Robert Rosenberg wrote: >I assume the re-run issue is that the location where the routine >resides is locked in when you first define the Sub-System and >thus can not be >replaced with a new copy (which will be ?>somewhere else in memory). Why not >make the routine have a >static location and be composed of a LOAD of the real >routine? >That way it would be able to locate a new copy that was handled >by >the CSVDLYPA routine. >
I have given considerable thought to such a process to test this "A Front End" Routine or STUB. Having stated that I wont be able to re-run the IEFSSI ADD a 2nd and 3rd and 4th time without receieving a "DUPLICATE SUBSYSTEM ID. IS my assesment correct ? . . Thanks Paul V. D'Angelo ---------- Original Message ---------- From: "Robert A. Rosenberg" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Tesing A SubSystem Initialization Routine Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2014 23:37:17 -0400 At 19:18 +0000 on 04/12/2014, [email protected] wrote about Tesing A SubSystem Initialization Routine: >Im Trying to set up and test a SubSystem Initialization Routine. >While I am testing I would like to be able to rerun the routine for >this subsystem ID without IPLING, in the event it abends. >(And we all have abended) > >I have been able to add & Remove My SubSystem Initialization Routine >in LPA by using CSVDYLPA. > >I can use either SETSSI command or the IEFSSI ADD function to add >the subsyetm. >Now I would like to Add a subsystem dynamically via SETSSI command >or IEFSSI macro and identify a subsystem Initialization routine to >run. >. >If the Initialization Routine Abends, How do I re-run it again >without an IPL ? > >My understanding is that If I Try To add an existing Subsustem a >second time, it would fail. If my Initialization routine fails >during Testing, How do I re-run it again to test it without an IPL ? >. >Any Recommendations, suggestions ? I assume the re-run issue is that the location where the routine resides is locked in when you first define the Sub-System and thus can not be replaced with a new copy (which will be somewhere else in memory). Why not make the routine have a static location and be composed of a LOAD of the real routine? That way it would be able to locate a new copy that was handled by the CSVDLYPA routine. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
