The IEFU8x exits get the "live" record, so yes, any updates that the exit makes
would get passed on down the line.
I thought this was documented, but I did a quick search and didn't find it
either. (There are some places that hint at it but I didn't find anything that
spe
PENed the DD so that OPEN
processing retrieves some of that information from the data set and puts it in
SWA - then Dynamic Information Retrieval doesn't have the information to return
to you.
-Scott Ballentine
z/OS Device Allocation, Schedu
ice. Also, you should not assume that a service
will zero an output address for you if the service could not return data (which
goes to Rob's comment about zeroing the output address before calling IEFSSI to
make sure it is clean.)
-Scott Ballentine
IBM z
resource, otherwise the request fails.)
Cancel the job.
By the way, to clarify something from one of the responses - upgrading enqueues
is allowed (with limitations, and that's why we try to obtain serialization the
way we do), and downgrading is also allowed if you request it (see the DSENQS
ink of to definitively
prevent it.
-Scott Ballentine, IBM z/OS Device Allocation
sbal...@us.ibm.com
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
ividual DDs are CLOSEd. And a dynamic allocation that causes the data
set ENQ to be upgraded from SHR to EXCL prevents any downgrading.
-Scott Ballentine
IBM z/OS Device Allocation Development
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signo
I'll confirm it: REPORTOPTS was not rolled back to z/OS 2.3. 2.4 and above
only.
- Scott Ballentine
z/OS Allocation, Scheduler, SMF Development
sbal...@us.ibm.com
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive a
initialization
routine is going to stay around after the initialization routine returns to the
system. This has lots of implications for the INITRTN when obtaining storage,
attaching subtasks, etc. - not that there aren't ways to deal with those
issues, but you do need to give some thoug
SSI control blocks or something like that -
although it's not limited to that use case.
Scott Ballentine (sbal...@us.ibm.com)
z/OS MVS Development
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instruc
eally important subsystem that you need to run the
system, you might not have a usable system anymore. Also, not every subsystem
supports being added dynamically, so if you delete one of those subsystems,
you're out of luck.
Scott Ballentine (sbal...@us.ibm.com)
z/OS MVS Development
ifferent problem that prevents the subsystem from activating
(maybe
the initialization routine ABENDs, as an example) then you could use the SETSSI
command to delete it and then issue a SETSSI ADD to create it.
-Scott Ballentine (sbal...@us.ibm.com), IBM z/OS Allocation
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 1
pointer to the text unit list for the unallocation is
pointing to the correct storage, the text units contain the correct keys, and
that you don't have the end of list indicator (the high-order bit) turned on
for any of the text unit pointers other than the last.
-Scott Ballentine (
could play with your data set in the window where it is
unallocated, so this might not be a viable option - that's for you to decide
based on what your application is doing.)
-Scott Ballentine (sbal...@us.ibm.com)
z/OS Device Allocation Development
---
I think it'd be fair to open a PMR here. IEFA107I should be telling you "what"
it was that couldn't be found, and it doesn't seem like it's doing that.
-Scott Ballentine
IBM z/OS Allocation
sbal...@us.ibm.com
-
k up the single step into multiple steps
to make it fit. You could crank up the TIOT size to 64K. You could also try
something a little more sophisticated - like dynamically allocating the data
sets (take a look at IDCAMS, which can access the data sets via dynamic
allocation and avoid the ba
e not-a-JOB case.)
You might want to experiment with S MYPROC,JOBNAME=, and try running a
batch job that has a step that EXECs a proc.
-Scott Ballentine
z/OS Device Allocation
sbal...@us.ibm.com
--
For IBM-MAIN s
taking the device away from allocation (it's no longer allocatable.) The
"console state" is separate from online or offline. Sorry, that serialization
is really necessary.
-Scott Ballentine
IBM z/OS Device Allocation
That's correct - the IEFA111I message is intended to be information to help
debug a job that didn't behave as expected. It's issued when a job has
MSGLEVEL=(,1) in effect.
I've arranged to have the System Messages documentation updated.
-Scott Ballentine (sbal...@us.ibm.c
u need to deal with setting
DYNAMNBR. If you're removing the in-use attribute from DDs, you might need to
worry about it, but I'm not sure how common that is these days.
That's a lot of information... how useful it is, I'm not sure, and if you've
got more quest
of 3273 DDs (and less if they are
multi-volume data sets or a DVC is in use.) If they're getting past that limit
(maybe into the tens of thousands of allocations), it's more likely that these
are XTIOT requests, but some of the other control blocks (such as the DSABs)
are going into
You also have to have authority to mount volumes, which most TSO users do not
have.
-Scott Ballentine (sbal...@us.ibm.com)
z/OS Allocation Development
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Lennie, glad you got it figured out (and sorry I didn't see all of these posts
yesterday!)
To fill in a few questions for which everybody probably has already guessed the
answers:
Q1. Can XTIOT only be requested by using Dynamic Allocation?
A1. Yes.
Q2. Is XTIOT only available to authorised c
VC 99 should recognize that the
ENQ is held, and upgrade it from shared to exclusive. It should then be held
exclusive until step 2 ends (or whatever the last step of the job that uses the
data set is.)
-Scott Ballentine (sbal...@us.ibm.com)
z/OS
as programming interfaces
do not require LOCEPAX=VR2.
You might also find this link helpful:
https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/3.1.0?topic=guide-accessing-scheduler-work-area
-Scott Ballentine (sbal...@us.ibm.com)
z/OS Allocation, Scheduler, SMF Development
On Sun, 25 May 2025 15:42:00 +0300, Steff Gl
y, based on the number of available drives and what the
tape workload looks like on each system.
You might also consider splitting the drives between the two monoplexes (so
half are online to monoplex A and half are online to monoplex B) as was also
previously suggested.
- Scott Ballentine (sb
exes,
it's at least worth looking at some of those other products, such as ATAM. Not
saying that Allocation's autoswitch processing won't work, but those other
products were really designed for it and some might find that they work better
in their environment.
- Scott Balle
26 matches
Mail list logo
