Tom, > >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.
> 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! Shane is talking about a ring of monoplexes that are working together in a GRSPlex. As he said, the "sharing boundary" is each individual monoplex. Which means that NONE of the PDSEs can be shared safely outside of the individual monoplex, no matter how big the GRSplex is. IGDSMS applies to the monoplex boundary, too, not to GRSplex boundaries. PDSE just *assumes* that systems are always in a construct where GRSplex = SYSplex, and in a ring of monoplexes that just isn't the case! This assumption has something to do with the nature of PDSE communication inside a sysplex: PDSE uses XCF communication, and that by design only works inside the sysplex, aka monoplex. Barbara Nitz ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
