Radoslaw Skorupka wrote:

>It was 25 years ago. Things changed. 


>Nowadays the most popular way to destroy PDSE is to share it across sysplexes.

Or using undocumented or wrong system services to use them... If you do those 
stunts across sysplexes, I'm running away.

>People who are reluctant to use PDSE have ... no choice. 

Too bad... Too sad. Consider using PDSESHARING(EXTENDED) 

Some of my ICETOOL jobs crashed (OPEN abend) because of too many PDS members 
opened to write/overwrite.

Solved that by moving over to PDSE instead having to use lots of PDS datasets 
with fewer members. [1]  

>Now, COBOL v5 and v6 do require PDSE for linked binaries.

We're not there (at 4.2.0), but trust me, our programmers will faint when they 
find out about that requirement. ;-)

Groete / Greetings
Elardus Engelbrecht

[1] - I have considered using temp PS datasets as output instead of permanent 
PDS/PDSE members, but I want to see the contents long after the ICETOOL jobs 
were purged.

For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to