Enabling Java shared classes ( and saving/restoring) across IPL may speed up the start.
On Tue, Jun 10, 2025, 00:49 R Dooley < [email protected]> wrote: > Agree. IBM does need to continue making enhancements/improvements to the > z/OSMF ServerPac process. While working for service providers for the > past 30+ years, my primary focus has been z/OS upgrade/install activity. > After using the ISPF CustomPac dialogs for 30+ years, I was not thrilled to > hear that IBM was inserting z/OSMF (aka LIberty WAS <oink!>). On small, > single-engine clients it can take 30-45 minutes for z/OSMF to start. > > After completing my 1st z/OSMF upgrade, my reaction was "why?". Why the > z/OSMF req to produce essentially the same result as the ISPF CustomPac > dialogs? B/c everything is better in a browser? Modernize for the newer > generation of sysprogs who theoretically expect everything to happen with a > click of the mouse? Where is the "value add"? > > One notable issue w/ the z/OSMF process is that more flexibility and > accommodation is needed in the customization/workflow process. For > example, operational/target/dlib datasets cannot be resized prior to > workflow allocation. The ISPF CustomPac process offered this > accommodation, why not z/OSMF? > > Hopefully IBM will continue to make improvements and listen to our > requests. > Best regards. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
