Dave Gibney has already mentioned the only justification that occurs to me: datasets sharing a HLQ have varied sharing requirements (e.g. some datasets are dedicated to an image and others are shared by multiple images).
Once upon a time, there may have been an additional justification: to isolate release levels of a product and thereby simplify cleanup (of the old release) and implementation (i.e. switching the new release on by changing the UCAT association). SYMBOLICRELATE aliases may now be used to accomplish the same thing. I have occasionally noticed that, because it uses its own LOCATE mechanisms, ISPF 3.4 sometimes returns some weird results in MLA environments. Alan Starr -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of John Eells Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 05:49 Subject: Multi-Level Aliases and System Software If you are using MLAs to manage system software data sets (z/OS, DB2, CICS, IMS, WAS, ISV products), please let me know. I don't know why anyone would need to do so but I'm willing to learn why it might be necessary. If you're using MLA for something else (application data, etc.), I don't need to know about it. Given a couple of fairly recent threads, it's probably a good idea to add, before anyone panics, that we do *not* intend to remove support for MLA as far as I know. Thanks! -- John Eells z/OS Technical Marketing IBM Poughkeepsie ee...@us.ibm.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
