On 9/12/2013 9:03 AM, Lizette Koehler wrote:
Tom,
I might suggest you underestimated the outage time and costs. For the
compiler and source management software - probably 2 hours.
But to change out all of the load libraries into PDS/E datasets - much
longer.
That will impact any function in z/OS that runs production code. So assume
that joblibs/steplibs in any DB2 Stored procedure, CICS STC DFHREPL, IMS
STCs DFSRESLB, MQ STCs, and all batch JCL have to change. That outage could
a huge impact.
I do not see the conversion from PDS to PDS/E big if all rules are followed.
But if I have an application load library that needs to be changed from PDS
to PDS/E that is in all of the above mentioned JCL, then I have to have
everything come down on all systems at one time. That could be a much
longer window and almost a Plex wide outage.
Yes, one could start by putting in an empty PDS/E above the PDS in all of
the above mentioned JCL and then over time get things straightened out. I
could not start loading that PDS/E until all the application JCL has also
had it added.
Yet, even with a pre-staging of the PDS/E into the JCL. Our shop, for
example, has not cycled some of these types of tasks for over 4 months. Our
time line to change to PDS/E in these tasks (CICS, IMS, MQ, DB2, etc...)
would be at least 6 months or so for a normal process. To cycle these tasks
sooner could take an act of some deity.
For the application group much longer to start changing all of their
steplibs and joblibs. They have more work, because, even if it is a benign
change like adding one DD statement to the steplib/joblib - that JCL has to
go through all the normal checkout processes. QA, Unit test, Validation,
change control, etc.... That could take up to a year or so; however, if
you have 60k or so product batch JCL (and you do not know which ones are
really live), it could take even longer. Therefore, until all the
application JCL has been updated, the STCs would continue to have an empty
PDS/E dataset. That is where I see the issue.
So one version of this plan, how change all PDS to PDS/E for load modules,
would be to start with forcing the Change Management Software to include an
empty PDS/E into all JCL that goes through it for steplib and joblib.
System folks would start by placing the same empty PDS/E into the JCL they
manage. Lastly the shop's management would need to assign a group of
application folks to focus on review and changing the remaining JCL for
production. It will be almost like a Y2K effort. There would also need to
be an analysis of how many PDS/E Datasets will be needed.
As some applications will have unique PDSs for their applications so tasks
like the CICS DFHRPL may not have 1 PDS for application load modules but
MULTIPLE PDS datasets. And your storage admin folks will also need to be
involved as some load libraries are huge and there would need to be two of
everything until the conversions complete - 1 PDS (current) 1 PDS/E - future
replacement.
Just my $0.02 worth.
Lizette
<snip>
Let's assume 1000 COBOL licenses in the world, with 100 executable
datasets per license (IMNSHO, ridiculously conservative estimates). So
that's 100,000 executable datasets. I'll set, again, a conservative
estimate of $1,000 to convert the PDS to PDSE. Here is how I break that
down. Planning - 1 hour. Allocating and copying - 1 hour. Change control
paperwork - 2 hours. Implementation - 2 hours.
Post-implementation followup - 2 hours. That's 8 hours at a fully-burdened
rate of $125/hr. I haven't even figured in the cost of DASD. That's $100M
US just to convert this small scenario I've laid out here.
This is the last time I'll ever respond to a post by John Gilmore.
Regards,
Tom Conley
Lizette,
Great analysis of some of the operational costs involved in this PDS to
PDSE conversion just to support COBOL V5.1. In many shops, this will
not be a trivial exercise, as some on IBM-Main have stated. This will
be a serious migration effort, and cost significant dollars. I'm still
mystified as to why IBM felt it had to impose this completely
unnecessary restriction. What reason is there to force COBOL V5.1
executables to come from a PDSE?
Regards,
Tom Conley
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
