> I think it is reasonable to use VMSYS and VMSYSU in the same manner that > IBM > uses them in the 'default' RMSMASTER configuration. For applications that > > are LOCAL to this system, I put control type information (config files) i > n > VMSYS and use VMSYSU for work and logfiles. At disaster recovery, I do no > t > mind starting with an empty VMSYSU.
Given that IBM discourages use of the VMSYSx: pools for real user data, would it make sense to propose that those local filepools be configured in a way that they reflected the node name they were running on, eg. if running on node FOO, then the default install would create FOOS: (for the IBM uses like RMSMASTER if that code can't be fixed to not require VMSYS:) and (optionally) FOOR:? Using a generic name like VMSYS: seems to be both confusing and not really all that optimal. If one wanted to provide a default pool for user data in the starter system, how about calling it <node>:, eg FOO: from our above example. It shouldn't be too hard to have the SFS code determine the current node name and publish that as the filepool name and/or APPC resource name.
