On 12/29/2005 12:02 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a recent note, Bruce Black said:
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 11:16:14 -0500
I did this to myself earlier today. It took hours to understand
Yes you did. You can allocate a dataset which does not really exist on
the disk, either through the catalog or by specifying UNIT and VOL. The
allocation will work successfully, as you saw. But when you do an OPEN
or some other operation like LISTDSI which requires the DSCB, the
missing DSCB is noticed and a failure occurs.
Duh! Thanks. Sometimes I can't see the forest for the trees.
I was trying to create a program with a test mode in which it
uses and deletes uncatalogued data sets. It was all too easy
to delete one of the catalogued instances and leave the
catalog entry.
The truly embarassing thing is that I was doing the LISTDSI
to try to understand the reason I was getting the S213 when
allocation succeeded and there didn't seem to be any RACF
considerations.
x13 abends are OPEN problems. Only some flavors of 913 have anything to
do with RACF.
I focused too narrowly on the failure of my
intended diagnostic technique without considering that itself
held the clue. I only figured it out (partly) when I tried
to Browse the data set in DSLIST. OK, now I know; you can
allocate a data set without really allocating a data set.
I hate the way the catalog (doesn't) works.
The problem you had has nothing to do with the catalog, as I see it,
even if the program you're trying to test does.
IBM has tried to eliminate problems like you had, via DFSMS. If you
were using SMS-managed data sets then you would not encounter such
uncataloged data sets except in some extraordinary circumstances.
Walt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
