I have found the discussion interesting, particularly in what has not been said (or perhaps I missed it).
The OP asked about an ENQ. The post did not indicate what resource it wanted to ENQ on (and as Tom Marchant point out, it is of course critical that all players in a serialization game use the same serialization, such as the same ENQ Qname/Rname). The discussion then decided that this must be a SYSDSN ENQ, and delved into SWA. Of course, ENQ's have nothing to do with SWA. Allocations do. Thus we are really talking about two thing -- allocating a data set and obtaining the ENQ that by protocol is by name associated with that data set. DEQ does nothing with SWA. Unallocations do. If you want to get SWA "cleaned up", you must unallocate (or pass some termination point at which the system would choose to do it for you). Getting back to the OP, my first question would have been what they are trying to accomplish/serialize? If it's to keep one job from running while another is, then as has been suggested use of a specific data set *allocation* (even a relatively "dummy" data set that is not even opened) in both jobs can accomplish that. That relies on the processing that was discussed of allocating data sets for the entire job (thus also ENQing) and then DEQing only when no longer needed. It is rarely a good idea to get on your own an ENQ that is managed by the system. Peter Relson z/OS Core Technology Design ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
