On Thu, 30 May 2013 19:09:57 -0500, Walt Farrell <[email protected]> wrote:
>That's one reason that IBM recommends using RACF's duplexing of it's database, >rather than depending on hardware mirror copies, and also recommend taking >nightly backups of the database. When an administrator makes a mistake it can >save a lot of hassle. > >And, if RACF itself makes a mistake, there's a good chance that only the >primary (or the duplex) copy will be damaged. But if you were depending on the >hardware mirroring they're all broken. Hmmmm. Maybe. We once had a situation where a test system IPL failed. Looked like MCAT. All systems active on the same shared MCAT were o.k. Tried another system - IPL failed. Same at secondary and tertiary sites. Crit1 - we couldn't have any production system fail, because it looked like we couldn't bring it back up. Anywhere. After some SADump analysis by ISC it turned out the MCAT was o.k, but the environment was compromised due to LE issue in the linklist (LPA maybe) - was back in 2.10 -> z/OS 1.1 so-called LE upward compatibility feature rollout ... :(. So all that good intent may go down the toilet for no obvious reason. I'm sure RACF or any other component can be an "innocent" victim as much as MCAT. Shane ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
