× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



Tom,

Let's say that this PTF affects one of those system tasks at the bottom of 
WRKACTJOB like QSYSARB.  Granted, you could load a program, onto the 
system, that this calls at anytime.  However if the program is already 
loaded up into memory then it won't be used until the next time the 
job/task starts.  The "action" on this one might be to stop/start QSYSARB. 
 Perhaps the only way to do that is to IPL.

QSYSARB was just used as an example.

Then again, maybe the developer just didn't want to document the steps 
necessary to make it active.

Rob Berendt
-- 
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary 
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." 
Benjamin Franklin 




qsrvbas@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Tom Liotta)
Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
04/08/2003 05:22 PM
Please respond to Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
 
        To:     midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
        cc: 
        Fax to: 
        Subject:        RE: Immediate PTF -- What's the point?


midrange-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>   7. Re: Immediate PTF -- What's the point? (rob)
>
>While a ptf may be applied immediately often there will be some action 
>required.  Sometimes the action is drastic enough that you might as well 
>IPL.  Sample actions may include:
<snip>

When there's actually an "action" to perform, I have no problem. But in 
this specific case, the _only_ action needed was to IPL. I just can't see 
where this is in any significant way different from a PTF that's applied 
as delayed but before the IPL. I'd have preferred this PTF to be 
designated as 'Delayed' right at the start.


>Technically, it makes IBM look good if they can reduce the number of 
PTF's 
>that require an IPL to apply.

I'm feeling as if this is _THE_ answer.

When I remember the relief back at around R1.2 and R2.1 when cumes and 
pre-reqs started to come together (back before "V"ersion had much 
meaning), I always feel nervous when things seem to be slipping backwards.


Tom Liotta

-- 
-- 
Tom Liotta
The PowerTech Group, Inc.
19426 68th Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
Phone  253-872-7788 x313
Fax    253-872-7904
http://www.powertechgroup.com


__________________________________________________________________
Try AOL and get 1045 hours FREE for 45 days!
http://free.aol.com/tryaolfree/index.adp?375380

Get AOL Instant Messenger 5.1 for FREE! Download Now!
http://aim.aol.com/aimnew/Aim/register.adp?promo=380455
_______________________________________________
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing 
list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.



As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.