On Fri, 6 Jul 2012 08:44:31 -0700, Skip Robinson <jo.skip.robin...@sce.com> wrote:
>Delay cause seems to be crucial here. I haven't seen anyone comment on >what I consider to be OP's unusual configuration. If I understand the >original post, two out of three 'sysplex' members are parallel while the >other is not. If that's so, then two members have access to coupling >facility structures while the other has only CTC connections to the other >two. > >In reading over the paragraph above, I think I must have misunderstood. >Can you even run that way? We have several parallel sysplexes, one basic >(no CF) sysplex, and some monoplexes. They are and I think must be >entirely separate plexes. I would have thought that any nonparallel >system in a complex must not attempt to share resources with an adjacent >parallel sysplex. If that's true, then this is a two-system problem; the >third system is irrelevant. > >Or am I being na�ve? > >. The sysplex is either parallel or not. And all the members are part of that. However, sysplex sharing of z/OS Unix file systems can be a subset of the sysplex just like JES2, SMS, etc. Regards, Mark -- Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS mailto:m...@mzelden.com Mark's MVS Utilities: http://www.mzelden.com/mvsutil.html Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
