On Wed, 7 Jun 2006 12:38:53 +0100, Perryman, Brian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi folks > >Some people in our apps support department create test files under >their own TSO userid HLQ, which get SMS-placed onto the 'user' storage >pool, but then later they manually rename these files to have a production >dataset prefix, I have no idea why - so they can test some production >jobs, perhaps. Anyway, these production HLQs would normally go in their >own catalog and SMS storage pool but, because the files were renamed, >they're staying in the original catalog and storage pool. If they are renamed with ALTER ... NEWNAME, they will stay in the same catalog. TSO or ISPF rename will recatalog them in the correct catalog. Otherwise normal catalog search would not find them. I suggest giving serious consideration to looking at your SMS design. IMHO, you should not be using different pools for production/test/user or for different applications. What benefit do you think you gain by doing so? I suggest that SMS would work better for you if you split your DASD farm by data set size and let it go at that. > >It's playing havoc with my storage policies and DR planning. > >Any ideas if there's a quick and easy way (preferably something in RACF?) >I can stop them doing this? > >Cheers > >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
