Sadly, as previously stated, MVS has always worked this way. During
allocation recovery, no new allocations can be processed. I agree that a
RFE would be nice. Perhaps allocation recovery could be by device class.
That way a DASD or tape allocation recovery would not block a console
allocation.

On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 11:09 AM J O Skip Robinson <[email protected]>
wrote:

> I believe that MVS has always worked this way. With a mount pending
> ('reply device name or cancel'), allocation holds up all other mounts ('v
> xxx,online') until the uncertainty is resolved. The reason as I understand
> it is that multiple mounts against the same device could cause an integrity
> problem. The fact that one device is DASD and the other a console might be
> justification for a bit more intelligence in allocation.
>
> The real culprit in OP's case the outstanding mount for a non-existent
> device. In our shop, MIA (CA) manages all tape so that IEF238D is never
> issued for tape. Hence we have an automated reply of CANCEL in the event of
> a finger check in JCL.
>
> BTW IEE799D for console is handled by Auto-Reply (AUTOR00) this way:
>
>    Msgid(IEE799D)    Delay(30S) Reply(CANCEL)
>
> That is, if the message remains outstanding for 30 seconds, Auto-Reply
> cancels the request.
>
> .
> .
> .
> J.O.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]
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On
> Behalf Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 7:02 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: vary <dev>,console with an IEF238D outstanding.
>
> In
> <2684875177256404.wa.elardus.engelbrechtsita.co...@listserv.ua.edu>,
> on 08/25/2015
>    at 04:45 AM, Elardus Engelbrecht <[email protected]>
> said:
>
> >Thanks. After RTFM, now I see the whole story. Interesting, perhaps you
> >discovered a bug.
>
> No bug; CONSOLE uses the same allocation code as any other job, which
> includes an ENQ. I'd suggest an RFE.
>
> --
>      Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

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

Reply via email to