Different RACF and fully shared DASD is a recipe for security problems and inconsistencies. I suppose RRSF could help. GRS ring is reported to be abysmal and nodes > 2 Same issues in trying to keep the catalogs in sync, which is required to SMS to be reliable. As will as trying to keep the SMS xCDS (and DFHSM) in sync.
I had 4 LPARS, all monoplex, perhaps a dozen, carefully shared volumes. Including the SYSRES. I did have separate Unix system filesystems for each. All volumes were potentially shareable, but I varied most of them offline at IPL from the 3 LPARs they were a part of. I had separate SMS pools for the application data in each LPAR. > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On > Behalf Of Gord Neill > Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2022 1:06 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: To share or not to share DASD > > [EXTERNAL EMAIL] > > Dave, > Each LPAR has its own RACF and Catalogs, and they are using SMS. This shop > is currently running z/OS 1.9 on very old hardware, in the process of > upgrading to current H/W and S/W. > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On > Behalf Of Gibney, Dave > Sent: November 24, 2022 4:02 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: To share or not to share DASD > > You can't share PDSE in such an environment. You can "get away" with only > and rarely updating from one LPAR, and reading in the others. > > Multiple RACF databases? Are the Catalogs the same and shared between all > 3 LPARS? > > Is the site using SMS? > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On > > Behalf Of Gord Neill > > Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2022 12:55 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: To share or not to share DASD > > > > [EXTERNAL EMAIL] > > > > G'day all, > > I've been having discussions with a small shop (single mainframe, 3 > > separate LPARs, no Sysplex) regarding best practices for DASD sharing. > > Their view is to share all DASD volumes across their 3 LPARs > > (Prod/Dev/Test) so their developers/sysprogs can get access to current > > datasets, but in order to do that, they'll need to use GRS Ring or MIM > > with the associated overhead. I don't know of any other serialization > > products, and since this is not a Sysplex environment, they can't use > > GRS Star. I suggested the idea of no GRS, keeping most DASD volumes > isolated to each LPAR, with a "shared string" > > available to all LPARs for copying datasets, but it was not well received. > > > > Just curious as to how other shops are handling this. TIA! > > > > > > Gord Neill | Senior I/T Consultant | GlassHouse Systems > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
