On Wed, 2006-06-07 at 07:29 -0500, Tom Marchant wrote: > 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.
Mmmmm - can't agree. We do likewise, and find it *VERY* sensible for DR. Only production gets mirrored - that is only production pools. When sh1t hits fan, prod counts - devl will be recovered if and when we have the time and inclination. Anything else is irrelevant. However, I concur with the other post re allowing renaming to prod HLQs. Doesn't happen in my shops. Onside auditors can very *very* useful to push things like that if there is any resistance. Shane ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
