George, In my opinion, you should espire to share as much as possible. Whenever using different data sets for each group of LPARs is a must, I would use a new qualifier in the data set name to differenciate the 2 groups (from the 2 previously seperate SYSPLEXes). Even though you will be using different data set names, you will still be able to keep one set of procedures by using system symbols. Keep a different IEASYMxx for each group of LPARs. HTH, Gil.
On 8/25/05, George Kozakos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We would > have 2 copies of the control dataset (one for each of the original > SYSPLEXes) but the enqueues would be seen by all systems in the new > merged SYSPLEX. > The products that this applies to are DFHSM, SMS, ACF2, CA1, Control-M, > Control-D, CA-Solve, HSC. > We are also looking at ISGNQXIT as it can modify resource names which > may be useful in specific cases. Anybody used that? Another idea is to > capture the enqueue workload from SYSPLEX A and redrive it on SYSPLEX > B. Anyone done this? > Any comments, recommendations or details of problems experienced would > be greatly appreciated. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
