On Thursday, 10/30/2008 at 08:32 EDT, "Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One last question on this. This SMF CONTROL file change (1 to 0) does > this setting normally mean that you have the RACFSMF guest in place and > are using it for dynamic switching of the SMF data set and if you did > not have the '1' there it would not invoke RACFSMF to do the switch if > needed? > > In other words if you are using RACFSMF to do the switching would you > need the '1' in the control file? You normally have RACFSMF in place, preventing SMF CONTROL from ever having a 1 in it in since both SMF disks never fill up at the same time). I mean, it's no guarantee, since there's no guarantee that RACFSMF will be successful in copying the SMF log to its own A-disk and archive. (If the copies fail, the originals aren't erased.) Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
