>On Sat, 7 Sep 2013 21:52:07 -0400, John Gilmore wrote: > >>Qua sysprog, I am sure thjat you are aware that PDSEs are problematic >>early in an IPL process; but none of these problems obtains for COBOL >>APs. > >Very late to this, so sorry if my concerns have been answered earlier. >What about shops with a ring of monoplexes ?. The sysplex scope is each ind= >ividual monoplex - but the sharing boundary is the larger GRSplex. Latch co= >ntention - particularly PDSE latches - are a PITA.
Never too late! I need to know these answers too. Some of my customers say PDSE is not a problem, others are quite concerned, like you. I did a quick search and found this: www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=tss1prs4280&aid=1? Where it says: PDSE sharing parameters are defined in the IGDSMSxx member of SYS1.PARMLIB. You can choose a NORMAL or EXTENDED sharing option. EXTENDED provides for sharing at the member level across a sysplex, where NORMAL provides for sharing at the PDSE data set level across a sysplex. The DSNTYPE(LIBRARY) parameter will default to a PDSE definition when a library is allocated with DSORG=PO or directory block allocation request is made in the SPACE parameter. It also says not to share PDSEs outside of GRSplex, but this seems like it woudl work for you, since the GRSplex is your sharing boundary. It sounds like you can do the kind of sharing you need to with PDSEs....let me know! Cheers, TomR >> COBOL is the Language of the Future! << ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
