On Jan 28, 2006, at 8:02 PM, Ron and Jenny Hawkins wrote:
Thanks Seymour. I was just informed of this offline as well. I know of
Hercules, but I haven't used it.
For MVS 3.8, wasn't the 2305 usually used as the standard VIO model
device
because it was so small that one runaway dataset wouldn't blow out
your AUX?
I think the 2314 was the original suggestion by IBM.
Ed
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
Sent: Sunday, 29 January 2006 8:18 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Is VIO mandatory?
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 01/28/2006
at 12:01 AM, Ron and Jenny Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Why don't you just fix the VIO Maxsize in SMS
The turnkey system is the free OS/VS2 R3.8 - no SMS.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
