MIDRANGE dot COM Mailing List Archive



Home » MIDRANGE-L » April 2013

RE: Applying PTFs *PERM prior to new Cumulative/Groups



fixed

No, you should either use DELAY(*YES) or my preference is DELAY(*IMMDLY). I don't use DELAY(*NO) because then some PTFs might not be able to be put on right now. With *IMMDLY, you get the best of both worlds. Those than can be done now are applied perm, and then those that can't are done at IPL, but you have redcued your IPL window by getting the ones you can on now.

Pete

--
Pete Massiello
iTech Solutions
http://www.itechsol.com
http://www.iInTheCloud.com




-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Robert Clay
Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 10:35 AM
To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx; midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Applying PTFs *PERM prior to new Cumulative/Groups

Thanks for the info, Rob.

We have no Domino and really, just basic LPPs. We don't even have BRMS. No test PTFs at all.

So, will command

APYPTF LICPGM(*ALL) APY(*PERM) DELAYED(*NO)

be sufficient? Will it impact performance (this is our main production LPAR). Any idea how long it will take?

"Contrariwise, if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic."--Tweedledee







Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2014 by MIDRANGE dot 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 here. If you have questions about this, please contact