Corruption due to concurrent update was the major rationale for PDSE. Traditional PO was deemed unfixable. The downside of PDSE is the mess that can result from attempt to access concurrently across sysplex boundaries. One hand giveth while the other hand taketh away.
. . J.O.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 323-715-0595 Mobile 626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW robin...@sce.com -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin Sent: Saturday, December 10, 2016 8:00 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: FTP serialization when writing PDS/PDSE members On Sat, 10 Dec 2016 19:46:00 -0800, Charles Mills wrote: >I think it is well known and probably documented (perhaps not with stunning >clarity) that you cannot write to two members of a PDS (non-E) at once. > Understood; perhaps better than NFS understands. It puts out two ENQ EXC SPFEDIT DSN, one with member, one witlout. Then if I open the same member or another member, PDS, for output, it doesn't stop me. I conjecture because all the ENQs come from the same MVSNFS task, so that's OK. SPF Edit will let me open another member (not the same), nothing goes wrong until I try a SAVE, which fails for RESERVE conflict. FTP doesn't exhibit the misbehavior because each connection starts a separate address space and the ENQs do their job. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
