On Sun, 10 May 2009 10:47:36 -0500, Jim Marshall <[email protected]> wrote:
> But I think IBM >was remiss in not understanding the full ramifications of how they have sites >implement the LOGGER. If they would have talked to some savy users, then >could have made the journey much smoother. That was apparent from the first time real presentation I saw at SHARE. And we've already had plenty of past discussions about that. At this point I still have no plans to implement it since the old way can keep up at our shop and have never had problems with lost SMF data. I do like the concept of multiple logstreams and the convenience it may eventually bring, but for now we'll just split off the different files during our nightly processing. I do have it running in some sandbox LPARs where we don't care about SMF data. In the past, those LPARs just dumped to a GDG in case we wanted the data later or dumped to "DD DUMMY". Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:[email protected] z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.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
