On 5/29/2019 3:57 AM, Styles, Andy , ITS zPlatform Services wrote:
Did you really get more PTFs assigned RSU1903 the second time? Or did you
simply get
more PTFs? Let me explain:
I believe we received new PTFs - with RSU1903 being assigned to them at the
same time. That's the behaviour I'm querying - and I think you agree - once IBM
has announced RSU1903, there should have been no further PTFs with that RSU,
whether I specify RECOMMENDED or ALL.
For the IBM server, when you run RECEIVE ORDER with CONTENT(RECOMMENDED), you
get back
PTFs identified with a Recommended Service Update SOURCEID (RSUyymm) *AND* PTFs
that
resolve critical problems (HIPER or PE). PTFs get assigned RSUyynn only once a
month,
but HIPER and PE fixing PTFs can get assigned every day.
I understand the HIPER/PE fixes, but they surely should not be assigned RSU1903
after the publish date?
Correct.
However, if you saw any RSU1903 sourceids being assigned during the second
RECEIVE ORDER,
then perhaps the server's behavior requires further analysis. If this is the
case, a
PMR may be warranted, but you're going to have to provide proof, as in the
SMP/E output
for both jobs.
Well, we're coming up to another RSU date in the next few days. I can attempt
to repeat this, and see what happens.
Fair enough. It will be helpful to keep track of changes to your SMP/E
environment between your two RECEIVE ORDER jobs, and please be sure to
use the same RECEIVE ORDER command. For example, either use FORTGTZONES
in both or not at all. My preference is not at all.
Kurt Quackenbush -- IBM, SMP/E Development
Chuck Norris never uses CHECK when he applies PTFs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
