> Sorry, I think I got some misleading information from > my MVS guy. The CDL VTOC does show 100% FULL.
Oh! Okay ... that is more of what one would expect. > So I would assume that IXFP would behave correctly. > However, operationally, I don't think I'd like to > expose my RVA CDL volumes to DDSR so I am having the > MVS guy exclude the Linux volumes when online to MVS. Would be nice if someone would report back what does happen. >From what you're now reporting, it looks like the CDL code is good from the MVS perspective. We also need to confirm that RVA is doing the right thing about interpreting the allocation. -- R;
