Looks like we moved to RMM around 2002, about 15 years ago. I was not the CA1 guy, but I'm guessing we moved shortly before the data base redesign. Unless I missed that event.
Also I've been urging the use of CA Reclaim on all systems, but it has not yet reached RMM on production. Our bad. . . 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 Mark Zelden Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 1:12 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: CA1 to RMM conversion On Wed, 25 Oct 2017 15:55:15 -0400, Russell Witt <res09...@verizon.net> wrote: >And of course using modern CA 1 you NEVER have to shutdown CA 1. You can move >the database, add or remove ranges even do an in-depth analysis - no shutdown >ever. In fact, you can even upgrade 1 release at a time without having to stop >tape processing. Why would you EVER want to have a tape management system that >requires you to stop tape processing - ever? > > >And Skip, we haven't been one record per block for about 15 years now. > > >Russell Witt >CA 1 > Continuous operations is more an more important. Stopping tape processing across a sysplex is a nightmare. It really means stopping all batch because even with job class standards there is no guarantee tape jobs won't run if you stop a "tape job class". And not all the sysplexes I support have job class standards based on tape usage and certainly with virtual tape no one has really paid attention to violating those standards in years anyway. I have a hard enough time scheduling rolling IPLs which don't affect most applications, but some batch is affected thanks to priceplex-ing and not having all software available on all LPARs. But at least that is controllable with SCHENV. When my team does need to schedule a change that requires "stopping all batch" for whatever reason, there is always a huge push back from my client. I didn't like the Datacom implementation forced for some CA products years ago, but it did allow for continuous operations or significantly less disruption for maintenance to product files / databases. I'm glad CA-1 did it all without Datacom. :-) Best Regards, Mark -- Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS ITIL v3 Foundation Certified mailto:m...@mzelden.com Mark's MVS Utilities: http://www.mzelden.com/mvsutil.html Systems Programming expert at http://search390.techtarget.com/ateExperts/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
