On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 16:49:58 -0600, Mark Zelden <[email protected]> wrote:
<snip>
>
>3) The Datacom R12 SVC load failed because I chose the same number as the R11
>SVC
> that was in use for MSM R3. I thought, "no problem re-run the load job
> with the
> CAIRIM "REINIT" parm since MSM was the only user and MSM was not active".
> However
> when I did this it crashed CA-11 - which is using a different Datacom SVC
> talking
> remotely to a different Datacom MUF on a different LPAR. (ouch!)
>
> I double checked everything to make sure this wasn't "operator error" and
> as far
> as I can tell, I did nothing wrong. To fix the problem I did a reinit
> for CA-11's
> (and Jobtrac's) Datacom SVC and a reinit of the MSM R3 Datacom SVC and
> restarted
> CA-11. As far as I can tell this is a bug of some sort, but I won't say
> so for sure
> until CA gets back to me. I have an open ticket and they have all the
> doc.
>
> As far as MSM upgrade was concerned, I just chose a different Datacom SVC
> to
> go along with the MSM upgrade from Datacom AD R11 to R12.
>
> My advice: Pick a new SVC number for Datacom if upgrading MSM from
> Pre-V4.
>
>
CA-Datacom support replied back to me as follows:
==================================================
"As we discussed, the SVC is the communication vehicle for applications
running on the same LPAR as the MUF, and as you have seen, these
applications use SVC 246 as expected and without issue. In addition to
that, the SVC is also used minimally with XCF processing, and that process,
which has been in place for several releases, is to use the lowest SVC at
the proper release level for this small amount of work. In this case, since
both SVC 233 and SVC 246 were at r11 when CA 11 was started, XCF used SVC
233 for its needs. Then, when you reinitialized SVC 233 to version 12.0,
control blocks and pointers changed, and XCF was broken, leading to the RC
83(01). You can then note that when CA 11 restarted and reestablished
connection across XCF to the MUF, that there was no further problem.
This, among other reasons, is why we have indicated for a long time that
the CAIRIM process to REINIT should not be used to change release levels of
the SVC. The recommendation has been that when introducing a new version
SVC, that it be done at IPL time, or that a new SVC be used, and to not
reinitialize a current Datacom SVC at a different level."
==================================================
Of course "indicated for a long time not to..." means nothing to a new user,
which from an MSM standpoint, I am. Also I reviewed the MSM admin
manual, release notes and installation considerations and the migration
checklist and there was no such warning about choosing a different SVC number.
As matter of fact, the MSM install doc specifically says you can use the
same number for a migration:
SVCNO
Specifies an SVC number for CA Datacom/MSM.
Note: We do not recommend that you use the same SVC used by a
running instance of CA Datacom r11.
Limits: 200 through 255
Note: If you are an existing CA MSM customer and perform migration,
the parameter value can be the same as in the previous release.
Anyway... previous advise stands: Choose a new SVC number. :-)
Regards,
Mark
--
Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS
mailto:[email protected]
Mark's MVS Utilities: http://www.mzelden.com/mvsutil.html
Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
