I recognize that sysplex-wide IPLs are sometimes unavoidable although I'm
hardly an enthusiastic fan. Scheduled or not, there's comfort-zone line
between outage and OOOUUUTTTAGE. A sysplex cold start is fraught with peril
under the rosiest of circumstances. While any scheduled outage can go long
because of unforeseen problems, you don't want one so far extended that
your replacement has ample time to set up pictures of her kids and dogs in
your (former) office by the time systems are back in production.
.
.
JO.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
626-302-7535 Office
323-715-0595 Mobile
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mark Zelden
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
CHNA.COM> To
Sent by: IBM [email protected]
Mainframe cc
Discussion List
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject
.EDU> Re: Change CFRM policy name for IPL
09/05/2007 09:49
AM
Please respond to
IBM Mainframe
Discussion List
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
.EDU>
On Wed, 5 Sep 2007 09:15:48 -0700, Skip Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Paolo's procedure will handle the change with what amounts to a
>sysplex-wide cold start. I always worry about 'cold start' of any stripe
or
>flavor. What happens if some otherwise trivial error results in no system
>available?
That's one point of view. Another is:
Exactly the reason I like doing a sysplex wide IPL when the opportunity
presents itself during a *scheduled* outage. It's a heck of a lot better
to deal with during a scheduled outage then when under the gun when
something very bad happens and takes out your entire sysplex. Plus
it cleans up consoles :-)
<snip>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
