AFAIK customer retention of obsolete attributes is mostly IBM's problem, not the customer's. They stopped honoring those attributes on new allocations years ago, but as long any customers retain them, DFP code still has to account for them. That means additional regression testing for pretty much nothing. I sympathize with the change team, but I don't think there's an end user performance hit.
. . JO.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 626-302-7535 Office 323-715-0595 Mobile [email protected] From: Mike Schwab <[email protected]> To: [email protected], Date: 07/16/2013 02:48 PM Subject: Re: Old usercatalogs with IMBED and REPLICATE Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> Another option would be to move various Aliases (HLQs) to new usercatalogs. Perhaps splitting them into more, smaller user catalogs. On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 2:26 PM, John McKown <[email protected]> wrote: > OK, OK, all ya'all have worn me out! <grin/> I scan to see how many catalog > I'm talking about and which ones they are. Then mention it to my boss. > Upper IT management basically won't care, so long as nothing goes wrong. > <more redacted> > -- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
