Currently, CICS version 1.3 modules are loaded in LPA and CICS regions are running with LPA=YES. How do you suggest...
moving version 2.2 modules in LPA while some regions are still at version 1.3? The installation guide says "modules with mismatching service levels can cause unpredictable results." Well, I don't, is the short answer.
If you are running different CICS levels in the same MVS image, then only one level (CTS 1.3 or CTS 2.2) can have modules residing in the LPA. The SVCs are shareable, however, as long as you use the CTS 2.2 ones (which will work for CTS 1.3). But, if you don't want to do this then simply use another set of SVC numbers for the CTS 2.2 SVCs.
So, you have got to make a choice as to which of your CTS 1.3 or CTS 2.2 regions needs the slightly better performance benefit of a LPA-resident module.
Back in the good old days, when storage below the line was important, putting things in the LPA was important for space reasons. I don't think that consideration is as important as it used to be.
CICS Technical Strategist -- CICS expert at Search390.com
Editor's note: Do you agree with this expert's response? If you have more to share, post it in one of our .VO7aaqqaAFk.0@/search390>discussion forums.
Related Q&A from Robert Crawford
With 3270 bridge, you can't stack input messages into one structure. The bridge can't process them all at once. It takes a little more work.continue reading
CICS expert Robert Crawford offers advice on determining the connection between CICS transactions and MQ Queue name.continue reading
CICS expert Robert Crawford discusses if a program can use IXLLIST macros in CICS when IXLLIST are APF.continue reading
Have a question for an expert?
Please add a title for your question
Get answers from a TechTarget expert on whatever's puzzling you.