At 1:15 PM -0700 on 7/27/10, Edward Jaffe wrote about Re: remove() of
PDSE member leaves PDS locked:
Robert A. Rosenberg wrote:
What is so hard (or dangerous) about just altering the status of
the EXC to SHR and then running the same code as the DEQ (after
first checking if the second entry is a SHR request [if it is an
EXC do not run the code])?
Agreed. This is a long-standing complaint. It's doable, but not yet
done for some reason. Perhaps there is no formal requirement?
I would think that the ability to release convert an EXC ENQ (due to
a DISP=OLD) into a SHR ENQ (due to all the references to the DSN in
subsequent steps being DISP=SHR) would be enough of a formal
requirement. I know that that capability has been requested for a
long time also. It is a pain you-know-where that the EXC ENQ is
propagated to the last step using the dataset when there is no VALID
need (beyond the refusal of IBM to fix this design flaw/bug) to not
respect the DISP=SHR request. The fact that the SYSDSN ENQ is not
compatible with a shared DASD environment (a design flaw that ISPF
fixes with its ENQ requests by adding the VOLSER to the DSN in its
RNAME Parm) due to the no longer valid assumption that there is only
one instance of a DSN per computer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
