On 04/19/2012 08:16 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
In<[email protected]>, on 04/18/2012
at 08:36 AM, Kurt Quackenbush<[email protected]> said:
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/gimusr51/3.6.3?SHELF=gim2bk90&DT=20110811181158
The only explanation given for "installation-wide" is "SMP/E uses this
table data set to save process status information for the SYSMOD
management dialogs." What problems occur[1] if you don't use a shared
SMPTABL? I've run into problems when it's shared.
[1] Assuming that the unshared SMPTABL is in the
ISPTLIB concatenation.
If you have multiple people who might have to back each other up and be
able to take over and eventually complete a maintenance project started
by another using SMP/E ISPF dialogs, then they had better share the same
SMPTABL dataset. Otherwise, the only way to continue their maintenance
would be to manually start a new "project", determine what SYSMODS
should be selected, determine the last step done by the prior person,
and spin through the already-done dialog steps without actually
submitting jobs in order to get to the right starting step. Also, if a
different SMPTABL is used, if the original person were to later use the
SMP/E dialogs, it would still look like he had an incomplete project and
he might attempt to complete it and attempt to run maintenance jobs that
are no longer needed or appropriate.
If you have multiple people applying maintenance to the same
global/target/dlib zones, sharing SMPTABL may be advisable so you can be
fully aware of other activity that might affect or have some impact on
the same zones and libraries you are changing.
If you have other people doing maintenance with the SMP/E dialogs to
other global zone, if there is any chance there are prereq/coreq
requirements between those zones and zones of interest to you, a shared
SMPTABL is occasionally useful to make it easier to check if there is
maintenance in progress to those zones.
We had a small enough number of System Programmers that used the SMP/E
dialogs that we just found it simpler to share the same SMPTABL among
all SysProgs (and there is no reason for anyone other than a SysProg to
have SMPTABL allocated). It wasn't that difficult to manually
coordinate on rare occasions when library compression or expansion was
required. YMMV. Occasionally one may have to clean up abandoned
maintenance projects and obsolete SMPTABL members associated with
abandoned target zones, but that can happen whether the SMPTABL dataset
is shared or not.
--
Joel C. Ewing, Bentonville, AR [email protected]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
