On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 08:40:54 -0700, Craig Bakken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>This may be somewhat of a religious question, Is it better to be right up to the current level of available maintenance or is it better to hang back a few months worth so as not to apply a PTF that goes PE? Is Z/OS 1.8 so buggy that current maintenance is required? > It is somewhat religious and you're going to get lots of different answers. All of which have probably been covered in the archives. IBM's recommendation is to be at current RSU... since that already goes though CST prior to being marked for RSU. But since everyone pretty much does that these days, to me it is really no different than being on current PUT was in "the old days" and I have seen problems get rolled out too often (if everyone waits to for the RSU, we are all testing it together). So these days we are doing quarterly RSU minus 1 quarter + HIPERs. HIPERs get looked at on a daily basis via ASAP notification and we usually download current holddata and run SMP/E report errorsysmods weekly or more than that just prior to rolling out a new sysres. However, when rolling out a new OS to the first LPAR (other than sysprog sandbox / test) I always start with current RSU + hipers to try and avoid as many problems as possible. New OS rollouts go though extra testing and sign offs, so I feel more comfortable being "bleeding edge" on maintenance. Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group: G-ITO mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] z/OS and OS390 expert at http://searchDataCenter.com/ateExperts/ Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
