Re: Cume PTF

Link Loder errors were HUGELY reduced with V5R3M5 and newer SLIC levels. Much of the problem was simply not enough space reserved for the work required when a large number of PTFs were applied. With V5R3M5 and newer that space was expanded 'dramatically' and I've been told 'you can't apply too many PTFs at once' and break the link loader in that way. I last tested this with V5R4M0 base load and then applying every PTF group I had available including CUME, DB, HIPER, HTTP, JAVA, Windows Integration, TCP, PRINT, Websphere and probably more. It did not break.

Others mention staying 'more current' on PTFs will reduce link loader errors. I'm not sure this is a true statement any longer, however, staying current for other reasons *IS* the right thing to do!

- Larry "DrFranken" Bolhuis

Link Loader errors are usually caused by specific problems, like co-dependant PTFs that are not applied at the same time. If you install complete packages (cume or group) delayed with an IPL and don't have any test PTFs applied you'll probably never have a link loader error. Applying packages on a regular schedule (like 2 or 4 times a year) will do wonders as far as minimizing these kinds of problems. Systems requiring 24x7x365 uptime are harder to deal with.

C8305540 would have been released on the 305th day of 2008 so it's approx. 2 years old. Applying a more current cume for V5R4 might be the prudent thing to do.


Regards,

Not my responsibility, but the thread concerning WRKPTFGRP made me a tad curious. Last cum applied is C8305540. Is there some magic way to know if a cum can be applied successfully - no link loader error, for example?