On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:44:28 -0500, Paul Dineen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hello, > >I'm wondering if others have had difficulty with PDSE's which are included >in LNKLST at IPL time, specifically deletion of them? > No, but I can see where it could cause some confusion since the restriction isn't (well?) documented. > >Thoughts to mitigate, but not all prevent the problem include: > 1) Overallocation of PDSEs. Secondary for "user" PDSEs in the LNKLST may not be a bad idea as opposed to overallocation. See #2 > 2) Allowing secondary allocation (and the LNKLST can of worms that opens). Not an issue for PDSE. It always counts as one extent, and if it takes an extent during update the module is accessable (an LLA refresh/update may be needed). Regards, Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
