I think you are making things a little more complicated than they should be.
I would use the same IODF for all systems. This would cause the IODF to be shared. One benefit is that an error which affects one system can be fixed from the other system. I have a HLQ for my IODF which keeps it out of the master catalog. This way I can upgrade Z/OS using FULL replacement (new master catalog) and just import connect the user catalog containing the IODF and its alias definition into the new system. What you have stumbled across is that the token matches between both IODFs and the HSA I/O configuration. On Fri, 30 May 2008 15:50:19 -0500, Johnston, Robert E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >We converted from a z800 to a z9BC in February (z/OS 1.7). We had been using >a shared SYS0 IODF for years, but when I created the IODF for the z9 I used >SYS1 from the PROD z800 LPAR (thinking keep it separate). This SYS1 IODF was >used to create the z9 IOCDS, which was used to POR the z9 and IPL the PROD >and TEST LPARs. > >I knew you could IPL with an uncataloged IODF, which is what I did for the >TEST LPAR. I didn't realize that you could not make any HCD changes if the >current IODF was not available (different MCAT), so HCD was dead on Test. > >To try and get back to shared, I created a SYS0 on Prod and tried to >activate. That didn't work because you can't change the HLQ for the IODF on >an activate (CBDA836I), only the IODF suffix. > >So, from the same work IODF, I created a prod SYS1.IODF05 and a prod >SYS0.IODF05 and wrote them to 2 different IOCDS's in the z9. I did a hardware >and software activate on Prod using SYS1.IODF05. Activate was successful and >HCD says I can still make h/w and s/w changes. > >Next I IPLed Test using the shared SYS0.IODF05. I expected to only be able to >make s/w changes but HCD now says I can make h/w and s/w changes. (If I did >make any changes from Test I don't think I could activate them on Prod.) > >To straighten things out, I'm going to need to POR with the IOCDS created >from SYS0 and IPL both Prod and Test with SYS0. Right? > >Am I living dangerously with the config that I have right now? We don't make >many changes and "never" go down. The changes I just made were to add >Explicit Device Candidate Lists to our DASD address to segregate some DASD >for Linux (I am about to venture into Linux land...). I suspect that if I >need to make another change before POR that I could repeat the SYS1/SYS0 >process. Am I forgetting anything or is there something that might bite me >that you can think of? > >Sorry for the length. Thanks for any input and have a good weekend... > >Robert Johnston >UAMS - Little Rock, AR ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
