I fail to see why you would expect an abend if the member was being edited in ISPF when it was deleted in batch. My expectation was that the batch delete would work fine and that user performing the ISPF edit would not notice any impact.
I would expect the following to happen: 1) The member would be successfully deleted. 2) If the ISPF EDIT session ended WITHOUT performing a SAVE after the delete had occurred, the member would remain deleted. 3) If the ISPF EDIT session ended WITH performing a SAVE after the delete had occurred, the member would be re-added and would exist. Because this was my expectation and I seemed easy enough to test, I did so. The results were exactly as described above. Bill Bass United Healthcare Greenville, SC -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joel C. Ewing Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2013 11:12 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Standard TSO/MVS way to delete a PDS(E) member On 10/02/2013 01:06 PM, Mark Zelden wrote: > On Wed, 2 Oct 2013 11:47:44 -0500, Kirk Wolf <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Mark, >> >> I'm curious - if the PDS is allocated with DISP=SHR, will IDCAMS use ISPF >> compatible ENQs to serialize the member when deleting? >> >> Kirk Wolf >> Dovetailed Technologies >> http://dovetail.com >> > > > In a word, no. But this is a problem all over the OS with various > utilities. If > the scenario you want to use IDCAMS w/SHR for deleting a PDS member > is a concern, then use ISPF services. If not, then it works just fine and > does the trick in the overwhelming majority of scenarios that I can think > of wanting to use it for. For example, setting up a batch installation, > maintenance or production job stream. If it is something you need to > repeat on a regular basis, there is probably not a human involved > editing the PDS member when you desire to do the delete. > > Regards, > > Mark > -- > Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS > mailto:[email protected] > ITIL v3 Foundation Certified > Mark's MVS Utilities: http://www.mzelden.com/mvsutil.html > Systems Programming expert at http://search390.techtarget.com/ateExperts/ When SHR allocation is used, an enqueue on the member is not as important as the exclusive enqueue ISPF services uses on "SPFEDIT" Major name to guarantee no one else tries to open the PDS for output at the same time with an overlapping directory update, as that would be fatal for PDS integrity if allowed. At least for many decades MVS prevents PDS directory destruction by ABENDing witih 213-30 an attempt to OPEN a PDS for OUTPUT if it is already OPEN for output elsewhere, but that means unless a delete process somehow uses the required ISPF SPFEDIT enqueue, it is subject to "random" ABEND failures if its execution conflicts with other PDS update activity that also uses SHR allocation of that PDS. -- Joel C. Ewing, Bentonville, AR [email protected] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN This e-mail, including attachments, may include confidential and/or proprietary information, and may be used only by the person or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or his or her authorized agent, the reader is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message and delete this e-mail immediately. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
