Re: Enqueue Question

If you need to do this (effectively a move), what you have to do is allocate the file with a temporary name on the receiving LPAR (I don't mean &&temp or similar), but a known temp name for this process. Upon successful move of the data, the sending system renames the dataset, notifies the rece

Re: Enqueue Question

: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Scott Barry Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2025 11:48 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Enqueue Question My understanding (always has been) is that one cannot allocate a same-named dataset (to be cataloged) in a given "shared enviro

Re: Enqueue Question

My understanding (always has been) is that one cannot allocate a same-named dataset (to be cataloged) in a given "shared environment" SYSPLEX. I have faced this same situation with SMF data-archival where a copy is forwarded via FTP from the creating-LPAR over the fence to another central-repos

Re: Enqueue Question

On Wed, 19 Feb 2025 15:31:44 +, Ituriel do Neto wrote: >Perhaps the parameter DSENQSHR=ALLOW in JOBCLASS (JES2PARM) is helpful. > Ouch! Wouldn't hat undermine data integrity for every user of that JOBCLASS? Could the OP use dynamic allocation rather than static in step 2? (And beware race c

Re: Enqueue Question

Tried that, it didn't work. Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email. GPG Public Key - https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get&search=markjac...@protonmail.com On Wednesday, February 19th, 2025 at 10:31 AM, Ituriel do Neto <03427ec2837d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

Re: Enqueue Question

Perhaps the parameter DSENQSHR=ALLOW in JOBCLASS (JES2PARM) is helpful. Best Regards Ituriel do Nascimento Neto z/OS System Programmer Em quarta-feira, 19 de fevereiro de 2025 às 12:22:40 BRT, Peter Vander Woude <07a1c61bd2ed-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> escreveu: We run into

Re: Enqueue Question

We run into this type of issue a lot, with the MQ/MFT transfer tool and batch jobs, as the agent portion runs as a STC. If the batch job submits to send a file, but has any step, after the step running the request to send the file, that references the file to do something like delete the datase

Re: Enqueue Question

Please excuse me for confusing people, I confused myself too. Reading the logs again, here's the actual scenario. 1) Step one initiates a data transfer to another system in the sysplex. 2) Step two allocates a dataset with the same dataset name for *reasons*. The dynamic allocation failure that

Re: Enqueue Question

On Wed, 19 Feb 2025 07:50:33 -0600, Scott Ballentine wrote: >>I have a two step job. Step 1 attempts to perform a dynamic allocation of a >>dataset. It's failing since step 2 allocates the dataset DISP=SHR, >and the >>enqueue is already created before the dynamic allocation is attempted. > >This

Re: Enqueue Question

On Wed, 19 Feb 2025 12:17:48 +, Mark Jacobs wrote: >One of the things I'm going to test is whether setting S99NORES in S99FLAG2 >might work. If so all we need to do is convince the software vendor to support >setting it on a job-by-job basis. >

Re: Enqueue Question

>I have a two step job. Step 1 attempts to perform a dynamic allocation of a >dataset. It's failing since step 2 allocates the dataset DISP=SHR, >and the >enqueue is already created before the dynamic allocation is attempted. This doesn't sound right to me. In step 1, SVC 99 should recognize th

Re: Enqueue Question

One of the things I'm going to test is whether setting S99NORES in S99FLAG2 might work. If so all we need to do is convince the software vendor to support setting it on a job-by-job basis. Mark Jacobs Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email. GPG Public Key - https://api.protonmail.c

Re: Enqueue Question

Hi I had a similar problem awhile ago. The only way that I could find to overcome it was making it a two job solution. The first job creates it and the second job uses it. Two jobs in the same PDS member using the same jobname. When I scheduled it the jobnames were different but with dependencies.

Re: Enqueue Question

No. I can do that tomorrow. I just wanted to test whether step 2 was the root cause of the enqueue being active during the execution of step 1. Mark Jacobs Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email. GPG Public Key - https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get&search=markjac...@protonma

Re: Enqueue Question

On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 23:28:24 +, Mark Jacobs wrote: >True, but not in the test case I used to verify that the problem exists in the >simplest way I could think of. > >Step 1. A user written program that issues the wait SVC without the ECB ever >being posted. >Step 2. PGM=IEFBR14 with a datase

Re: Enqueue Question

True, but not in the test case I used to verify that the problem exists in the simplest way I could think of. Step 1. A user written program that issues the wait SVC without the ECB ever being posted. Step 2. PGM=IEFBR14 with a dataset allocated DISP=SHR A D GRS command verified that the enqueu

Re: Enqueue Question

On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 19:58:20 +, Mark Jacobs wrote: >No. It's all one job. I did verify that the problematic enqueue is owned by >the the second step of the batch job. > Nowadays a single job can use multiple address spaces and ENQ conflicts can arise between the,. Such a problem has occurred

Re: Enqueue Question

No. It's all one job. I did verify that the problematic enqueue is owned by the the second step of the batch job. Mark Jacobs Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email. GPG Public Key - https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get&search=markjac...@protonmail.com On Tuesday, February

Re: Enqueue Question

On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 19:07:42 +, Mark Jacobs wrote: >DSENQSHR on the job card. Tried that too. Didn't work. > Are you using multiple address spaces? (What program?) SDSF might tell you. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / s

Re: Enqueue Question

On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 18:54:21 +, Allan Staller wrote: >Classification: Confidential > >There was an option added in one of the recent z/OS releases to "downgrade the >enque" >e.g. step1 "creates" the dataset with an exclusive enque. Once the need for >exclusive control has been satisfied, the

Re: Enqueue Question

cobs > > Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 12:47 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Enqueue Question > > [CAUTION: This Email is from outside the Organization. Unless you trust the > sender, Don't click links or open attachments as it may be a Phishing email,

Re: Enqueue Question

On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 12:41:11 -0600, Charles Mills wrote: >I am surprised that would fail but I don't know SVC 99 well enough to say "no, >that's wrong." > The initiator performs the ENQ before the first job step and keeps it in effect through the last step that references the data set name. >See

Re: Enqueue Question

#x27;t remember the exact language, but that ius the gist of it. HTH, -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Mark Jacobs Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 12:47 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Enqueue Question [CAUTION: This Email is from outside

Re: Enqueue Question

I tried that. Didn't work. Mark Jacobs Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email. GPG Public Key - https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get&search=markjac...@protonmail.com On Tuesday, February 18th, 2025 at 1:41 PM, Charles Mills wrote: > I am surprised that would fail but I do

Re: Enqueue Question

I am surprised that would fail but I don't know SVC 99 well enough to say "no, that's wrong." Seeing as the job is set up with the dataset already "hard coded" in Step 2 -- why not allocate it with JCL in Step 1? If you do that would the SVC 99 then succeed (so you would not have to change you

Enqueue Question

I have a two step job. Step 1 attempts to perform a dynamic allocation of a dataset. It's failing since step 2 allocates the dataset DISP=SHR, and the enqueue is already created before the dynamic allocation is attempted. Is there anyway around this problem? Mark Jacobs Sent from [ProtonMail](