced.
 * In Sweden, it is pronounced kicks.
 * In Uganda, it is pronounced kicks.
 * In Turkey, it is pronounced kiks.

title: CICS


text:
The "5" Royales

The "5" Royales was an American rhythm and blues (R&B) vocal group from Winston-Salem, North Carolina that combined gospel, jump blues and doo-wop, marking an early and influential step in the evolution of rock and roll. Most of their big R&B hits were recorded in 1952 and 1953 and written by the guitarist Lowman "Pete" Pauling. Cover versions of the band's songs hit the Top 40, including "Dedicated to the One I Love" (the Shirelles and the Mamas & the Papas), "Tell the Truth" (Ray Charles and Ike & Tina Turner), and "Think" (James Brown & The Famous Flames). Brown modeled his first vocal group after the "5" Royales, and both Eric Clapton and Stax guitarist Steve Cropper cited Pauling as a key influence. The Rolling Stones singer Mick Jagger covered "Think" on his 1993 solo album Wandering Spirit. The "5" Royales were inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 2015.

History
Originally the Royal Sons Quintet, the group began recording for Apollo Records in the early 1950s, changing its name to the Royals after abandoning gospel for secular music. The group initially included Lowman Pauling and his brother Clarence, as founding members. Clarence Pauling later shortened his name to "Clarence Paul". He left the group to become involved with Motown as a producer. Other members included the vocalists Jimmy Moore, Obadiah Carter, and Otto Jeffries, with Johnny Tanner singing lead. Tanner's younger brother, Eugene, later replaced Jeffries. The robust Johnny Tanner sang lead on most of the group's hits, including "Think," but the sweeter-voiced Eugene Tanner stepped to the microphone for the group's best-known song, "Dedicated to the One I Love." "Baby Don't Do It" and "Help Me Somebody" became hits in 1953, and the group soon signed with King Records. In addition to heartfelt odes like "Dedicated to the One I Love," Pauling also wrote comic and risque tunes, including "Monkey Hips and Rice", later the title of a two-CD anthology of the group's music released by Rhino Records in 1994. Pauling used an extra-long strap for his guitar, sometimes playing it down around his knees for comic effect. The group shared stages with all the major R&B artists of the 1950s, including Sam Cooke and Ray Charles, once substituting for the latter's Raelettes at a show in Durham, North Carolina.

According to the Acoustic Music organization, the "first clear evidence of soul music shows up with The '5' Royales, an ex-gospel group that turned to R&B".

Confusion arose when two groups of Royals began touring, the other led by the Detroit R&B star Hank Ballard. According to members of the "5" Royales, the confusion peaked in 1953 when an unscrupulous promoter booked Ballard's group in Winston-Salem, trying to pass the Detroit band off as the hometown group with the same name, much to the chagrin of a local audience. Shortly thereafter, the air cleared when Winston-Salem's Royals became the "5" Royales and Detroit's Royals became The Midnighters. (The "5" was in scare quotes because there were actually six members at the time. ) Both groups had hits at King working with Rock and Roll Hall of Fame producer Ralph Bass, becoming good friends and routinely competing in battles of the bands at clubs like the Royal Peacock, in the Sweet Auburn section of Atlanta.

With King, "Think" and "Tears of Joy" became hits for the "5" Royales in 1957. Some of their lesser-known tracks from this period are now critically acclaimed as innovative. Rock critic Dave Marsh chose the 1958 "5" Royales hit "The Slummer the Slum" as one of the top 1001 singles of all time in his book The Heart of Rock and Soul, crediting Pauling with capturing the first intentional use of guitar feedback on record, years before better-known squawks from The Beatles, The Yardbirds, and The Velvet Underground. In the 1960s, R&B gradually gave way to more polished soul music and the Royales' career waned rapidly. The band still recorded, including for Memphis label Home Of The Blues - which results were later compiled on the posthumous Catch That Teardrop album - as well as Vee-Jay, ABC-Paramount, Smash Records and the Todd label.

The "5" Royales broke up in 1965, though various combinations of musicians toured under the group's name into the 1970s. For a time Pauling continued recording with the pianist and frequent Royales collaborator Royal Abbitt as El Pauling and the Royalton. Pauling's brother, Clarence Paul, a former member of the Royal Sons Quintet, found success as a producer and songwriter at Motown Records in the 1960s.

Post-group
After years of struggle with alcohol dependency, Lowman Pauling (né Lowman Pete Pauling, Jr.; 1927–1973) ended up working as a night watchman at a Manhattan church and died of an apparent seizure on December 26, 1973. He was buried in Evergreen Cemetery in Winston-Salem, as were his brother Clarence, who lies next to him, and his bandmates Otto Jeffries (1912–1975), who died on August 8, 1975, and Obadiah Carter (né Obadiah Hawthorne Carter; 1925–1994). Health problems forced Eugene Tanner (né Eugene Elijah Tanner; 1936–1994) to take disability benefits in the years before his death on December 29, 1994. His brother Johnny Tanner (né John Louis Tanner; 1924–2005) died of cancer on November 8, 2005. Jimmy Moore (aka Johnny; né James Edward Moore; 1926–2008), the last surviving member of The "5" Royales, died on August 16, 2008, at the Cedar Manor Nursing Home in Ossining, New York, after a long illness.

Legacy
The "5" Royales were inducted into the North Carolina Music Hall of Fame in 2009. They were nominated unsuccessfully for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 2002 and 2004; they were inducted in 2015 in the category Early Influence.

The legacy and influence of the "5" Royales was profiled on National Public Radio's Weekend Edition Sunday on August 14, 2011, in an interview with the guitarist Steve Cropper. Cropper released the album Dedicated: A Salute to the 5 Royales in 2011.

In May 2015, compilation Soul & Swagger: The Complete "5" Royales 1951-1967 won a Blues Music Award in the Historical category. Other posthumous compilations include Monkey Hips and Rice: The "5" Royales Anthology (1994), The Apollo Sessions (1995), It's Hard But It's Fair: King Hits and Rarities (2005) and The Definitive "5" Royales: Home of the Blues & Beyond (2014).

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: The "5" Royales


text:
University of Georgia School of Law

The University of Georgia School of Law (Georgia Law) is the law school of the University of Georgia, a public research university in Athens, Georgia. It was founded in 1859, making it among the oldest American university law schools in continuous operation. Georgia Law accepted 14.77% of applicants for the class entering in 2023.

Georgia Law recent graduates include 11 governors, over 110 state and federal legislators, approximately 70 federal judges, and numerous state supreme court justices, practitioners, government officials, ambassadors, trial court judges, academics and law firm principals. Notable recent alumni of Georgia Law include former acting United States Attorney General Sally Yates, former President Pro Tempore of the U.S. Senate Richard B. Russell Jr., former Chief Judge and present Senior Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals Larry Edmondson, and Ertharin Cousin, named to the TIME 100 most influential people in the world list and Payne Distinguished Professor at Stanford University's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies.

History
The law school was founded in 1859. The founding three professors of the university's new law school included one of the United States' first state supreme court chief justices, Joseph Lumpkin, a Princeton alumnus. Joining him was attorney Thomas Cobb, who was the author of first enacted comprehensive codification of common law in the United States. The third original law professor was William Hull, an honors graduate of the University of Georgia, who had been a United States Attorney and a Solicitor General of the United States. Previously, law courses had been offered as part of the undergraduate curriculum of Franklin College of the university. The first classes of the Lumpkin Law School, as it was originally designated, were held at the law offices of Lumpkin and Cobb at the corner of Prince Avenue and Pulaski Street until 1873.

By 1880, the curriculum included courses in equity, parliamentary law, and various commercial law studies such as partnership, insurance, tax, and tariffs. Around 1889, stricter admission standards mandated that students be at least 18 years old. Two years later, an entrance exam had been instituted. The modern method of case law instruction was ushered in during the 1920s. In December 1931, the school was granted membership in the Association of American Law Schools. After being housed in various buildings over the years, the law school in 1932 moved into the new Hirsch Hall, named in honor of prominent attorney Harold Hirsch, located on historic North Campus at the University of Georgia.

Hirsch Hall, expanded by many thousands of square feet over the years in connected buildings and upgrades, remains the site of law school classrooms and offices, as well as the Alexander Campbell King Law Library and the Hatton Lovejoy Courtroom. A 2012 renovation created almost 4,000 square feet of additional space, including a cafe and enclosed three story courtyard.

The law school's four-story, 40,000-square-foot separate addition, Dean Rusk Hall, opened in 1996 adjacent to Hirsch Hall. Named for former U.S. Secretary of State Dean Rusk, who was a Georgia Law professor, this building became the new home of the Dean Rusk International Law Center, founded in 1977. Dean Rusk Hall also houses additional classrooms, faculty offices, and library space, and a second law school courtroom, the James E. Butler Courtroom.

In the three years up to 2020, the Law School raised an additional $61 million to add to its endowment for scholarships, teaching, clinics, and experiential offerings.

Academics
More than 300 courses, clinics, and seminars are offered at Georgia Law, including business-related law, property-related law, personal rights and public interest law, trial and appellate practice, as well as global practice preparation. Although academics, theory, and legal reasoning are primary, Georgia Law is also ranked A+ and 16th of all ABA law schools for practical training. Ninety-four percent of students participate in clinics and externships.

Degrees awarded include the Juris Doctor (J.D.), the Master of Laws (LL.M.) for foreign-trained lawyers, and the Master in the Study of Law (M.S.L.) for those who do not want to practice law, but wish to gain an understanding of legal principles and perspectives in order to advance their careers. Students also may choose to pursue interdisciplinary coursework in other University schools and colleges, or to earn one of many dual degrees including a J.D./M.B.A. or LL.M./M.B.A.

The law school is accredited by the American Bar Association (ABA), is a member of the Association of American Law Schools, has a chapter of the Order of the Coif, and is host to two advocacy inns: Lumpkin Inn of Court, one of the earliest American inns of court, and E. Wycliffe Orr Sr. American Inn of Court. Both are modeled after the English inns of court. It is also an academic partner of the American Society of International Law.

Admissions
The law school is among the most selective law schools in the nation, Georgia Law accepting 14.77% of applicants for the Class entering in 2023, with that class having an average LSAT score of 169 and average undergraduate GPA of 3.83. Georgia Law's 2022 average selectivity rating was 96 out of a possible maximum of 99, Georgia Law enrolled students being in the top 3% of law school applicants. Approximately 27% of enrolled students self-identify as belonging to historically underrepresented groups. Although grades, degrees earned, and standardized test scores are important, for each applicant the admissions committee primarily considers a mandatory personal admission essay, a mandatory resume detailing the applicant's education, employment, fellowships, skills, honors, awards, community involvement, volunteer work, and other accomplishments, as well as mandatory letters of recommendation.

The 165 students entering in 2023 came from 26 states, 15 countries, and 59 undergraduate institutions. Of those students, 73% received merit based scholarships.

Student support and faculty to student ratio
Georgia Law's Mentorship Program matches every law student with a faculty member mentor, an upperclassman peer mentor, a Career Development Office counselor, and an alumnus professional mentor. There are just six students for each faculty member.

Rankings
For the 2022 Top 50 Law School Rankings, of the 196 ABA-approved law schools, Georgia Law was ranked #13. However, according to the study by Law School Transparency, Georgia Law ranked in the top ten nationally for employment outcomes, while The New York Times recognized Georgia law as being in the top five law schools offering the best salary-to-debt ratios in the nation. Furthermore, the law school has been ranked #13 of the top best law schools by the National Jurist as well as by Above the Law. U.S. News & World Report's 2024 ranking of #20 places Georgia Law in the top tier of all 196 ABA-approved law schools and in the top 10% of those schools, with the school additionally individually ranked in Trial Advocacy, Business/Corporate Law, Clinical Training, Constitutional Law, Contracts/Commercial Law, Dispute Resolution, Environmental Law, Intellectual Property Law, International Law, Healthcare Law, Legal Writing, and Tax Law. Finally, based on outcome-driven factors such as average indebtedness, bar passage, and employment, Georgia Law has been ranked #1 as the best value in legal education in the United States by the National Jurist for the last three straight years.

Law review and journals
Georgia Law students publish four legal journals: Georgia Law Review Journal of Intellectual Property Law Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law Georgia Criminal Law Review. These journals have frequently been cited by federal and state courts, as well as textbooks and law reviews. Membership on the journals is limited to students in their second and third years of law school. In addition to the Georgia Law Review, students publish the online component, the Georgia Law Review Posts, which features essays by students, practitioners, judges, and professors focused primarily on timely legal issues in the U.S. Supreme Court and U.S. courts of appeals.

Alexander Campbell King Law Library
The Alexander Campbell King Law Library is the oldest and largest law library in the state of Georgia. In 1967, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black gave the keynote address at an outdoor ceremony to dedicate a modern law library building adjacent to Hirsch Hall. Housing a collection of more than 500,000 digital and print titles, the law library is a founding member of the Legal Information Preservation Alliance and the Law Library Microform Consortium. It has been designated a Federal Depository Library. The library is also one of the United States' Specialized European Documentation Centres, houses the Faculty Writings Collection, the Phillips Nuremberg Trials Collection, the Rare Book Collection, and the J. Alton Hosch Collection, which includes the extensive personal library of Dean Hosch, a member of the law school faculty from 1935 to 1964.

The Louis B. Sohn Library on International Relations is housed within the school's Dean Rusk International Law Center. The Sohn library is the extensive international law collection of Louis B. Sohn, who was the Woodruff Chair professor at Georgia Law and previously the Bemis Professor of International Law at Harvard Law School.

Clinics and related initiatives
For the 2020–21 academic year, more than 450 Georgia Law students enrolled in clinical and field placement programs for approximately 94,000 hours. There are over 100 organizations, experiential learning and practical training offerings, and other additional education opportunities at Georgia Law. Some of the offerings include, without limitation, the Business Law Clinic, Civil Law Practice Externships, the Corporate Counsel Externship, the Environmental Law Practicum, the Washington D.C. Semester in Practice, the First Amendment Clinic, the Atlanta Semester in Practice, Corsair Law Society (transactions and litigation in major financial markets), the Family Justice Clinic, Labor & Employment Law Association, Public Interest Law Council, Real Estate & Other Property Organization, the Mediation Clinic, the Community Health Law Partnership (HeLP) Clinic, Business Law Society, American Constitution Society, the Public Interest Practicum and Fellowships, Health Law Society, Intellectual Property Law Society, International Law Society, the Wilbanks Child Endangerment and Sexual Exploitation Clinic, Family Law Society, Association of Law and Politics, the Criminal Defense Practicum, the Prosecutorial Justice Program, Environmental Law Association, Veteran Legal Services Clinic, Trial Lawyers Association, Practicum in Animal Welfare Skills, Entertainment & Sports Law Society, Federal Bar Association, Tax Law Society, national award-winning moot court, mock trial, and negotiation programs (for example, in last five years members have been awarded 13 national and ten regional titles), Georgia Law–Leuven Centre Global Governance Summer School in Belgium, Georgia Law at the University of Oxford program, and the Capital Assistance Project. Students in the Appellate Litigation Clinic have briefed and argued before the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Fourth, Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuits (with students winning five times in four courts in 2020–2021). The Global Externship initiative provides global practice preparation for many students each summer, for instance past practice preparation included, without limitation, placement with law firms like DLA Piper in Russia, GÖRG Partnerschaft von Rechtsanwälten mbB in Germany, Priti Suri & Associates (PSA) in India, Siqueira Castro Advogados in Brazil, and King & Wood Mallesons in China. To educate students in the benefits of public service and the functioning of the judiciary, up to 20 jurists, including U.S. Supreme Court justices, U.S. Court of Appeals judges, and trial judges, visit Georgia Law to teach classes.

Costs
U.S. News & World Report ranks Georgia Law as having the lowest tuition of the top 20 law schools. The total of tuition and fees for one year at Georgia Law is $18,994 for Georgia residents and $37,752 for non-residents. The total cost of attendance (including the cost of tuition, fees, room and board, books and supplies, transportation, and miscellaneous personal expenses) for the 2022–23 academic year is estimated to be $36,694 for Georgia residents living on-campus, $39,860 for Georgia residents living off-campus, $56,286 for non-residents living on-campus, and $59,452 for non-residents living off-campus. Non-resident students are able to obtain Georgia residency at the beginning of their second year of law school, and besides other scholarships, available are tuition reduction scholarships that allow non-residents to pay resident tuition for one or two semesters of the first year of Georgia Law. Further, over 73% of the members of the class matriculating in 2022 received merit based scholarships funded by donors. U.S. News & World Report ranked Georgia Law as a top ten law school in having the 4th best salary to debt ratio, while Georgia Law has been ranked #1 as the best value in legal education in the United States by the National Jurist for the last three straight years.

Employment
Living Georgia Law graduates work in all 50 states and more than 60 countries. Those who graduated in 2021 are working in 26 states and abroad. According to ABA required disclosures, not including those choosing to open their own practices, to pursue additional education, etc., 98% of the 2022 graduating class were hired to perform high-value jobs within nine months after graduation, and 94.79% held full-time, long-term, JD-required positions at that point (Georgia Law being the nation's #1 law school for high-value jobs out of 196 ABA-approved schools). For the class graduating in 2022, Georgia Law was ranked in the top four of all 196 ABA approved law schools for the highest percentage of graduates obtaining full-time legal jobs requiring bar passage. Georgia Law was among the top law schools that sent the highest percentage of juris doctor graduates into associate positions at the largest 100 law firms in the country. Of 202 students who graduated in 2021 - not including those who opened their own practices, pursued additional education, etc. - 57 went to law firms with up to 50 attorneys, 54 to law firms with 51 to over 500 attorneys including 25 to law firms of over 500 attorneys, 5 to business organizations, 38 to government and public interest organizations (not including judicial clerkships that 38 graduates obtained) and six to academia.

Serving as a judicial clerk is considered one of the most prestigious positions in legal circles, and often opens up wide-ranging opportunities in private practice, high-ranking government work, and academia. Georgia Law has had six alumni serve as judicial clerks for justices of the United States Supreme Court since 2005. Based on the 2005-2021 graduating classes, the School of Law was ranked 14th among the nation's law schools for sending its graduates to clerk for the U.S. Supreme Court. For the class of 2021, Georgia Law placed 38 graduates in federal and state court clerkships (for 2020 Georgia Law had a top eight placement rate of all ABA approved law schools in the nation for federal court clerkships).

Notable recent alumni
Georgia Law graduates work in all 50 states and more than 60 countries. Among recent Georgia Law graduates are 11 governors, more than 110 state and federal legislators, approximately 70 federal appeals and district court judges, multiple state trial and appeals court judges, numerous state supreme court justices, government officials, ambassadors, law firm principals, as well as other notable practitioners, leaders, authors, and academics. Some recent graduates include the following.

 * Luis A. Aguilar (J.D. 1979), attorney, former Commissioner, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
 * M. Neil Andrews (LL.B. 1956), former special assistant to the Attorney General of the United States, Chief of the Trial Section of the United States Department of Justice Criminal Division, United States Attorney, Chief Judge, U.S. District Court
 * Ellis Arnall (LL.B. 1931), attorney, Am Law 200 law firm founder, former Governor
 * R. Stan Baker (J.D. 2004), Judge, U.S. District Court
 * Roy Barnes (J.D. 1972), former Governor, attorney, law firm founder
 * Timothy Batten (J.D. 1984), Chief Judge, U.S. District Court
 * Robert Benham (J.D. 1970), Chief Justice state Supreme Court, first African-American to serve as Justice of the Supreme Court of Georgia
 * Charlie Bethel (J.D. 2001), Justice, state Supreme Court
 * Keith R. Blackwell (J.D. 1999), Justice, state Supreme Court
 * J. P. Boulee (J.D. 1996), former partner Jones Day, Judge, U.S. District Court
 * Dudley Hollingsworth Bowen Jr. (LL.B. 1965), Judge, U.S. District Court
 * Mike Bowers (J.D. 1974), state Attorney General
 * Michael Lawrence Brown (J.D. 1994), Judge, U.S. District Court
 * George Busbee (J.D. 1952), senior partner at King & Spalding international law firm, former Governor
 * Valerie E. Caproni (J.D. 1979), Judge, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; formerly, General Counsel, Federal Bureau of Investigation
 * Julie E. Carnes (J.D. 1975), Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals
 * Christopher M. Carr (J.D. 1999), state Attorney General
 * John William Carter (J.D. 1975), investment consultant and state Senator
 * Jason Carter (J.D. 2004), partner Bondurant, Mixson & Elmore, represents the National Football League Players Association, awarded the Stuart Eizenstat Lawyer Award, given by the Anti-Defamation League, for his pro bono work defending voting rights, state Senator
 * Thomas Alonzo Clark (LL.B. 1949), Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals
 * Verda Colvin (J.D. 1993), Justice, state Supreme Court
 * Christian A. Coomer (J.D. 1999), Judge, state Court of Appeals
 * Ertharin Cousin (J.D. 1982), named to the TIME 100 most influential people in the world list, Payne Distinguished Professor at Stanford University's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
 * Bill Cowsert (J.D. 1983), attorney, State Senator and Majority Leader
 * George W. Darden III (J.D. 1967), former Member U.S. House of Representatives; presidential appointee to the Board of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation; Advisor on behalf of the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs; partner, international law firm McKenna Long & Aldridge (now, Dentons)
 * Bertis Downs IV (J.D. 1981), entertainment attorney
 * Berry Avant Edenfield (LL.B. 1958), Chief Judge, U.S. District Court
 * Newell Edenfield (LL.B. 1938), Senior Judge, U.S. District Court
 * James Larry Edmondson (J.D. 1971), former Chief Judge, now Senior Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals
 * John J. Ellington (J.D. 1985), Justice, state Supreme Court
 * Randy Evans (J.D. 1983), attorney, partner Squire Patton Boggs, former  ambassador, member Dentons international law firm U.S. board of directors, general counsel to Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives
 * Stacey Evans (J.D. 2003), attorney and State Representative
 * Duross Fitzpatrick (LL.B. 1966), Chief Judge, U.S. District Court
 * Norman S. Fletcher (J.D. 1958), Chief Justice, state Supreme Court
 * Daisy Hurst Floyd (J.D.1980), attorney, law professor, and law school Dean
 * Joan T.A. Gabel (J.D. 1993), American academic and first female President of the University of Minnesota, present Chancellor of the University of Pittsburgh
 * Elizabeth Gobeil (J.D. 1995), Judge, state Court of Appeals
 * Stephen S. Goss (J.D. 1986), Judge, state Court of Appeals
 * James Randal Hall (J.D. 1982), Chief Judge, U.S. District Court
 * Frank Hanna III (J.D. 1986), former corporate attorney, now entrepreneur, merchant banker, philanthropist, and Grand Cross Knight of the Order of St. Gregory the Great
 * Kenneth B. Hodges, III (J.D. 1991), Judge, state Court of Appeals
 * Pierre Howard (J.D. 1974), attorney, Lieutenant Governor, Senator
 * C. Donald Johnson Jr. (J.D. 1973), attorney, academic, former Congressman U.S. House of Representatives; former ambassador at the Office of the United States Trade Representative; partner, Squire Patton Boggs
 * Francys Johnson (J.D. 2006), civil rights attorney and academic
 * Steve C. Jones (J.D. 1987), Judge, U.S. District Court
 * Dar'shun N. Kendrick (J.D. 2007), attorney, member state House of Representatives
 * Clay D. Land (J.D. 1985), Chief Judge, U.S. District Court
 * Edward H. Lindsey Jr. (J.D. 1984), attorney, law firm founder, partner in Dentons international law firm
 * Beverly B. Martin (J.D. 1981), Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals
 * Leigh Martin May (J.D. 1998), Judge, U.S. District Court
 * Scott F. McAfee (J.D. 2013), state trial judge, former state inspector general, United States Attorney
 * Christopher J. McFadden (J.D. 1985), Presiding Judge, state Court of Appeals
 * Carla Wong McMillian (J.D. 1998), Justice, state Supreme Court
 * Peter Meldrim (LL.B. 1969), Judge, President of the American Bar Association, Commissioner of the Uniform Law Commission
 * Harold D. Melton (J.D. 1991), former Chief Justice, state Supreme Court, partner Troutman Pepper
 * Patrick N. Millsaps (J.D. 2000), attorney and American film producer
 * Tamika Montgomery–Reeves (J.D. 2006), Justice, state Supreme Court, former Chancellor, Delaware Court of Chancery, former attorney with Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
 * William Theodore Moore Jr. (J. D. 1964), Chief Judge, U.S. District Court
 * Jere Morehead (J.D. 1980), president of a top 15 Public National University
 * Lewis Render Morgan (J. D. 1935), Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals
 * Thomas B. Murphy (J.D. 1949), attorney, Speaker, state House of Representatives from 1973 to 2002.
 * Harold Lloyd Murphy (J. D. 1949), Judge, U. S. District Court
 * Wilbur Dawson Owens Jr. (J.D. 1952), Chief Judge, U.S. District Court
 * Charles A. Pannell Jr. (J.D. 1970), Senior Judge, U.S. District Court
 * William Porter Payne (J.D. 1973), former Managing Director of Gleacher & Company, former Vice Chairman of Bank of America and other companies, president and CEO of the Committee for the Olympic Games responsible for bringing the 1996 Summer Olympics to the United States
 * Charles Peeler (J.D. 1999), former United States Attorney, a managing partner of Troutman Pepper
 * Andrew Pinson (J.D. 2011), former Solicitor General, then Justice, state Supreme Court
 * David Ralston (J.D. 1980), attorney, former member of state Senate, Speaker, state House of Representatives
 * William McCrary Ray II (J.D. 1990), Judge, U. S. District Court
 * Brian M. Rickman (J.D. 2001), Chief Judge, state Court of Appeals
 * Jack L. Rives (J.D. 1977), Executive Director and Chief Operating Officer, American Bar Association
 * C. Ashley Royal (J.D. 1974), Judge, U. S. District Court
 * Richard B. Russell Jr. (LL.B. 1938), U.S. Senator, former President Pro Tempore of the Senate
 * Carl Sanders (J. D. 1947), former Governor, founder and chairman of the multiple city national law firm of Troutman Pepper
 * Frank W. "Sonny" Seiler (J.D. 1957), trial attorney, leading role in the longest-standing New York Times Best-Seller, Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil
 * Tilman E. Self (J.D. 1997), Judge, U.S. District Court
 * Marvin Herman Shoob (J.D. 1948), Senior Judge, U.S. District Court
 * Samuel Hale Sibley (LL.B. 1933), Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals
 * Sidney Oslin Smith Jr. (J.D. 1949), Chief Judge, U.S. District Court
 * George T. Smith (J. D. 1948), Justice, state Supreme Court, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives
 * Richard W. Story (J.D. 1978), Judge, U.S. District Court
 * Herman E. Talmadge (J.D. 1936), Governor, U.S. Senator
 * Edward J. Tarver (1991), former state Senator, attorney, United States Attorney
 * Robert L. Vining Jr. (J.D. 1959), Chief Judge, then Senior Judge, U.S. District Court
 * Joe D. Whitley (J.D. 1975), youngest appointed United States Attorney, then United States Associate Attorney General, first General Counsel for the United States Department of Homeland Security, Adjunct Professor at the George Washington University Law School, former partner at Alston & Bird international law firm, present partner at Baker Donelson
 * Robert Whitlow (J.D. 1979), North Carolina attorney, best-selling author, and filmmaker
 * Melanie D. Wilson (J.D. 1990), dean of Washington and Lee University School of Law
 * Lisa Godbey Wood (J.D. 1990), Chief Judge, U.S. District Court
 * William Robert Woodall III (J.D. 1997), member, U.S. House of Representatives
 * Sally Quillian Yates (J.D. 1986), partner, international law firm King & Spalding, former faculty Georgetown University Law Center, former United States Deputy Attorney General and acting United States Attorney General

title: University of Georgia School of Law


text:
User:Cataclysm12

This is my page???

title: User:Cataclysm12