> SYSDSN is Allocation, not ISPF.
Correct. I meant SYSDSN ENQ behavior done by allocation on behalf of ISPF
edit.
> I believe that what you are seeing is that
> for sequential data sets ISPF allocation with disposition OLD but for PDS
> it allocates with SHR. ISPF does it's own ENQ's to serialize updates to
> PDS members.
Agreed. Having had coffee, I attempted to say what I really meant in a
subsequent post.
> Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:11:56 -0500
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: tcpip, vary obey command failed : exclusive control
> To: [email protected]
>
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/07/2008
> at 09:29 AM, J R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> >ISTR that ISPF edit's SYSDSN ENQ behaves differently
> >for a sequential dataset versus a member of a PDS.
>
> SYSDSN is Allocation, not ISPF. I believe that what you are seeing is that
> for sequential data sets ISPF allocation with disposition OLD but for PDS
> it allocates with SHR. ISPF does it's own ENQ's to serialize updates to
> PDS members.
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
> ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html
> We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
> (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
_________________________________________________________________
Helping your favorite cause is as easy as instant messaging. You IM, we give.
http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=text_hotmail_join
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
