If that's what works for you then by all means you should stick with it. I have performed literally hundreds of upgrades and I have never kept the old master catalog as the master for the new system. Mostly it has to do with "properly" setting up the master catalog in the first place. The only datasets in the master catalog should be those that get shipped with the new OS, the rest should be in usercats.
Typically I have a MASTER catalog , and (sometimes) a SYSTEM usercatalog, the rest of the sites datasets belong in other user catalogs. There are a lot of datasets that are "new" to each release, and the extra time required to remove the old ones will probably never happen if I were to leave the old master in place. I can see where you would be able to keep things going for quite a while with system symbols for most of the important datasets, but eventually you are going to have a bunch of useless entries in your master catalog or things will move and you'll end up taking the chance that you will miss it. There seems to be a lot of chance for things to go wrong, and with all of the other issues involved in a migration, making it more complex, for me, is not a "good thing". As I said though, if what you are currently doing works for you, then almost by definition it's correct, for you. Just because I feel it adds complexity, doesn't make me right, in the end, whatever works correctly is what is right. 1+1+1+1+1+1+1 = (5+2) = (4+3) = 14/2 = 7(1) = 7 On the other hand, if you are not using symbols and you are really reusing the same physical page datasets etc. then that's playing with fire. Brian ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
