Re: why cum ptf apply faster than predicted?

["Dave Shaw" <daveshaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Jim,

Perhaps it would be smarter if IBM didn't bother providing a lower limit.  I
can't quibble about that.  However, the "sort of measure of success" is
readily available and is mentioned in the instructions for every cume tape -
check the log using the filter supplied, make sure there are no error
messages and that all of the completion messages expected are there.  If
that's not good enough, do a DSPPTF and look for PTF's that aren't in one of
the correct statuses.  Please tell me if I'm being overly simplistic here -
the ONLY time I ever had problems with this was when I didn't do it!
(Actually someone else was supposed to do it, but I hadn't done an adequate
job training her and she missed something.  Learning experience for both of
us...)

Dave Shaw
Simpsonville, SC
---
If you would like to participate in the MAPICS-L mailing list send email to
MAPICS-L-SUB@midrange.com or go to www.midrange.com and follow the
instructions.

----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Damato

<snip>

It would be smarter to define an upper limit so that you'll know when you
might be in trouble, and provide some sort of measure of success to check
before moving on.

<snip some more>


+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---