You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently, it is possible for a Shared DASD Server and/or its Client(s) to specify a "cu=" value for a given dasd that is different from the other's. This is not good as it leads to incorrect behavior on one or the other. For example, see the thread in the Main SDL Hercules-390 group labelled "zOS Disabled Wait 05D During Initialization":
Frank's troubles were caused by his server specifying cu=3990-6 on its shared dasds, but where his client was missing that option. There needs to be a way to prevent this simple error from being made by users, causing them much frustration, confusion and grief.
p.s. Don't forget to mention its requirement in the documentation somewhere too!
Jeff Bassett adds:"Might also put a NOTE on the section for defining disks – with some additional information that we have learned about the CU parm – vs default."
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Fish-Git
changed the title
Shared Device Server and Client should pass current "cu=" (Control Unit) value to one another
Shared Device Server and Client should pass "cu=" value to one another
Sep 29, 2024
Fish-Git
added
the
Enhancement
This issue does not describe a problem but rather describes a suggested change or improvement.
label
Sep 29, 2024
Currently, it is possible for a Shared DASD Server and/or its Client(s) to specify a "cu=" value for a given dasd that is different from the other's. This is not good as it leads to incorrect behavior on one or the other. For example, see the thread in the Main SDL Hercules-390 group labelled "zOS Disabled Wait 05D During Initialization":
Which ends with the following post:
Frank's troubles were caused by his server specifying
cu=3990-6
on its shared dasds, but where his client was missing that option. There needs to be a way to prevent this simple error from being made by users, causing them much frustration, confusion and grief.p.s. Don't forget to mention its requirement in the documentation somewhere too!
Jeff Bassett adds: "Might also put a NOTE on the section for defining disks – with some additional information that we have learned about the CU parm – vs default."
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: