> On Nov 20, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Paul Gilmartin > <0000000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > But it's not a PDS, but Condor will export it in a useless format resembling > IEBUPDTE? > > If it were a PDS I'd recommend IEBCOPY and AMATERSE. > > It appears that the Condor has its talons in the CamLib and doesn't > want to let it go. Have you asked Phoenix? Their representatives on > this list have been helpful. > > — gil
Gil, It is a psuedo standard for *AGES* too use iebupdte (or what ever the VM equivalence is). I have not been heavily into VM but I believe since day 1 vm source updates have been iebupdte type format for OS (PCP-MFT-MVT) Its a portable way of doing things IEBCOPY for source is used (I believe) only for clists and maybe some netview and misc others. JES2 & 3 both use it for distributed source members. There are other examples. To put it bluntly you are arguing a standard that won’t go away any time soon, unless a replacement is found. BTW IBM blew it day 1 for lists as clist put sequence numbers in 1-8 rather than 72. It took a number of share/guides to get IBM to figure out that iebupdte won’t work with clists. IBM quietly just went to iebcopy for clists and then on top of that CLISTS are VB in length which is NOT iebupdte friendly. We were probably in the top 100 nationwide to do MVS in production. We saw the issue day 2. We sat back and watched IBM argue amongst themselves how they were going to handle CLIST. The first time we fired up SMP we could see the issue as IBM wrestled with what to use to update. I *think* netview used 80 for it's “clist”. Way back then when I was a junior sysprog going to Guide wasn’t possible until it came to Chicago. The senior sysprog at the time was on one of the committees (don’t ask its been a LONG time ago) and he would tell us about the arguments that arose about clists and it got to be fun according to him seeing IBM trying to argue the point. I know our IBM SE was almost swept up in it (IBM internals). He politely refused to get involved. If people don’t remember at one time the CDS was in PDS format (IBM sort of broke the rules on that one) when SMPE came out and converted the pds to a Vsam dataset all was good again. Firing up SMP was a big resource hog as it read (IIRC) the CDS directory into memory. The SMP zone was a PDS as well but it was manageable, Its been years so my memory might be faulty here, the CDS (at least at our installation was created with 20,000 members (or more). The first indications that IBM needed to “fix” pds’s was because of SMP and somewhere along the line IBM decided to replace PDS’s with PDSe’s, I don’t remember what caused the decision, but (again here my memory is iffy) is that SMP CDS’s were bumping the limits of PO type datasets. Ed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
