There *was* more to the story The PE list in OA14708 today includes
all affected PTFs and the AI information (which was only on *some* of the
PTFs) has now been deleted. In addition, under 'additional symptoms'
OA14708 describes the aspect of the problem which was specific to HDS
hardware.
IBM has backed off. They created this APAR for the issue.
APAR Identifier .. OA14708
http://www-306.ibm.com/ibmlink/link2/sis/sisPage.jsp?applJsp=documentBr
owse.jspnavItem=sis.jsplc=encc=USdocNumber=OA14708 Last
Changed 05/12/21
IEA307I I/O ERROR READING VOLUME LABEL
Not sure what you mean by IBM has backed off. The APAR quoted does not
mention HDS, nor does it flag as PE any PTF (which means that HDS customers
are still doomed to discover their new MVS maintenance fails to IPL).
There must be more to the story
Brian
On Wed, 4 Jan 2006 09:05:13 -0600,
So, does UA22489 have the same problem with HDS as UA22552? Or does
it
circumvent the HDS problem??
Yes it does have the same problem. Either PTF causes the same issue. I
did ask that question.
Thanks.
John Eatherly
--
For
So, does UA22489 have the same problem with HDS as UA22552? Or does
it
circumvent the HDS problem??
Yes it does have the same problem. Either PTF causes the same issue. I
did ask that question.
So IBM needs to add the AI to the superceding PTFs. Did they volunteer
to do so?
At 15:40 -0600 on 12/30/2005, Dave Danner wrote about Re: Warning:
PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not avai:
The problem is not with SMP/E. I've been told that the internal IBM
systems that generate enhanced HOLDDATA are not capable of generating
ACTION, DEP, etc holds.
That is
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 12/29/2005
at 02:46 PM, Brian Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
What is really needed is a ++HOLD ACTION or ++HOLD EC with text
stating that Vendor-A microcode level xxx is required for
compatability with PTF UZ1. However, ++HOLD ACTION / ++HOLD EC
text must be
Well, well, wellI was *sure* that this could not be done. Wrong.
After a closer reading of the SMP/E Commands manual, it appears that SMP/E
fully supports sending ++HOLD ACTION or ++HOLD EC statements after the
fact via the same mechanism (RECEIVE HOLDDATA) as ++HOLD ERROR commands.
So, the
At 12:46 -0600 on 12/28/2005, Eatherly, John D [IT] wrote about
Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not availab:
Just wanted to pass on a heads up on some APARs that require HDS
microcode on DASD. And that microcode will not be available until the
2nd week in January.
Was there a
AI information is text added to PTFs (not APARs). The AI text is visible
if you go into IBMLink and call up the PTF. Or, search for a keyword which
does not appear frequently in the IBMLink data base, such as HDS.
The AI information notification mechanism is completely manual. You have
to
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 12/29/2005
at 12:30 PM, Brian Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
In case I have been unclear, it is my opinion that the AI information
process is completely useless. If a problem deserves publication of
AI information because of the impact to customers, it absolutely
The following scenerio may resemble the circumstances in this thread.
1) IBM writes code, tests it with IBM hardware, and issues the code as PTF
UZ1 (for example).
2) Vendor-A's DASD stops working when customers install PTF UZ1.
3) IBM customers who have Vendor-A DASD call IBM to
The heads up of course is valuable - it's what this list is about.
Just wanted to pass on a heads up on some APARs that require
HDS microcode on DASD. And that microcode will not be
available until the 2nd week in January.
Was there a HOLD(ACTION) [or it might need to be
HOLD(DEPENDENT?) -
At 14:46 -0600 on 12/29/2005, Brian Peterson wrote about Re: Warning:
PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not avai:
What is really needed is a ++HOLD ACTION or ++HOLD EC with text stating
that Vendor-A microcode level xxx is required for compatability with PTF
UZ1. However, ++HOLD
At 12:46 -0600 on 12/28/2005, Eatherly, John D [IT] wrote about
Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not availab:
Just wanted to pass on a heads up on some APARs that require HDS
microcode on DASD. And that microcode will not be available until the
2nd week in January.
Was there
*
Just as a word to the cautious - I would not IPL any system that accesses
the HDS storage subsystem while an HDS microcode update is taking place.
*
On 12/28/05, Eatherly, John D [IT] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just wanted to pass on a heads up on some APARs that require HDS
microcode on
I wouldn't IPL or Boot any system that is accessing ANY vendor's storage
when microcode is being updated. :(
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Glen Gasior
Sent: Thursday, 29 December 2005 4:24 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
17 matches
Mail list logo
