On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 23:48:57 -0700 Edward Jaffe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>Huh? You have this completely reveresed in your mind. Upgrading your ENQ :>from shared to exclusive is the common case and is a *required* function :>in order to maintain the integrity of the data. Going the other way :>would be far less common ... so uncommon, in fact, that OS/MVT/MVS never :>bothered to create a service for it! There's just no need. If you want :>to downgrade from exclusive to shared, you simply DEQ and re-ENQ with :>shared scope. Which loses control if there are ten SHR waiters followed by an EXC waiter. I can see the case for EXC->SHR, and it should always be successful. -- Binyamin Dissen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.dissensoftware.com Director, Dissen Software, Bar & Grill - Israel Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me, you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain. I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems, especially those from irresponsible companies. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
