Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Reading a scratch tape
AFAIK, there no PDSE in CMS OS simulation. I'd have to check the z/VM documentation to be sure. That said, I abandoned EXEC and EXEC2 once REXX was available. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי נֵ֣צַח יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א יְשַׁקֵּ֖ר From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Paul Gilmartin <042bfe9c879d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 9:55 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Reading a scratch tape On Sun, 11 Feb 2024 13:44:16 +, Seymour J Metz wrote: >EXEC2 didn't exist in 1971. > But later, could EXEC2 read a PDSE? > >From: Seymour J Metz >Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2024 8:09 PM > >I would assume that it's difficult or impossible with PDSE, but that there is >less need in PDSE2, due to generations. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Reading a scratch tape
On Sun, 11 Feb 2024 13:44:16 +, Seymour J Metz wrote: >EXEC2 didn't exist in 1971. > But later, could EXEC2 read a PDSE? > >From: Seymour J Metz >Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2024 8:09 PM > >I would assume that it's difficult or impossible with PDSE, but that there is >less need in PDSE2, due to generations. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Reading a scratch tape
EXEC2 didn't exist in 1971. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי נֵ֣צַח יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א יְשַׁקֵּ֖ר From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Seymour J Metz Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2024 8:09 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Reading a scratch tape I would assume that it's difficult or impossible with PDSE, but that there is less need in PDSE2, due to generations. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי נֵ֣צַח יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א יְשַׁקֵּ֖ר From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Paul Gilmartin <042bfe9c879d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> Sent: Friday, February 9, 2024 6:46 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Reading a scratch tape On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 22:41:03 +, Pommier, Rex wrote: > >Actually, it does make sense (at least to me) to have this threshold set. >We've gone back more than once to rescue a developer or support person who >inadvertently scratched a tape the day before and we were able to recover it >for them by using this "expired but not really" feature...> > I believe PDS86 has a similar ability to recover deleted PDS members. Does this work for PDSE? I suspect it's harder. Is that used as an argument against migrating from PDS to PDSE? That's what generations are for. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Reading a scratch tape
I would assume that it's difficult or impossible with PDSE, but that there is less need in PDSE2, due to generations. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי נֵ֣צַח יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א יְשַׁקֵּ֖ר From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Paul Gilmartin <042bfe9c879d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> Sent: Friday, February 9, 2024 6:46 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Reading a scratch tape On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 22:41:03 +, Pommier, Rex wrote: > >Actually, it does make sense (at least to me) to have this threshold set. >We've gone back more than once to rescue a developer or support person who >inadvertently scratched a tape the day before and we were able to recover it >for them by using this "expired but not really" feature...> > I believe PDS86 has a similar ability to recover deleted PDS members. Does this work for PDSE? I suspect it's harder. Is that used as an argument against migrating from PDS to PDSE? That's what generations are for. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Reading a scratch tape
On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 22:41:03 +, Pommier, Rex wrote: > >Actually, it does make sense (at least to me) to have this threshold set. >We've gone back more than once to rescue a developer or support person who >inadvertently scratched a tape the day before and we were able to recover it >for them by using this "expired but not really" feature...> > I believe PDS86 has a similar ability to recover deleted PDS members. Does this work for PDSE? I suspect it's harder. Is that used as an argument against migrating from PDS to PDSE? That's what generations are for. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Reading a scratch tape
Hi Gil, Actually, it does make sense (at least to me) to have this threshold set. We've gone back more than once to rescue a developer or support person who inadvertently scratched a tape the day before and we were able to recover it for them by using this "expired but not really" feature. It is really no different from old physical tapes, where the data on a scratch tape wasn't really gone until the tape was physically written over. In those days, one could jump through hoops (and security) to get the contents brought back. This simply maintains that capability. Without the expire hold, as soon as the tape is scratch, the data is gone. Rex -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin Sent: Thursday, February 8, 2024 4:19 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Reading a scratch tape rpomm...@sfgmembers.com> wrote: >In the "scratch category" settings, you can set an "expire hold" field that >tells the TS77xx how long to keep an expired tape before releasing it to >scratch. I believe that once that threshold is crossed, the TS77xx rewrites >the tape mark to the beginning of the tape and all data is lost - unless IBM >has some magic they can preform on the back end. > "Expired" but not really!? This makes as little sense as expecting to read a temporary data set in a subsequent job. With a physical tape one might EXCP, bypass errors, and recover some data. But when my employer was designing a product, we learned that some users expect the scratch pool to be managed FIFO. I was astonished. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- The information contained in this message is confidential, protected from disclosure and may be legally privileged. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, distribution, copying, or any action taken or action omitted in reliance on it, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
