Thanks Ed, Kees, and Barbara for your responses. Yes, a sysplex cold-start is assumed.
But, I still have this nagging idea in my head though that SMS controlled volumes have sysplex name on them somewhere. We do have a separate plex up at times for early z/OS upgrade testing(not up right now), and I seem to recall that if I try to write data across sysplex boundaries, I get SMS error messages that the volume is owned by another plex, and the write fails. Even though the "old" plex name and the "new" plex name would not have active systems at the same time, wouldn't the affect be the same? Wouldn't allocations to SMS disk after the sysplex rename, and subsequent restart fail? Does this sound familiar? _________________________________________________________________ Dave Jousma Assistant Vice President, Mainframe Services [email protected] 1830 East Paris, Grand Rapids, MI 49546 MD RSCB1G p 616.653.8429 f 616.653.8497 This e-mail transmission contains information that is confidential and may be privileged. It is intended only for the addressee(s) named above. If you receive this e-mail in error, please do not read, copy or disseminate it in any manner. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. Please reply to the message immediately by informing the sender that the message was misdirected. After replying, please erase it from your computer system. Your assistance in correcting this error is 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
