Today's posts moved me to actually look at my GLOBAL DDDEFs. My SMPPTS% entries 
are defined discreetly, not as a concatenation of libraries. So I have 

SMPPTS
SMPPTS1
SMPPTS2

pointing to individual libraries. I believe this is what causes SMP/E to 
examine a succession of SMPPTS% DDDEFs until a sysmod is found or the next n+1 
entry does not exist. There is no place to specify something like 'highest PTS 
DDDEF defined'. All this is to say that there is no actual SMPPTS 
concatenation, rather a set of libraries that will be searched in order until 
'the next one' is not found. That's why you can freely reallocate the set of 
PTS libraries and move sysmods around without disrupting SMP/E. Also why you 
cannot skip any SMPPTS% in the series, which would terminate the search. 

Could SMPPTS be defined as an actual concatenation of libraries? That's 
conceivable within the framework of SMP/E, but I don't know if it would work in 
practice. A perfect task to assign to your favorite sysprog intern. Ha ha.   

.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler 
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW
[email protected]


-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf 
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2017 8:46 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: (External):Re: Can SMPPTS datasets be consolidated?

On 2017-03-17, at 08:06, Pommier, Rex wrote:
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kurt Quackenbush
> Sent: Friday, March 17, 2017 8:51 AM
> 
> Yes, ever since we added the SMPPTS spill data set function (year 2000) SMP/E 
> has allowed you to merge data sets, move PTFs from data set to data set, add 
> data sets, whatever you want to do, as long as the SMPPTSnn DDDEF entries in 
> your global, target, and dlib zones point to your current set of SMPPTS data 
> sets.
>  
Alternatively, might the programmer specify (override) SMPPTS in a JCL DD 
statement as a concatenation of UNIX directories rather than in a DDDEF?

(from Rex, who didn't properly quote Kurt's remarks:)
> And one other - albeit minor - caveat to the SMPPTS spill datasets is that 
> you can't skip one.  IF you're consolidating them down and you have, for 
> example SMPPTS1,2,3 and 2 empties out, if you just remove SMPPTS2, SMP/E 
> won't use SMPPTS3 either.
>  
Do you mean remove the DDDEF or delete the corresponding UNIX directory?

-- gil


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

Reply via email to