MIDRANGE dot COM Mailing List Archive



Home » MIDRANGE-L » June 2014

RE: PTF apply philosophies



fixed

On my R&D partition, I just did an apply immediate, set delayed.
6 MF applied, 6 MF set to delayed IPL action, 5770BR1-SI51667 latest BRMS group applied (which I really needed.)
This was quick, 7 minutes, with minimal impact.
BRMS Subsystem Q1ABRMNET was only recycled process.
I suppose another approach would be NOT to accumulate PTFs, apply immediate as needed or as they become available.
Not my preferred option, but possibly acceptable.

Paul


-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of CRPence
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2014 2:10 PM
To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: PTF apply philosophies

On 04-Jun-2014 12:39 -0500, Steinmetz, Paul wrote:
For many years, I've successfully done:
option 8, Automatic IPL N, other options Y , 2=Apply immediate, set
delayed PTFs All PTFs would get applied except those needing an IPL
Some at IBM will say this is OK, others discourage it.

Perfectly acceptable, although only completely safe to effect after knowing all /special instructions/ and knowing about any specific requirements regarding /activation instructions/ for the set of eligible PTFs; and implementing those instructions accordingly, to avoid any difficulties those instructions aim to ameliorate or prevent.

So if there is no intention to, or if instead only a cursory attempt is made to, read and understand the /cover letter/ of each PTF that will apply as immediate, then [anyone] discouraging [anyone else from using] that process, is appropriate. For a large set of PTFs, such that the volume of PTF cover letters to review is [nearly] prohibitive, the process of applying all eligible PTFs immediately and merely scheduling later application of delayed-restricted PTFs is potentially problematic, per the possibility that required special instructions will not have been performed. Of course applying those PTFs in restricted state is mostly always sufficient [even for cumulative\group PTFs, because PTFs that would require special instructions to be read first, to avoid harming the system, would usually be withheld from such sets], but doing an End System (ENDSYS) contradicts the general intent of applying the PTFs in that fashion; i.e. typically using the noted process intends to maximize up-time [minimize down-time], but at the cost of additional planning.

--
Regards, Chuck
--
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.






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