----------SNIP--------------------------------------------------
The "flaw" exists:
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/ispzpc90/
APPENDIX1.1.3
<quote>
APPENDIX1.1.3 Member name enqueue
To restrict concurrent use of a member of a partitioned data set,
while
still allowing ISPF users to use different members of the same data
set
(PDF EDIT, Table Processing, File Tailoring), ISPF issues this ENQ
macro
for the member:
ENQ SPFEDIT,rname,E,52,SYSTEMS
where
rname
the data set name, length of 44, padded with blanks, followed by
the member
name, length of 8, padded with blanks
</quote>
I do not really agree that not including the volser in the SYSDSN
enqueue
is a "flaw". If it were done, then their could need to be
multiple ENQs,
one for each volume in a multi-volume DSN. Also, when a DSN is
extended to
another volume, then an new SYSDSN ENQ would need to be issued.
This could
possibly fail, although I would think it unlikely. But remember
this was
designed in OS/360 and "set in stone" back when it would cost much
more,
relatively speaking, in CPU and main memory overhead. Once "set in
stone",
changing it is very difficult. Not only to code & test, but to put
up with
customers who could start screaming about needing to change their
code to
be compatible.
-- -------------------SNIP-------------------
This becomes a key point *IF* PDSE's ever become multi volume.
Somewhere in the recent past I *think* Ibm announced multi volume
pdse (I could be wrong but I do remember think about this when it was
announced).
Ed
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
