On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 10:41:10 -0700, Dick Bond wrote: >*Exactly! *This is the correct way of doing RSU**** maintenance upgrades. >It also solves some of the objections to the way RESTORE works as well. >There are those who say they never ACCEPT maintenance which will cause a lot >of problems which is then attributed to poor SMP/E design. SMP/E is the >best thing since bacon-and-eggs if used properly. > Complete with the LDL cholesterol.
An ideally designed SMP/E would have no need for ACCEPT. Simply, the systems programmer should be able to restore any previous service level. It should be a multi-level UNDO. I suppose this could be done by taking a flash copy of the entire CSI after each individual PTF and eschewing ACCEPT. ACCEPT creates an undesirable firewall. If I wish to RESTORE to a particular level, I must ACCEPT to that level, then I can never RESTORE to an earlier level. Our testers don't bother with ACCEPT. They take frequent backups and preserve them indefinitely. Then if a particular service level is needed for problem recreation, they restore (in the sense of DFSMS, not of SMP/E) the service level needed. Similarly, for the testing I need to do, it's easiest for me to create a new CSI; install the product, and add PTFs to taste. The practice terrifies some of our developers. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
