<snip> How about this situation ... I am part of a team of people who plan maintenance upgrades many months in advance. There is no possibility of IPL (for many of the maintenance upgrades). All Batch is held (other than implementation jobs); DFSMShsm, CICS, IMS and DB2 are down. TSO is limited to implementers. SCSQAUTH (an MQ LNKLSTd Dataset) is emptied, its contents replaced and LLA is REFRESHd. MQ, CICS, IMS and DB2 are started and tested by implementers and then by the customer. After everyone signs off, it's back to "business as usual" and Batch is restarted.
Do you see any holes in this approach? </snip> If you can guarantee that no one does any fetch that might involve a member with the same name as one within the PDS that you emptied then "maybe". And if you don't need to compress the data set then "maybe". The operating system cannot stop you from compressing the data set. But it tries a little, by allocating the data set with DISP=SHR, so that if you do what you really should do for a compress, of using DISP=OLD, you won't be able to. If you're going to refresh LLA anyway, why not be safer and stop LLA first, then restart when you're ready? The refresh will negate any relevant caching of directories or modules, so there's no real benefit to having LLA up across the operations. Peter Relson z/OS Core Technology Design ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
