On 11/18/2011 04:15 PM, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
I'm glad to know "n-2" compatibility is now supported. If that were true long
ago when the previous dfdss 64KiB change was made, it
certainly wasn't advertised then.
Funny, I thought n-1 was supported for a long time!
-
Ted MacNEIL
eamacn...@yahoo.ca
>I'm glad to know "n-2" compatibility is now supported. If that were true long
>ago when the previous dfdss 64KiB change was made, it
certainly wasn't advertised then.
Funny, I thought n-1 was supported for a long time!
-
Ted MacNEIL
eamacn...@yahoo.ca
Twitter: @TedMacNEIL
On 11/18/2011 08:18 AM, Norbert Friemel wrote:
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 07:42:34 -0600, Joel C. Ewing wrote:
...
But, take note that this backward compatibility does not always exist.
It seems that about every ten years or so as tape technology advances
IBM decides to raise the block size written by
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 07:42:34 -0600, Joel C. Ewing wrote:
>...
>But, take note that this backward compatibility does not always exist.
>It seems that about every ten years or so as tape technology advances
>IBM decides to raise the block size written by dfdss, first to 64KiB,
>relatively recently t
On 11/18/2011 07:11 AM, Norbert Friemel wrote:
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 10:26:32 -0200, Carlos Bodra - Pessoal wrote:
If I have a volume backed up using ADRDSSU 1.11 (DUMP DATASET) is
possible to restore it using ADRDSSU 1.10? (backward compatibility)
--
Yes, if the coexistence and fallback PTFs
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 10:26:32 -0200, Carlos Bodra - Pessoal wrote:
>If I have a volume backed up using ADRDSSU 1.11 (DUMP DATASET) is
>possible to restore it using ADRDSSU 1.10? (backward compatibility)
>--
Yes, if the coexistence and fallback PTFs are installed on z/OS 1.10
http://publibz.boulde
6 matches
Mail list logo