× 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.

At some time each ptf should be permanently applied.
Some might only do it immediately before a release upgrade.
We do it once a quarter. We set all to apply perm at the next IPL, and
prior to that IPL, we order the next batch of cume, groups and recommended

For the argumentative, look at it this way. You have PTF MF12345 temp
applied and all is well and good. Next group comes out and it's time for
your maintenance so you order and apply it. MF23456 was part of that and
it supercedes MF12345 so it perm applies that. MF23456 is only temp. Now
you run into some strange new combination which causes an error. You tie
it to MF23456 so you remove it. You still have the error. You then
discover it was originally caused by MF12345. It just hadn't occurred
because you didn't hit that unique situation. You cannot remove that so
you call IBM. You have a few choices here.
1 - slip the lic and load/apply lower PTFs (if you have them laying around)
2 - call ibm and report the problem and they say "yeah, we know about
that. Get MF23468."
3 - Restore from backup
Summary: Sooner or later the PTF is going to get perm applied anyway. If
it doesn't happen in 3 months it would be a pretty rare situation that you
would notice it later.

On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 3:28 PM Bryan Dietz <bdietz400@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

My "worry" about perm applying non-57xx999 PTFs is defective PTFs, or
PTFs that change behavior.

If you need to remove it, the latter, you are hosed. For defective PTfs
you need to wait for fixing PTF.

Certainly you would not load and immediately perm apply PTFs, so your
risk might be low(er). But i think it is still there.


Larry "DrFranken" Bolhuis wrote on 3/28/2023 2:16 PM:
CLEARLY it is the 999 PTFs that would cause issues with the link loader
or cause issues that can clobber the system, and thus require a reload.

So restricting the perm apply to 999 PTFs (LIC) only is not a bad idea.

Not sure why IBM would recommend NOT to perm apply the other PTFs - OS
and LPPs but we can assume they know better!

- DrF

On 3/28/2023 3:05 PM, Michael Mayer wrote:
I have a recent IBM Case about this and they say and I quote them:
“When applying CUME’s / Group’s, the only PTF’s that we recommend
should be applied
*PERM is the 5770999 LIC MF’s.

Michael Mayer
IBM i on Power System Admin
2225 Industrial Rd
Dyersburg, Tennessee 38024
Office and OnCall: 731.676.4318
Cell: 518.641.8906
Email: michael.mayer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:michael.mayer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
IBM i Personal Blog:
“Success is not final. Failure is not fatal. It is the courage to
continue that counts”.


-- .
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at https://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...


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

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2023 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.