A few IBM products run with NODSI intentionally. Looking the I&T, looks
like PSF, VLF, DLF, FFST, RMF, JES2, JES3, *MASTER*, SMF, CAS
To be clear and picky, most of these are components of the z/OS base, not
products. There's a big difference between a product needing NODSI and the
operating
On Thu, 24 Oct 2019 16:15:08 +, David Purdy wrote:
>...
>It would be desirable to update a PDSE while DISP=SHR and DSI is set, without
>adversely impacting anyone. There is an exit to have PSF close an idle
>library, to be used in conjunction with DSI (if I'm reading the doc right).
>Bo
03c5dc1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
To: IBM-MAIN
Sent: Thu, Oct 24, 2019 11:01 AM
Subject: Re: PDS to PDSE conversion issues
Thats correct gil. A few IBM products run with NODSI intentionally. Looking
the I&T, looks like PSF, VLF, DLF, FFST, RMF, JES2, JES3, *MASTER*, SMF, CAS
I wouldn’
List On Behalf Of
Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2019 10:07 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: PDS to PDSE conversion issues
**CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL**
**DO NOT open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected
emails**
On Wed, 23 Oct 2019 20:37:52 +
On Wed, 23 Oct 2019 20:37:52 +, Jousma, David wrote:
>Defaults to nodsi in sched00 I'm guessing
>
I'm very naive here. All I know is from a search that found:
https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSLTBW_2.1.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r1.apss000/deppt.htm
Other hits seem to indicate that
Spot on, Dave!
-Original Message-
From: Jousma, David <01a0403c5dc1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
To: IBM-MAIN
Sent: Wed, Oct 23, 2019 08:16 PM
Subject: Re: PDS to PDSE conversion issues
Defaults to nodsi in sched00 I'
.8429 | fax: 616.653.2717
From: Paul Gilmartin <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2019 3:32 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: PDS to PDSE conversion issues
**CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL**
**DO NOT open attachmen
On Wed, 23 Oct 2019 19:18:49 +, David Purdy wrote:
>Dave, I was unclear. The process is a dasd volume reorg to maximize
>contiguous free extents. That process, which some products call a sweeper or
>compaction, moved a dataset that was opened by PSF but not enqueued. Quite
>right that an
way is the PDSE being
compressed, but combining multiple extents into one for sure.
David
-Original Message-
From: Jousma, David <01a0403c5dc1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
To: IBM-MAIN
Sent: Wed, Oct 23, 2019 02:41 PM
Subject: Re: PDS to PDSE conversion issues
David, I g
ber 23, 2019 8:34 AM
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>Subject: Re: PDS to PDSE conversion issues
>
>**CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL**
>
>**DO NOT open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected
>emails**
>
>This is within one sysplex. We're asking ours
David Purdy
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2019 8:34 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: PDS to PDSE conversion issues
**CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL**
**DO NOT open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected
emails**
This is within one sysplex. We're asking ourselve
2:20 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: PDS to PDSE conversion issues
>
> I recently converted several PSF libraries, resulting in a problem if a dasd
> reorg moved the dataset while PSF tasks are up. PSF does not issue an
> enqueue but has the dataset open
t; To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: PDS to PDSE conversion issues
>
> I recently converted several PSF libraries, resulting in a problem if a dasd
> reorg moved the dataset while PSF tasks are up. PSF does not issue an
> enqueue but has the dataset open. The volume reorg on
Oct 22, 2019 03:06 PM
Subject: PDS to PDSE conversion issues
We are currently thinking about converting many of our PDS libraries to PDSE.
While researching the possible pitfalls to a PDSE one that concerned me the
most is
"Blocked Workload" that Thomas Reed discussed at SHARE in 2018.
On Tue, 22 Oct 2019 10:17:07 -0500, Toby Seguin wrote:
>We are currently thinking about converting many of our PDS libraries to PDSE.
>... Anything else I should be looking closer at?
>
When an aliased PDS member is deleted, the aliases remain valid. For a
PDSE the aliases are automatically del
Take a look at BLWLINTHD and BLWLTRPCT in IEAOPTxx, Tuning options for blocked
workloads.
Mark Jacobs
Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email.
GPG Public Key -
https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get&search=markjac...@protonmail.com
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Tuesday,
I don't have any recent experience with 100% utilization, but isn't that a
generic problem with any shared resource?
I doubt this would be an issue unless you have a PDSE with lots of output
activity. But I don't see that a PDS would do better.
sas
On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 10:27 AM Toby Seguin <
We are currently thinking about converting many of our PDS libraries to PDSE.
While researching the possible pitfalls to a PDSE one that concerned me the
most is
"Blocked Workload" that Thomas Reed discussed at SHARE in 2018.
This situation is said to occur when CPU is near 100% (pretty common
18 matches
Mail list logo
