Well I don't know the number of PTF's for PDSE. We use PDSE for our production load-library since several year. We also had some problems with latches and so on but no data corruption since several years. Most times we hit a known problem and we just receive/applied a fix. So it's often just a maintenance issue. Most MVS folks are very conservative.
CICS works fine with PDSE in the DFHRPL and it can now run 7*24. Of course we are forced to use PDSE because a lot of application is written in C++. Roland -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL Sent: Friday, September 09, 2005 2:00 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Possible problem with PDSE's >I would be grateful for any group members experiences with PDSE's, or >any links to documents describing issues or problems that may be encountered. ... I used to think they were the kitty's butt, until IBM put in support for non-SMS (post hoc, ergo propter hoc?). It may be a bit of an exaggeration, or urban legend, but I thought I heard that IBM has over 100 PTF's in the last year for PDSE's. I know they consume (E?)CSA, and are easibly corrupted when shared. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
