Basically the extended GDG has a new format. So the old GDG cannot become the new GDGE without some effort.
For example: If the datasets are TAPE - Uncatalog tape, create the new GDGE, catalog the tape Marna (as others have stated) has done testing and provide some suggestions on how to tackle this. There was a discussion on if it is on DASD and Migrated, does it need to be recalled in-order to do this. IBM did not provide a "switch" from GDG to GDGE. Due to it being a new function in the catalog it has a very different structure than a GDG. As shops move to the GDGE function, I am hoping that IBM will find an easier way to do this. So my understanding is the GDG datasets have to be converted to the GDGE format. Lizette > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Pommier, Rex > Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 12:10 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: extended GDG implementation > > Hello list, > > I have what are probably simple questions regarding the relaxation of the 255 > generation GDG limit. We are running z/OS 2.2 so are eligible for the > relaxation. I know I need to make a change to the IGGCATx member to activate > the capability and I need to add EXT to the GDG definition. So here are my > (rather basic) questions. > > 1. Can I implement an IGGCATxx member short of an IPL? I don't have one > now, relying on the defaults, and I don't see anything in the INIT&TUNING > manual that indicates that I can implement this dynamically, sadly. > > 2. Once it is active, can I use an IDCAMS ALTER to change between the old > limit and an extended one? I am positive the answer to this is "no, it can > only be done at GDG definition time" but am hoping. > > 3. Here's the scenario that has led me to this point. We just discovered we > have a tape based GDG defined with LIMIT(255) and we have had several > generations fall off the end. This is data we need to recover. Presuming > the answer to question 2 is "no" as I strongly suspect, does anybody see an > unsurmountable problem with (carefully) uncataloging all the tape > generations, redefining the GDG base as extended with an appropriate limit, > and recataloging all the generations, including the ones that have fallen > off? > > TIA - again! > > Rex > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
