On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 11:45:47 -0500, Paul Gilmartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 08:51:16 -0500, Mark Zelden wrote: >> >>You must at least set PROFILE_SHARING=YES in the ISPF configuration >>table and you also have to remove the the customization for >>ISPF_TEMPORARY_DATA_SET_QUALIFIER that includes a system unique >>name if you enable this feature. See the "Profile Sharing" section in the >>ISPF Planning and Customization manual. >> >>BTW Ted, that section also talks about removing the SYSIKJUA propagation >>in GRS. >> >If some future release (or a USERMOD?) were to remove not just >SYSIKJUA propagation, but to remove the ENQ entirely, might it >then be possible for a user to have concurrent sessions not only >in different LPARs, but even in a single LPAR? > >>The problem with migrating to this new support in my environment would >>be deciding which ISPF profile to keep for any particular user since there >>is one per system. (Thinking out loud...) >> >Would it be possible to give users individually a choice whether >to use shared profiles or multiple profiles? Different logon >PROCs? Different logon CLISTs? System symbols? Aliases with >embedded system symbols? (Some users might prefer to keep their >profiles system-sensitive.) Sure. I wouldn't really have a choice. Like I said, I would provide a clist/exec to copy the profile of their choice (by prompting for an LPAR name most likely so they don't have to type the entire name) to a new shared profile. Since the logon clist would check for that first, those that chose to do so would get the shared profile. Those that didn't would get their old profiles. Because of the new userid std / renames done 10 years ago, I already support logon clists that use a single name for the ISPF profile regardless of LPAR (under some of the old userid naming conventions). Those users have never been able to logon to more than one LPAR at the same time. Also, those same users wouldn't have to change anything to get the new support. Today when the try to logon to multiple LPARs, (which they sometimes do accidentally), they actually can do it but get stopped trying to get into ISPF because of their profile already being in use. >I don't suppose >ISPF_TEMPORARY_DATA_SET_QUALIFIER can be made user-sensitive or >user-customizable. > Userid sensative? Well, I suppose one could go back to using exit16 to do something based on userid (like I used to) if there was a userid naming standard. User customizable? I wouldn't want that. That would be a nightmare for the dasd management team (SMS, HSM rules etc). Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] z/OS 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
