John, Before the OP deletes masses of entries, did you perhaps mean to say, Define Nonvsam with the Devicetye and Recatalog parameters?
-----Original Message----- From: John Eells [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 9:30 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Catalog Device Type Conversion I guess I need to dust off more brain cells. I must obviously have used DELETE/DEFINE. Chuck Arney wrote: > Thanks for the suggestions John, but I don't find an IDCAMS ALTER > parameter that allows you to modify the hex device type code for a > nonvsam catalog entry. Am I looking in the wrong place or are you > dreaming of the way "it should be"? > > I'd prefer to use something like you suggest but I fail to see a way > to make it work. > > Chuck Arney > Arney Computer Systems > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of John Eells > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 3:05 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Catalog Device Type Conversion > > Chuck Arney wrote: > <snip> >> Specifically, I am looking for suggestions on what is available for >> mass catalog updates. I'd rather not reinvent the wheel if there are >> useable tools around. > <snip> > > I don't know of anything in z/OS itself that does this, but perhaps > someone else's product could help. There are at least a couple of > companies out there with catalog management products, I think. And a > search of the CBT site might bear fruit. > > Many moons ago, after a similar search for existing tools, I wrote a > quick throwaway program to parse LISTCAT output and build ALTER > control statements for IDCAMS for exactly this purpose. (In our case, > some people had used esoteric names to catalog their data sets using a > utility or DYNALLOC--I forget which--and the catalog entries had to be > fixed to move the data sets to different device types.) > > These days I'd think it more sensible to use the Catalog Search > Interface to find the entries needed to build IDCAMS control > statements, which would put a reasonably stable API on both ends of > the code. There might be a better way but that's where I'd tend to > start if I had to do it over today. (Well, actually, I'd start by > dusting off the long-unused brain cells I once used for programming, > but...) > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- John Eells z/OS Technical Marketing IBM Poughkeepsie [email protected] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
