Damned, I never thought to send such a msg "as is" !!! Outlook failed asking me to send a nice dump to microsoft.
I applied my (too often tested) Windows DRP to give you some feedback about this. First : I don't have any problem. We had years ago but no more now. Our procedure has been updated with this case. The fact is I just learnt the reason why a 3380 could have 3339 cyls. I was supposed to get this info from the support not through the forum :) Steve, you tell something very important here where DS8300 only accepts 3380TCM. Imagine we buy a DS8300. The day we will ipl our MVS in LPAR, I suppose the prod would be a bit surprized looking the vtoc and see what they thought to be a 3380-k. The impact could be dramatic, I suppose. Alain Le 1/12/08 21:56, « Alan Altmark » <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit : > On Monday, 12/01/2008 at 02:50 EST, Alain Benveniste > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> The fact is we are not the owners of this DS8300. IBM configures it for > our >> needs when it is DRT time. We asked them many times if it was not a > wrong >> manip at customization. >> >> No one there told us we will have 3380-k size > > Again, Alain: What is the problem? Is it just that you have more > cylinders than you expected? Or that you have track incompatibilities > between DR and home? > > If you have 3390s in native mode at home and you try to restore native > 3390 DDRs to a 3380 TCM, you're going to get errors since a 3390 track > holds about 10K more data (12 4K records as compared to a 3380's 10 > records). The number of cylinders doesn't matter as long as there are at > least as many per device as you have on your home system. > > 3380 TCM on a 3390 was designed specifically to allow installations to be > able to restore 3380 backups onto 3390s. It is not designed to go the > other way unless you specifically limit cylinder counts to that of your > home system. > > Alan Altmark > z/VM Development > IBM Endicott >
