> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Shmuel Metz
>
> In
> <cae1xxdhjs_8hfezdeb9la9-ppazqpniusxkdkjpyvcf0yyo...@mail.gmail.com>,
> on 07/30/2014
> at 11:11 AM, John Gilmore <[email protected]> said:
>
> >My comment that elicited his "Nonsense!" response suggested very
> >briefly that the device of making and marking a load module or program
> >object reentrant or, better, refreshable could be used to share code
> >across LPAR boundaries.
>
> No, it suggested more than that. Had that been your comment then I would have
> silently agreed. As
> written, "If 1) the execution loader has brought a load module or program
> object into storage and 2)
> that executable is marked refreshable and/or reentrant, the execution loader
> will not bring second or
> subseq", it was clearly false. The distinction between "into storage" and
> "into shared storage" is an
> important one.
Easy enough to "share code" across address space boundaries within one LPAR
(placing the program in the LPA seems simplest), but how does one "share code"
across LPAR boundaries? I'm not aware of any real storage ("memory") that can
be accessed concurrently by two or more LPARs, such that a program in "memory"
within LPAR A can be executed in LPAR B without B having to load its own copy
of it into its own "memory".
-jc-
**********************************************************************
Information contained in this e-mail message and in any attachments thereto is
confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this
message, delete any copies held on your systems, notify the sender immediately,
and refrain from using or disclosing all or any part of its content to any
other person.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
