The fact that you had to logon to B, and detach/relink the disk tells me that either (1) B never really logged off, or more likely (2) B wasn't linking the disk you thought it was, but when you did it manually you got the disk you thought it should have (the one A updated). -- Mike Harding z/VM System Support
[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] (925) 926-3179 (w) (925) 323-2070 (c) IM: VMBearDad (AIM), mbhcpcvt (Y!) The IBM z/VM Operating System <[email protected]> wrote on 12/29/2010 03:17:53 PM: > From: "Schuh, Richard" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Date: 12/29/2010 03:18 PM > Subject: Re: Configuration Puzzler > Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System <[email protected]> > > As stated, one has it R/W the other R/O. Someone has to log on to > the machine that has it R/W to update it, there is nothing in the > machine, itself, that writes anything. I am aware of MDC, and it is > not in play, here. Both are on the same VM system. The update was > done while both were logged off. The file was only updated once. The > trials, including several logoff/logon sequences, spanned a couple > of hours on a system that is lightly loaded. > > Regards, > Richard Schuh > > > > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of Kris Buelens > Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2010 2:09 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Configuration Puzzler > Your machines don't share it in MW mode? If yes, anything is possible.... > They are on the same z/VM system? If not, the MDC cache on the > system that didn't update the disk can be backlevel. > 2010/12/29 Schuh, Richard <[email protected]> > We have two service machines, I will call them A and B for this > discussion. These machines share a 191 disk. When A is xautologged, > it initializes itself and then xautologs B. I logged both machines > off and added two new ACCESS commands to the PROFILE EXEC. I then > logged A on and checked its configuration. It reflected the changes > from the PROFILE. It AUTOLOGGed B. B came up using the old profile. > I stopped the server code on B and checked the configuration. It was > indeed the old profile that was used. A q links 191 showed that A > had it as its 191 in R/W mode, while B had it as 191 R/O. A list > profile exec * found only one such file, on the A disk, , and on B > it was the old configuration. I then logged both off and xautologged > A. Again, B came up with the old configuration. I tried the logoff/ > logon sequence several times, all with the same result. I finally > detached the 191 disk from B and relinked it. This time, the new > profile exec was there, like it should have been all along. > > How is this even possible? Are we going to be plagued by this every > time we xautolog A? Clearly the pointers were all correct when the > first machine logged on. Given that, I would certainly expect that > they would be correct when the second machine linked to the same > disk and accessed it. > > > Regards, > Richard Schuh > > > > > > > -- > Kris Buelens, > IBM Belgium, VM customer support
