After stating flatly that we do not support VIO, I ran a test and learned
otherwise. For sure we do not support the esoteric name 'VIO'. In my previous
shop IIRC it was implemented as 'SYSVIO'. I don't know why the name change, but
I would guess it's to avoid canned jobs from gobbling up paging space, although
nothing would prevent someone from changing 'VIO' to a supported name.
I see this in my test job, which seems to indicate that the data set really
went to VIO:
IGD101I SMS ALLOCATED TO DDNAME (ALLOCVIO)
DSN (SYS16127.T095147.RA000.ALLOCVIO.R0108161 )
STORCLAS (STANDARD) MGMTCLAS ( ) DATACLAS (STANDARD)
VOL SER NOS= VIO
.
.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-302-7535 Office
[email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Friday, May 06, 2016 9:25 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: (External):Re: Using TYPE=MEMORY (or VIO?)
On 2016-05-06, at 09:35, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote:
>
> ... , be aware that some customers (like us) did away with VIO a long time
> ago.
>
Did they tend to preserve their VIO esoteric name?
Could you even count on the same esoteric name's existing even in all shops
supporting VIO?
I sometimes distribute JCL using a JCL symbol for VIO.
-- gil
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
