Others have offered good reasons for V XCF,OFF rather than just RESETting 
an LPAR. Here's another. With a minimal amount of configuration, you can 
enable 'reIPL' to act on this command: 

V XCF,sysname,OFF,REIPL

ReIPL is immediate and can only use the current sysres volume. That's not 
always what you want. You may need intervening time to perform some 
activity. or you may want to change sysres volumes. If reIPL fills the 
bill, you can IPL a system with no delay entirely via console command. No 
HMC necessary. This is important to us for sandbox systems where reIPL can 
be accomplished entirely by folks who don't have HMC access. 

.
.
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:   Tom Ambros <[email protected]>
To:     [email protected], 
Date:   01/20/2014 05:18 AM
Subject:        Re: Impact of XCF offline
Sent by:        IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]>



You don't have another working console in the sysplex?  If you don't vary 
the offending system out of the sysplex when it behaves as you describe 
it'll be a while (failure interval) before serialized resources are freed 
up and any new serialization takes place, if I remember correctly.  If you 

don't have the luxury of a sysplex that is all non-production you run the 
risk of affecting your production workload.  We went to the trouble of 
implementing the BCPii interface to handle a system that can't be 
partitioned because it is unreachable by any other means just for this 
situation.  I forget precisely what they called it, the first iteration 
was a function in System Automation.  It was a while back we did it. 

Thomas Ambros
Operating Systems and Connectivity Engineering
518-436-6433





From:   "van der Grijn, Bart (B)" <[email protected]>
To:     [email protected]
Date:   01/20/2014 07:59
Subject:        Re: Impact of XCF offline
Sent by:        IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]>



Peter, 

We used to IPL our systems without the V XCF,<sysname>,OFFLINE. That 
worked for years until we started to run into issues with signaling 
structures (one of the systems would occasionally not use one of the 
signaling structures after an IPL). We opened a PMR and IBM's response was 

to perform the V XCF as per <
http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/z/advantages/pso/removing.html>.
We changed our IPL procedure and haven't seen the problem since.
(This was back in z/OS 1.10)

So yes, we did see an impact with not using the V XCF OFFLINE.


Bart

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On 
Behalf Of mf db
Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2014 9:05 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Impact of XCF offline

Hello All,

This question might sound little basic and dummy, but my apologies first.
There are some situation in our shop when one of our Development LPAR do
undergo to  unresponsive state(This happens when our developers do some
destructive testings or many other factors) and even we cannot issue any
commands on Console. To resolve this we just do a de-activate and activate
to re-ipl the system. As a normal IPL procedure we issue V
XCF,OFF,SYSNAME=something. Will there be any impact to the system when we
do not issue the V XCF,OFFLINE and just do a de-activate and activate ?

Peter


----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to