There may be other considerations dependant on the device type moving from an to. But when we have gone to a newer drive that was backward compatible, the device type in the MVS catalog didn't get changed. The newer drives would read the older tapes with no change to the MVS catalog. CA-1 doesn't care about the MVS catalog in this regard.
We moved from 3480 (18 track) to 3490E (36 track). Thank you and have a Terrific day! Jonathan Goossen, DTM ACT Mainframe Storage Group Personal: 651-361-4541 Department Support Line: 651-361-5555 For help with communication and leadership skills checkout Woodwinds Toastmasters. IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> wrote on 06/25/2012 12:41:46 PM: > From: Chuck Arney <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Date: 06/25/2012 12:43 PM > Subject: Catalog Device Type Conversion > Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> > > I know this must have been discussed in the past but a search of the > archives has not turned up a definitive answer. > > We are working with a tape hardware migration solution that may end up with > us needing to change the device type code in MVS catalog records for > existing tape data sets. The data sets will not be recreated but the > catalog device type codes may need to be updated to direct device allocation > to use the new devices rather than the old devices for input data sets. > > The MVS catalog has never been my area of expertise so this raises a few > questions. > > 1. What do we use for the catalog update? Are there any z/OS provided > facilities to do this or does a custom solution need to be developed? Doing > some searching has only turned up Dave Cartwright's ICF3490 program from the > CBTTAPE File 172 which does direct catalog record updates. This could be > adapted, but are there better techniques to get this update done? > > 2. Does anything need to be done, in the catalog records, for handling of > an esoteric (that is, an esoteric used at data set creation time)? I'm not > an allocation expert but from recent observations it seems to me that device > selection for input tape data set allocation is somehow influenced by the > creation esoteric and not just by the device type code. Is this true or was > it just happenstance? > > 3. Are any changes necessary to a tape management system's TMC for a > dynamically changed device type? Of the five TMS'es we support, I don't > recall any of them doing anything device type dependent that would override > or conflict with the MVS allocation selection, but if there is something to > be concerned about here I'd like to know about it beforehand. > > Thanks for any input you may offer. > > Chuck Arney > Arney Computer Systems > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee(s). If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, distribution, copying, forwarding or other use of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message and all copies and backups thereof. Thank you. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
