Peter, we've run into health checks that are not compatible with what we believe are reasonable settings. Some we've turned off, others we didn't want to turn off, but had to add steps to some of our processes to deal with them (steps that we feel hinder rather than help). If you're interested in details, see PMRs 52015,082,000 (XCF_CF_STR_PREFLIST) and 91965 (USS_CLIENT_MOUNTS ) (the 2nd one is pretty old, not sure if it is still in the system, plus it was before they renumbered our branch, so it's likely ,800,000).
Bart -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Peter Relson Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2014 7:59 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: PROGxx vs LNKLSTxx, and APF FORMAT(DYNAMIC) >Try to avoid making HC sending so much >informational/advisory/recommendational/etc. >stuff, that nobody pays attention anymore. Can you be more specific? What stuff do you feel HC is advising/recommending that "nobody pays attention" to? Many clean up their systems specifically so that they are in accordance with the recommendations so that any new "exception" is unexpected and therefore warrants attention. Do you not agree with the recommendations that are in the books? Which ones? HC rarely advises/recommends on its own; typically it is helping you to get to the position recommended in the books. 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
