I don't understand why you think this a good thing! It' not. Aliases en masse is NOT a problem! It reduces clutter, and makes a storage analyst's job a heck of a lot easier!
- I'm a SuperHero with neither powers, nor motivation! Kimota! -----Original Message----- From: "Tony @ Comcast" <[email protected]> Sender: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2010 15:41:32 To: <[email protected]> Reply-To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Dumb question on DEFINE ALIAS Years ago I worked for a small MVS shop that functioned quite well using the "catalog name being the same as the hlq" trick to avoid the need for creating aliases en masse. It was handy for the TSO user population to have a catalog called ISPF, the prefixing everyone's personal datasets accordingly. If I were in the storage management business these days (glad I'm not!) I'd continue to exploit this "feature." -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Darth Keller Sent: Friday, July 09, 2010 2:27 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Dumb question on DEFINE ALIAS >>Subject: Dumb question on DEFINE ALIAS >>What is the reason for defining a catalog alias? I think I understand the technical effect but I don't understand the big picture purpose. >>Suppose I wanted to define and catalog some new datasets FOO.THIS and FOO.THAT. Why would I issue something like >> DEFINE ALIAS (NAME(FOO ) RELATE(SOME.CATALOG)) >>I understand the "little picture" reason: to specify FOO as an alias for SOME.CATALOG but big picture, why would I not just create and catalog >>FOO.THIS and FOO.THAT using JCL? What is the advantage of or reason for defining the alias? >>Is there an overview somewhere of catalogs and catalog management? So isn't there sneaky way to get away without defining aliases? If your datasets all start with the 2 levels A.B and you have a usercatalog named "A.B", then all your A.B.** datasets end up cataloged in the usercatalog "A.B" by default. I ran into this in one shop where they had a catalog named "A" and all the A.** datasets were cataloged in that usercatalog - no alias defined. I did not like it and got rid of it as fast as I could. This method pretty much requires that you have a separate usercatalog for each 'set' of datasets. In my current shop, that would mean thousands of catalogs if we carried it out to the bitter end. ddk This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee(s). If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, distribution, copying, forwarding or other use of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message and all copies and backups thereof. Thank you. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
