On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 12:35:35 -0500, Arthur Gutowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 10:25:58 -0500, Tom Marchant <m42tom- >[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>You're right, he didn't say where the apply job was run. Perhaps I >>misunderstood. > >Maybe so, but it's still a *really bad* idea to apply maintenance to a running >system. Yes. I think everyone agrees. But never say never... It may be a bad idea to apply maintenance to a running system, but it's even a worse idea to IPL a production system and have an outage when it can be avoided. Why do you think so many changes can be made dynamically on z/OS (more and more all the time). Do you think IBM would have spent all the time an effort to get something like dynamic activation of service in z/OS UNIX (F OMVS,ACTIVATE=SERVICE) if everyone could always afford an IPL to get a fix in? Rolling IPLs may not work. Even in the most "sysplex enabled" shops I've been at there are always some applications that live on particular LPARs and need an outage to move or maybe can't even be moved. Do you really want to IPL for an annoying ISPF bug that only affects TSO/ISPF users? Or maybe just an LLA UPDATE or dynamic LPA load and avoid the outage and make a bunch of people happy. 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
