Re: Disk vs Tape scenario

[Bruce Black]

For mainframe we support Flashcopy, but for Open Systems we provide a common
pool for Copy on Write (aka Snapshot).
Thanks.  You can probably tell I have a "closed mind" on open systems 
   course, this is the ibm-MAIN forum


--
Bruce A. Black
Senior Software Developer for FDR
Innovation Data Processing 973-890-7300
personal: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
sales info: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
tech support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
web: www.innovationdp.fdr.com 


--
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

Re: CAZ????? modules (resolution coming)

[ibm-main]

From: "Thomas Conley"
>
> Chris has stumbled uncontrollably into the truth.  IBM is aware of this
> issue and is working on a resolution.  CAZ was not registered, therefore
IBM
> was unaware of its existence.  So it's just one of those thangs.

So, CA still needs their arse kicked. Let's say Ed was right, and the
product has been out there 25-odd years.

And they *still* haven't registered it ...

Maybe the same division within CA looks after ordering SMP training.

Shane ...

--
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

Re: Disk vs Tape scenario

[Ron and Jenny Hawkins]

Bruce,

For mainframe we support Flashcopy, but for Open Systems we provide a common
pool for Copy on Write (aka Snapshot).

Ron




> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Bruce Black
> Sent: Sunday, 19 February 2006 1:44 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Disk vs Tape scenario
> 
> Let me elaborate on what Ron said.
> 
> There are essentially 3 technologies out there for "instant" replication
> of data.
> 1) Snapshot, in the IBM RVA and the StorageTek(Sun) disks, was truly
> instant, since the architecture allowed data to be copied by just
> copying pointers in memory.  I won't go into all the gory details, but
> essentially it created two pointers, so that two different tracks (on
> the same or different disks) pointed to the same track image on the real
> disks.   If one of those two "tracks" was updated, its data was written
> to a new location and its pointer updated, the other still pointed to
> the unupdated data.
> 2) constant mirroring, such as EMC Timefinder/Mirror BCV and Hitachi
> ShadowImage, keep a continously updated mirror of a given disk volume.
> When you want to create a point-in-time image of the volume, you 'split"
> the mirror and it instantly becomes a copy.
> 3) instant copy - like Flashcopy and EMC Snap, copy datasets and volumes
> by establishing a background session, which takes only seconds.  The
> copy can be treated as if it was instantly completed, even though the
> control unit is still copying data in the background.  Updated tracks
> are copied immediately, before the update is allowed, to preserve the
> original content.  Unupdated tracks may or may not be copied (an
> option);  if a track on the target is accessed and it has not been
> copied, the track from the original disk is fetched.
> 
> BTW, Hitachi ShadowImage has a version of (3) for full-vol only.  They
> support FlashCopy for dataset copies.
> 
> --
> Bruce A. Black
> Senior Software Developer for FDR
> Innovation Data Processing 973-890-7300
> personal: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> sales info: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> tech support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> web: www.innovationdp.fdr.com
> 
> --
> 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

Re: Disk vs Tape scenario

[Ron and Jenny Hawkins]

Gil,

For Instant Split, if a track is updated before it is copied it will be
copied out of order. 

The main difference between Instant Split and COW is that the Source data
will always be copied to the target location eventually, whereas with Copy
On Write only updated data is moved to the update pool or target volume.

Ron

> I think I understand CoW.  Instant Split is new to me.  So a couple
> questions:
> 
> o With Instant Split, what happens if some other process attempts to
>   update a block before the copy is complete?
> 
> o How does this behavior differ from that of CoW?
> 
> -- gil
> --
> StorageTek
> INFORMATION made POWERFUL
> 
> --
> 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

Re: Disk vs Tape scenario

[Bruce Black]

OK but it is far from *INSTANT* the propagation delay is still there,
no matter how fat (big) of pipline you may have, right? 
Ed, I don't quite see your point. 

In the technologies that Ron and I described, when you access the data 
on the target disk, it either reads it from the target (a track already 
copied) or reads it from the source (an unupdated track not yet copied), 
the speed is about the same.   So when you access the disk to back it 
up, the read speed is about the same as if you were accessing the 
original disk. 

BTW, we are not describing remote copies, to another control unit, we 
are describing replication technology from one location to another in 
the same control unit.  No pipeline involved, just read-cache-write


--
Bruce A. Black
Senior Software Developer for FDR
Innovation Data Processing 973-890-7300
personal: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
sales info: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
tech support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
web: www.innovationdp.fdr.com 


--
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

Re: Disk vs Tape scenario

[Ron and Jenny Hawkins]

Ed,

I disagree. It is instant. There is no propagation delay as the copy is
available instantly - no big fat pipe required. 

In the case of Copy on Write there may never be any propagation, so delay is
zero IMNSHO and infinite in yours.

How about a metaphor that a sysprogs will understand - CSA? There is one
copy of CSA shared by all address spaces. Every address thinks it has its
own copy of CSA, but there is just one common copy. 

If I make 20 *INSTANT* copies of a LUN using Copy On Write and mount them on
20 different servers I have a simile with CSA. One common set of storage
used by 20 different servers. There is no big fat pipe required to do this.

It is part of what the storage marketeers call *virtualisation*. People with
an MVS background are usually the first to be comfortable with this.

Ron


> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Ed Gould
> Sent: Sunday, 19 February 2006 12:26 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Disk vs Tape scenario
> 
> Ron,
> 
> OK but it is far from *INSTANT* the propagation delay is still there,
> no matter how fat (big) of pipline you may have, right?
> 
> Ed
> 
> --
> 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

Re: Disk vs Tape scenario

[Bruce Black]

Let me elaborate on what Ron said.

There are essentially 3 technologies out there for "instant" replication 
of data.
1) Snapshot, in the IBM RVA and the StorageTek(Sun) disks, was truly 
instant, since the architecture allowed data to be copied by just 
copying pointers in memory.  I won't go into all the gory details, but 
essentially it created two pointers, so that two different tracks (on 
the same or different disks) pointed to the same track image on the real 
disks.   If one of those two "tracks" was updated, its data was written 
to a new location and its pointer updated, the other still pointed to 
the unupdated data. 
2) constant mirroring, such as EMC Timefinder/Mirror BCV and Hitachi 
ShadowImage, keep a continously updated mirror of a given disk volume.  
When you want to create a point-in-time image of the volume, you 'split" 
the mirror and it instantly becomes a copy.
3) instant copy - like Flashcopy and EMC Snap, copy datasets and volumes 
by establishing a background session, which takes only seconds.  The 
copy can be treated as if it was instantly completed, even though the 
control unit is still copying data in the background.  Updated tracks 
are copied immediately, before the update is allowed, to preserve the 
original content.  Unupdated tracks may or may not be copied (an 
option);  if a track on the target is accessed and it has not been 
copied, the track from the original disk is fetched.  

BTW, Hitachi ShadowImage has a version of (3) for full-vol only.  They 
support FlashCopy for dataset copies.


--
Bruce A. Black
Senior Software Developer for FDR
Innovation Data Processing 973-890-7300
personal: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
sales info: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
tech support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
web: www.innovationdp.fdr.com 


--
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

Re: Don't fully understand IBM terminal

[Matt Collins]

My fault, I'm referring to our Z/OS consoles, we have four of them, each
identified by a Tel#. Their different TSO's as I'm told. Is that like having
4 different "systems" running? That would mean there are different jobs
running in each TSO, right? And that's probably why I'm supposed to check
for outstanding messages on each console. But yet I can check any drive
status on any console. If Tel1 prompts me for a tape, what message would I
get if a D U,,, that drive from another console?

Back to the console question though, here is what I've gathered so far:
Orange Text - task successfully executed, will roll off screen
Blue - task is about to happen
White - mount a tape (come to think of it, all the messages are tape
related, aren't there many other things going on in the mainframe?)
Those vertical bars on the left, do they group messages or something?

I know I'm hammering you with questions, but if you could answer them for me
it would really fill in the holes.

Matt Collins

On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 09:45:04 -0500, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/14/2006
>   at 07:00 PM, Matt Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
>>Subject: Don't fully understand IBM terminal
>
>What do you mean by "IBM terminal"? My first thought was MCS console,
>but parts of your message don't fit that.
>
>If you're looking at an MCS console, then see the z/OS System Messages
>manual. If you're looking at something else, tell us what it is and we
>may be able to help.
>
>You probably should also read the System Commands and JES2 System
>Commands manuals.
>
>--
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
> ISO position; see 
>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

Re: CAZ????? modules (resolution coming)

[Thomas Conley]

- Original Message - 
From: "Craddock, Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
Sent: Saturday, February 18, 2006 11:23 PM
Subject: RE: CAZ? modules



IMHO, the new "kid" on the block -- this 'CAZ' product from IBM --

ought

to choose a component ID that doesn't conflict with an *extremely*
popular product from CA with a decades long history and many thousands
of happy customers; probably including IBM themselves...


I would certainly agree with that sentiment. My (somewhat terse) earlier
post was not intended otherwise, but on re-reading it could be
interpreted that way.

There are quite a few examples of other ISV products that have been
"grandfathered" into the IBM namespace - our own BB* stuff for example.

However, IBM provides a registry for these things and as far as I know,
they will not assign an internal TLA that conflicts with a registered
ISV product - even if that product is in the IBM namespace.



Chris has stumbled uncontrollably into the truth.  IBM is aware of this 
issue and is working on a resolution.  CAZ was not registered, therefore IBM 
was unaware of its existence.  So it's just one of those thangs.


Regards,
Tom Conley 


--
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

Re: Disk vs Tape scenario

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 11:42:53 +0800, Ron and Jenny Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> For Copy On Write the original data will be copied to a backing location if
> it is updated. This may be a shared pool of space or a dedicated backing
> volume. For Instant Split the data is copied under the covers after the
> split, and the storage updates the pointers when data moves from source to
> targets.
>
I think I understand CoW.  Instant Split is new to me.  So a couple
questions:

o With Instant Split, what happens if some other process attempts to
  update a block before the copy is complete?

o How does this behavior differ from that of CoW?

-- gil
--
StorageTek
INFORMATION made POWERFUL

--
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

Re: Disk vs Tape scenario

[Ed Gould]

Ron,

OK but it is far from *INSTANT* the propagation delay is still there,
no matter how fat (big) of pipline you may have, right?

Ed

--
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

Re: CAZ????? modules

[Craddock, Chris]

> IMHO, the new "kid" on the block -- this 'CAZ' product from IBM --
ought
> to choose a component ID that doesn't conflict with an *extremely*
> popular product from CA with a decades long history and many thousands
> of happy customers; probably including IBM themselves...

I would certainly agree with that sentiment. My (somewhat terse) earlier
post was not intended otherwise, but on re-reading it could be
interpreted that way. 

There are quite a few examples of other ISV products that have been
"grandfathered" into the IBM namespace - our own BB* stuff for example.

However, IBM provides a registry for these things and as far as I know,
they will not assign an internal TLA that conflicts with a registered
ISV product - even if that product is in the IBM namespace.

CC

--
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

Re: Disk vs Tape scenario

[Ron and Jenny Hawkins]

Ed,

There are two similar methods available. One is Copy On Write and the other
is Instant Split. In both cases when the copy is created there is a set of
pointers back to the original copy - the actual source data is not copied at
that point.

Now you have two set of pointers directed to the same data, which is a bit
like having two windows looking into the same room. You can start using the
second copy immediately, while continuing to use the first copy. Creating
the first set of pointers takes seconds. The minutes vendors usually talk
about includes the procedures and automation required to prepare for the
copy to be done.

For Copy On Write the original data will be copied to a backing location if
it is updated. This may be a shared pool of space or a dedicated backing
volume. For Instant Split the data is copied under the covers after the
split, and the storage updates the pointers when data moves from source to
targets.

Ron

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Ed Gould
> Sent: Sunday, 19 February 2006 10:34 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Disk vs Tape scenario
> 
> On Feb 18, 2006, at 8:05 PM, Ron and Jenny Hawkins wrote:
> 
> > Radoslaw,
> >
> > I think the point is that for shops that use in system copies
> > (Shadowimage,
> > Flashcopy, Timefinder, etc) the time it takes to do the backup has
> > nothing
> > to do with the speed of tape.
> >
> > All of vendors offer instant copy capabilities that can be
> > completed easily
> > in less than a minute, no matter if you copy a GB or a TB.
> > ---SNIP
> 
> Ron,
> 
> This has always bothered me. I will play beginner here. How can any
> vendor copy a GB (or a TB) *INSTANTLY* there are laws of physics
> here.  A pipeline (even FICON or dark fiber) can only carry so much
> traffic in an INSTANT.
> 
> I can understand warmed over copy (as data is updated the updated
> data is transmitted) . Is this what you mean?
> 
> Even then (to me) its questionable if there is a GB being updated.
> 
> Please educate me in what is apparently FTL technology that has been
> invented.
> 
> Ed
> 
> --
> 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

Re: Disk vs Tape scenario

[Ed Gould]

On Feb 18, 2006, at 8:05 PM, Ron and Jenny Hawkins wrote:


Radoslaw,

I think the point is that for shops that use in system copies  
(Shadowimage,
Flashcopy, Timefinder, etc) the time it takes to do the backup has  
nothing

to do with the speed of tape.

All of vendors offer instant copy capabilities that can be  
completed easily

in less than a minute, no matter if you copy a GB or a TB.
---SNIP


Ron,

This has always bothered me. I will play beginner here. How can any  
vendor copy a GB (or a TB) *INSTANTLY* there are laws of physics  
here.  A pipeline (even FICON or dark fiber) can only carry so much  
traffic in an INSTANT.


I can understand warmed over copy (as data is updated the updated  
data is transmitted) . Is this what you mean?


Even then (to me) its questionable if there is a GB being updated.

Please educate me in what is apparently FTL technology that has been  
invented.


Ed

--
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

Re: Disk vs Tape scenario

[Ron and Jenny Hawkins]

Radoslaw,

The 120MB/s appears to be the uncompressed data transfer rate at the heads.
They think they will get 360MBsec on 4Gb FCP once they introduce
compression.

Ron

> Real speed is currently limited by interface: 2Gbps FC or FICON (4Gbps
> version planned).

--
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

Re: Pod slurping?

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/17/2006
   at 06:21 PM, Phil Payne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>(That will probably get me another SnottyGram from Bell Helicopter's
>firewall for "inappropriate sexist language".  Seufz.)

Or possibly a different word further on.

>you could by all means take a stiffie in

Try Saltpeter.

>but you were not allowed to take it out again.

A bit harsh, what?

>Did you ever try to walk out of a data centre with a 10" 3420-style
>self-loader under your arm? 

Yes - lots of times. So did vendor personnel.

>The Spanish Inquisition was a breeze
>compared to those security checks. 

Not everyone has the same management you do. Of course, the shops
where management doesn't care about security at all are as bad,
perhaps worse, than the shops where a concern for security compromises
the mission of the data center.

>We have lost the glass-house discipline,

What discipline? Every shop is different. I've been at shops where I
was regarded as a freak because I wanted code and design reviews. I've
been at shops where basic common sense security rules were ignored[1],
even though they were required by law. I know of a data center move
where the entire tape library was shipped to the new location without
first making backup copies.

[1] No, writing the combination to a classified container on the
blackboard in hex because "nobody will be able to read it"
is not complaint with Federal security requirements. I don't
know what the UK law is, but I'd be very surprised if it was
legal in your neck of the woods either.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
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

Re: Disk vs Tape scenario

[Ron and Jenny Hawkins]

Radoslaw,

I think the point is that for shops that use in system copies (Shadowimage,
Flashcopy, Timefinder, etc) the time it takes to do the backup has nothing
to do with the speed of tape.

All of vendors offer instant copy capabilities that can be completed easily
in less than a minute, no matter if you copy a GB or a TB.

Once that is done you have your backup. The tape drive is only creating an
archive of the backup, and is not in the critical path. Faster tape drives
are really so important for backups in this case.

Ron

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of R.S.
> Sent: Saturday, 18 February 2006 7:18 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Disk vs Tape scenario
> 
> Bruno Sugliani wrote:
> > On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 21:51:51 +0100, R.S.
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Looks very promising.
> >>
> >
> > Yes .. on the other hand when we look at DASD manufacturers numbers ..
> you
> > wonder why some of us are looking for larger time frame for backup ...
> > the numbers say that we need few minutes to save few teras
> > Ok it is friday :-))
> 
> IMHO it's quite obvious: 10 years ago you had 10GB cart and you needed,
> let's say 3 hours to backup your 0.x TB DASD. Today you have 500GB cart
> and ...still need 3 hours, because your DASD also grew up. Did your
> business grew as the storage ? I strongly doubt.
> This is the same like in popular (in Poland) IT anecdote: in 1986 our
> secretary needed PC XT and 640kB RAM to print one page document. After
> many years she has Pentium 4, 1GB RAM, 100+ GB disk and she ...still use
> it is typing machine.
> (translation is not exact, but the idea is obvious)
> 
> --
> Radoslaw Skorupka
> Lodz, Poland
> 
> --
> 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

Re: CAZ????? modules

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/18/2006
   at 02:07 PM, Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>You have only yourselves* to blame.

ObGBS How is he responsible for the pigheaded polices of Lord North
and George III? Had the English treated us like British subjects we
would never have revolted.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
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

Re: Heads Up - LE PE - PK15432

[Bob Rutledge]

We installed the fix for PK15432 on 11 Dec. 2005 as part of our last maintenance 
roll-out before year-end freeze.  I've had one problem and the program was 
easily fixed (after I wrote a note for the auditors explaining why we replaced a 
program in the financial software.)  I have a job ready to pull PK15432 and a 
couple relatives but I doubt that I'll have to use it after two months.


Bob

Knutson, Sam wrote:

Roland's handy COBANAL freeware detects the presence of the Search which
I can find in the output by searching on 'SearchY'. I can also
have our Endeavor administrator scan the source libraries for 'SEARCH
ALL'. What else is anyone using to assess the risk?   Are you electing
to back out the PE without waiting for any reports of problems at your
site or fixes from IBM?

We have not had any reports of issues on R6 which includes the now PE
PTF but "I have a bad feeling about this". 


--
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

Re: Heads Up - LE PE - PK15432

[Knutson, Sam]

Roland's handy COBANAL freeware detects the presence of the Search which
I can find in the output by searching on 'SearchY'. I can also
have our Endeavor administrator scan the source libraries for 'SEARCH
ALL'. What else is anyone using to assess the risk?   Are you electing
to back out the PE without waiting for any reports of problems at your
site or fixes from IBM?

We have not had any reports of issues on R6 which includes the now PE
PTF but "I have a bad feeling about this". 

Best Regards,

Sam Knutson, GEICO
Performance and Availability Management
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(office)  301.986.3574

"Think big, act bold, start simple, grow fast..."

This email/fax message is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of this
email/fax is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
destroy all paper and electronic copies of the original message.

--
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

SV: IBM Application Performance Analyzer

[Peter Kvernes]

The answer is Strobe, or?

--
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

Re: CAZ????? modules

[Edward E. Jaffe]

Chris Mason wrote:

At one time in the UK, there was a two-part bumper sticker (or one with
appropriate arrows) which indicated "overtaking" on the right side of the
car and "undertaking" on the left. Of course, this only makes sense because
I mentioned the sticker is used in the UK.

You can imagine how troublesome I found driving in your state with
overtaking on either side being legal.

There may be another of those UK/US terminology reverses here. In the UK we
overtake in the "outside" lane and regard it as the safer of the
alternatives. Perhaps this is the "inside" lane in the US - because it's
closer to the centre?
  



I deliberately used the terms "inside" and "outside" rather than "left" 
and "right" in an effort to make my point understood internationally. 
Americans actually never use such terminology. Let me try again using 
the words we use:


In the USA, we drive on the right. On a freeway (or highway), the 
fastest cars are supposed to drive in the left lanes; the slower ones on 
the right. Passing on the left is considered safer because the right 
lanes have slower cars and, depending on how wide the road is and far to 
the right you go, can become busy with traffic entering and leaving the 
freeway. On some roads, especially those with fewer lanes, passing on 
the right may be disallowed altogether.


BTW, the ridiculous national speed limit of 55 mph was abolished in 
1995. By all accounts, it was absolutely the right thing to do: 
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-346es.html



Rather than engage in an off-topic discussion of driving laws and/or 
habits, I was trying to use a metaphor to to describe people that refuse 
to yield as a matter of principle, even though such refusal endangers 
everyone else around them.


IMHO, the new "kid" on the block -- this 'CAZ' product from IBM -- ought 
to choose a component ID that doesn't conflict with an *extremely* 
popular product from CA with a decades long history and many thousands 
of happy customers; probably including IBM themselves...


--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800
Los Angeles, CA 90045
310-338-0400 x318
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/

--
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

Re: CAZ????? modules

[Ed Gould]

On Feb 18, 2006, at 8:36 AM, Chris Mason wrote:


Edward,

I guess that it's "Nervana" for you while it's "Nirvana" for them.

I recall when I visited the US in 1972 that 55 was the absolute  
upper speed

limit - maddening.

At one time in the UK, there was a two-part bumper sticker (or one  
with
appropriate arrows) which indicated "overtaking" on the right side  
of the
car and "undertaking" on the left. Of course, this only makes sense  
because

I mentioned the sticker is used in the UK.

You can imagine how troublesome I found driving in your state with
overtaking on either side being legal.

There may be another of those UK/US terminology reverses here. In  
the UK we

overtake in the "outside" lane and regard it as the safer of the
alternatives. Perhaps this is the "inside" lane in the US - because  
it's

closer to the centre?

Or at least that's how it was when I lived in the UK. I'm now  
living in
Belgium and here you can be pulled over by the police for NOT  
exceeding the
speed limit. Once at 5 in the morning I was obeying the law all  
alone on an
urban dual carriageway and some lights appeared behind. They  
followed me

round a couple of bends and the van pulled up alongside when I parked
outside my house. "You're obstructing the garage." was the best  
they could

come up with. It seems as if someone behaving unusually by actually
observing the speed limit, especially on a deserted street at  
night, must

have some sort of criminal intent.

Incidentally, I once saw a cartoon of US police pulling over a car  
because
it was going too slowly. This was some years ago and, at the time,  
would

never have happened in the UK, hence the opportunity for humour.

Chris Mason



Chris,

I will never forget the Brits for introducing zagged marks (painted  
zig zag marks) (No parking?) in the street.
I thought at first they were introduced to allow drunk drivers a  
chance to pass the sobriety test.


Ed
 


--
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

Re: Disk vs Tape scenario

[Ed Finnell]

 
In a message dated 2/18/2006 5:18:57 A.M. Central Standard Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

secretary needed PC XT and 640kB RAM to print one page document. After  
many years she has Pentium 4, 1GB RAM, 100+ GB disk and she ...still use  
it is typing machine.
(translation is not exact, but the idea is  obvious)



>>
You forgot the 'graphics standards implementation' Corporate Logo,  
Departmental Header, 1 1/2" margins. Now all one page documents are two pages,  
regardless.

--
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

Re: Heads Up - LE PE - PK15432

[Ambat Ravi Nair]

it is marked HIPER now ...


  APAR Identifier .. PK15432  Last Changed  06/02/17
  EXEC BINARY SEARCH ALL ... WHEN .. GIVES DIFFERENT RESULT AFTER
  PQ95214 IF SEARCH ARGUMENT IS LONGER THAN  06/01/19 PTF PECHANGE

  Symptom .. IN INCORROUT Status ... CLOSED  PER
  Severity ... 2  Date Closed . 06/01/25
  Component .. 568819802  Duplicate of 
  Reported Release . 709  Fixed Release  999
  Component Name LE COBOL LIB Special NoticePE HIPER
  Current Target Date ..06/02/22  Flags
  SCP ...
  Platform  PERVASIVE  DATALOSS

  Status Detail: APARCLOSURE - APAR is being closed.



On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 15:35:03 -0600, Mark Zelden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>What I don't get is... at least as of right now this APAR is not
>even marked HIPER (or doesn't IBM do that until the PTF is
>available?).This has gone to the highest levels of management
>in our organization and the question has been asked many times by
>senior management: "Doesn't IBM alert you to a problem like this that
>has potential for this much damage?"
>
>It's hard to respond to that yes, there was HOLDDATA and normally
>someone downloads it weekly and reviews SMP/E report errorsysmods to
>see potential impacts.   This one was overlooked. Even if found,
>by the person looking things over, I doubt the impact would have
>been realized.
>
>In my thinking, this should have been a red alert.   It seems
>that those are reserved to problems that can't be resolved
>without an IPL or cause an IPL.  While no one likes system
>outages and they can cost real money depending on the business,
>data corruption is IMHO a *much worse* scenario. We recently
>went though a recovery effort from a problem caused by another
>vendor related to data loss/corruption.  Took several weeks
>of 24*7 work by a lot of people.
>
>Mark
>--
>Mark Zelden
>Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead
>Zurich North America and Farmers Insurance Group
>mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/
>Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.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

Re: CAZ????? modules

[Chris Mason]

Edward,

I guess that it's "Nervana" for you while it's "Nirvana" for them.

I recall when I visited the US in 1972 that 55 was the absolute upper speed
limit - maddening.

At one time in the UK, there was a two-part bumper sticker (or one with
appropriate arrows) which indicated "overtaking" on the right side of the
car and "undertaking" on the left. Of course, this only makes sense because
I mentioned the sticker is used in the UK.

You can imagine how troublesome I found driving in your state with
overtaking on either side being legal.

There may be another of those UK/US terminology reverses here. In the UK we
overtake in the "outside" lane and regard it as the safer of the
alternatives. Perhaps this is the "inside" lane in the US - because it's
closer to the centre?

Or at least that's how it was when I lived in the UK. I'm now living in
Belgium and here you can be pulled over by the police for NOT exceeding the
speed limit. Once at 5 in the morning I was obeying the law all alone on an
urban dual carriageway and some lights appeared behind. They followed me
round a couple of bends and the van pulled up alongside when I parked
outside my house. "You're obstructing the garage." was the best they could
come up with. It seems as if someone behaving unusually by actually
observing the speed limit, especially on a deserted street at night, must
have some sort of criminal intent.

Incidentally, I once saw a cartoon of US police pulling over a car because
it was going too slowly. This was some years ago and, at the time, would
never have happened in the UK, hence the opportunity for humour.

Chris Mason

- Original Message - 
From: "Edward E. Jaffe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: 
Sent: Saturday, 18 February, 2006 1:52 AM
Subject: Re: CAZ? modules


...

> This reminds me of the obstinate "jerks" that get in the inside lane of
> the freeway and drive 55. They'll just sit there in their
> passive-aggressive "Nervana" while one car after another needlessly
> endangers themselves and everyone else on the road while passing on the
> outside. They figure it's their right to do so, but in this state CHP
> *will* pull them over nonetheless for impeding the flow of traffic. I've
> seen them do it...
>
> -- 
> Edward E Jaffe
> Phoenix Software International, Inc
> 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800
> Los Angeles, CA 90045
> 310-338-0400 x318
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/

--
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

Re: Redirecting Software Functionality

[Ted MacNEIL]

>That may work for the compiler (will have to double check) but it  
still has issues with "coblib" (ie LE runtime & Subroutines). You  
*HAVE to give out read to that library for the binder.

Not any more, unless you're using an unsupported version of COBOL.
The latest releases don't support static links.

Even then, with the runtimes only you can't compile squat.


-
-teD

I’m an enthusiastic proselytiser of the universal panacea I believe in!

--
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

Re: CAZ????? modules

[Chris Mason]

Thomas,

You have only yourselves* to blame. If the British crown had continued to
have the Carolinas available for the purposes of shipping convicts, Oz
wouldn't have a reason to exist :-) - but then with whom would the Brits
have the chance to dispute ownership of the ashes of a cricket bail :-(

* I'm relying on your domain name as evidence that you are a citizen of the
lost colonies.

Chris Mason

- Original Message - 
From: "Thomas Conley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: 
Sent: Saturday, 18 February, 2006 4:59 AM
Subject: Re: CAZ? modules


> Freakin' Aussies

--
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

Re: Disk vs Tape scenario

[R.S.]

Bruno Sugliani wrote:

On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 21:51:51 +0100, R.S. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



Looks very promising.



Yes .. on the other hand when we look at DASD manufacturers numbers .. you
wonder why some of us are looking for larger time frame for backup ...
the numbers say that we need few minutes to save few teras
Ok it is friday :-))


IMHO it's quite obvious: 10 years ago you had 10GB cart and you needed, 
let's say 3 hours to backup your 0.x TB DASD. Today you have 500GB cart 
and ...still need 3 hours, because your DASD also grew up. Did your 
business grew as the storage ? I strongly doubt.
This is the same like in popular (in Poland) IT anecdote: in 1986 our 
secretary needed PC XT and 640kB RAM to print one page document. After 
many years she has Pentium 4, 1GB RAM, 100+ GB disk and she ...still use 
it is typing machine.

(translation is not exact, but the idea is obvious)

--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland

--
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

Re: external vs internal coupling facility

[Timothy Sipples]

Is there any way you can wiggle an ICF into your configuration?  For 
example, could you go to a 2xx model?  Are you WLC (and thus could 
conceivably shift the Linux workload to the CPs)?  Could you consolidate 
more Linux work and turn on an IFL or two in the second system to convert 
it, better funding its maintenance?  Do you need the CF?  Have you had a 
recent chat with your IBM SE^H^H IT Specialist?

I'm not liking Plan A either. :-)

- - - - -
Timothy F. Sipples
Consulting Enterprise Software Architect, z9/zSeries
IBM Japan, Ltd.
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
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

Re: CAZ????? modules

[Edward E. Jaffe]

ibm-main wrote:

Never stopped them suddenly deciding to start using DIAGNOSE codes that
Amdahl just happened to have used.
Unannounced and undocumented of course. I'm sure the folks in the labs (both
camps) knew what was in use and what wasn't - I just saw the end effects out
in the field.
  


Yikes!

--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800
Los Angeles, CA 90045
310-338-0400 x318
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/

--
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