In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 01/17/2006
at 08:04 AM, Paul Gilmartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>I don't understand how these pieces fit together. Is DAIRFAIL a sort
>of reporting component,
No. DAIRFAIL is a routine to produce a message from status data.
>analogous to SYNADAF?
It's analogous to SYNADAF, but I wouldn't call that a reporting
component. SYNADAF just formats data already reported.
>Is the Request Block Extension available to DAIRFAIL?
Presumably.
>??? For a mutually exclusive error, shouldn't there be two key
>values reported, not one?
Yes.
>Might S99ERSN, otherwise unused for
>this error code, be overloaded with the other key value?
That sounds viable, but if you write a request make it more generic
than that.
>It states there is a performance gain for reusing an existing
>allocation. Where?
Control block allocation and chaining, if nothing else.
>Does the SYSDSN ENQ remain in effect while an
>allocation is not-in-use?
Yes.
>Does the TSO FREE command
>actually remove the allocation, or merely set the not-in-use flag?
I believe that it actually frees the allocation.
>Such as, reporting both mutually exclusive keys?
That and much more.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
