Thank you all! I was a little worried after the first 3 responses of Yes, No, and Maybe.
As it turns out, I may have to reallocate the library anyway for future use so a new linklist set or IPL will be needed but it's nice to know that I could get away with it if I needed to. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- This email message and any accompanying materials may contain proprietary, privileged and confidential information of CIT Group Inc. or its subsidiaries or affiliates (collectively, "CIT"), and are intended solely for the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, any use, disclosure, printing, copying or distribution, or reliance on the contents, of this communication is strictly prohibited. CIT disclaims any liability for the review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or the taking of any action in reliance upon, this communication by persons other than the intended recipient(s). If you have received this communication in error, please reply to the sender advising of the error in transmission, and immediately delete and destroy the communication and any accompanying materials. To the extent permitted by applicable law, CIT and others may inspect, review, monitor, analyze, copy, record and retain any communications sent from or received at this email address. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Skip Robinson I like the advice to bounce LLA. This should eliminate a timing issue. While LLA is down, the (new) directory will be searched on each fetch. Once LLA is back up, he will have an updated picture of where members are located. It's important to distinguish between an allocation change and a directory change. FETCH cares a whole lot about PDS extents. Only LLA cares about directory details. . JO.Skip Robinson -----Original Message----- Mark Zelden On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 13:08:57 -0500, Tom Marchant <[email protected]> wrote: >On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 13:47:06 -0400, Ken Porowski wrote: > >>Does anyone know if an LLA REFRESH will pick up increased directory >>blocks? > >It will not. Read the section, "Removing or compressing a data set >in an active LNKLST set" in the Init and Tuning Reference. > It will work fine. Compressing is a different issue and as long as Ken doesn't care about what may happen to jobs / tasks trying to use those modules while he is working with that data set, then all will be fine after he does the LLA refresh. The directory will be read again when refreshed, so the new blocks added will be picked up. And I've done this before, but you can run a simple test if you want to verify for yourself. Mark -- Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
