Re: CSA 'above the bar'
On Fri, 2 Nov 2007 20:32:28 -0700, Edward Jaffe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Paul Schuster wrote: >> Am I correct in believing that the method to obtain the equivalent of CSA >> above the bar is to use macro IARV64 with the REQUEST=GETSHARED option? >> > >That's the only "common" storage currently available above 2G. However, >unlike CSA, it must be explicitly shared. Above 4 G ? Bruno Bruno(dot)sugliani(at)groupemornay(dot)asso(dot)fr -- 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: CSA 'above the bar'
Anything above 4G IS above 2G. :-) Martin Packer Performance Consultant IBM United Kingdom Ltd +44-20-8832-5167 +44-7802-245-584 [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Bruno Sugliani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Date: 03/11/2007 08:39 Subject: Re: CSA 'above the bar' On Fri, 2 Nov 2007 20:32:28 -0700, Edward Jaffe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Paul Schuster wrote: >> Am I correct in believing that the method to obtain the equivalent of CSA >> above the bar is to use macro IARV64 with the REQUEST=GETSHARED option? >> > >That's the only "common" storage currently available above 2G. However, >unlike CSA, it must be explicitly shared. Above 4 G ? Bruno Bruno(dot)sugliani(at)groupemornay(dot)asso(dot)fr -- 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 Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- 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
Obtain Hypervisor Offset Value via REXX?
Folks, in an accounting project where we collect various data from all LPARs we have some LPARs that are/were IPLed with a future date. (I'm not familiar with the exact terms nor the procedure how this is accomplished, so please bear with me). From studying SMF type 70 records we know that there is a field SMF70HOF which is sometimes labelled as 'hypervisor offset' or as 'sysplex timer offset' respectively. Since not all of our data sources are SMF data we thought that it might be nice if we could obtain the current HOF value directly from storage and add it to the processing of those data. Knowing this value would give us the opportunity to create reports that say something along the lines of 'values from date/time x in simulation of date/time y'. My #1 source of inspiration here being Mark Zelden's IPLINFO rexx program (which does not display that value as far as I could make out by having a quick look into the code and the output sample on Mark's web site). Has anybody ever successfully tried to find the Hypervisor Offset value via REXX? If so, would you mind to share this little piece of valuable code with me and all of IBM-MAIN? Thanks a lot in advance Robert Bardos Ansys AG, Zurich, Switzerland -- 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: CSA 'above the bar'
So, Ed J says ... > That's the only "common" storage currently available above 2G. However, > unlike CSA, it must be explicitly shared. And Bruno tosses some bait with ... > Above 4 G ? And Martin bites with ... > Anything above 4G IS above 2G. :-) Nobody has said anything wrong as far as I can see, but I reckon the points decision goes to Bruno. 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: PL/S ??
On Fri, 2 Nov 2007 19:05:24 -0500, Ed Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I respected the IBM Scott. Gee. I guess respect is conferred based on employment? My leaving IBM was under amicable circumstances (I attended the zSeries Technical Disclosure Meeting last month and will be attending a 30th Service Anniversary celebration on Tuesday). My opinions have always been based on what's best for the system, the industry and the customers. I changed my IBM-MAIN email address at the suggestion of a customer. If I've demonstrated some sort of bias that has changed due to my employment circumstances, then, please, point it out. I've reviewed all 17 of my new posts, and none seem to be any more or less controversial/obnoxious than ever. If my advocacy of Metal C for what it is (and what it is not) was in some way belittling, I apologize. I see this as an opportunity to move the platform forward by making it more accessible. We, as the community of advocates, should not be looking this gift horse in the mouth. It's tiring, after 21 years, to hear about how hard things are, and when IBM does something good to remove a barrier (no matter how small), then hear from the same community rail that it's "not enough" or "too little too late" because it's not exactly the way they wanted it or would have designed it. Off my soapbox now, Scott Fagen Enterprise Systems Management -- 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: CSA 'above the bar'
Bruno Sugliani wrote: On Fri, 2 Nov 2007 20:32:28 -0700, Edward Jaffe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Paul Schuster wrote: Am I correct in believing that the method to obtain the equivalent of CSA above the bar is to use macro IARV64 with the REQUEST=GETSHARED option? That's the only "common" storage currently available above 2G. However, unlike CSA, it must be explicitly shared. Above 4 G ? Yes. The "bar" is at 2G. But, there is a "dead zone" between 2G and 4G that will never be allocated by z/OS. For simplicity, some folks like to think of the z/OS virtual storage "bar" as being 2G thick. And, of course, there is no equivalent dead zone when working with real storage. -- 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
Scotts new role
On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 07:53 -0500, Scott Fagen wrote: > On Fri, 2 Nov 2007 19:05:24 -0500, Ed Gould wrote: > >I respected the IBM Scott. > > Gee. I guess respect is conferred based on employment? Normally I just ignore the stupidity of Ed G, but this was totally uncalled for. Pull your head in Ed, or everyone will have you on their "kill list". 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: Scotts new role
- Original Message - From: "Shane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2007 4:45 PM Subject: Scotts new role On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 07:53 -0500, Scott Fagen wrote: On Fri, 2 Nov 2007 19:05:24 -0500, Ed Gould wrote: >I respected the IBM Scott. Gee. I guess respect is conferred based on employment? Normally I just ignore the stupidity of Ed G, but this was totally uncalled for. Pull your head in Ed, or everyone will have you on their "kill list". Shane ... Shane, With rectocephaly, the head is already in, it must be pulled out. You freakin' Aussies, always getting it backwards. As for Mr. Gould questioning Scott's integrity just because he no longer works for IBM, that's beneath contempt. Right up there with Gilmore taking on Jaffe (guess who won that one?). Might as well call out Chris and Norm, too. How dare they choose to be gainfully employed! I'm proud to still call them my friends. Guess I should hate them just because they work for CA. I know!!! I'll snub them at SHARE in Orlando!!! What do you think you're doing, working for CA? Leaving IBM, BMC, and Candle. That's not right. 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: Scotts new role
On Nov 3, 2007, at 3:45 PM, Shane wrote: On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 07:53 -0500, Scott Fagen wrote: On Fri, 2 Nov 2007 19:05:24 -0500, Ed Gould wrote: I respected the IBM Scott. Gee. I guess respect is conferred based on employment? Normally I just ignore the stupidity of Ed G, but this was totally uncalled for. Pull your head in Ed, or everyone will have you on their "kill list". Shane ... Shane: How could you respect anyone that worked for CA? I don't know (or care) about his reasoning for going to work for the "evil empire", that is his prerogative. Sure there were some people way back when who got bought out by CA and didn't have a choice. They have my sympathies but to leave a company and essentially sell their name to the evil empire (and not even announce it) tells me quite a bit about their themselves. Poor Russell he managed to keep himself out of the dirt that CA has cast far and wide, but he didn't have a choice in the matter. The company that he worked for was bought up so he is trying to make the best of it (and doing a decent job). You have had your day and duty speaking up on his behalf. I won't get into name calling , hope you have a great life. 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: Scotts new role
Can't we all just get along ? Can't dimplomacy be used ? Economic/Atomic pressure ? Sorry.. Too many pints -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Gould Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2007 7:10 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Scotts new role On Nov 3, 2007, at 3:45 PM, Shane wrote: > On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 07:53 -0500, Scott Fagen wrote: > >> On Fri, 2 Nov 2007 19:05:24 -0500, Ed Gould wrote: >>> I respected the IBM Scott. >> >> Gee. I guess respect is conferred based on employment? > > Normally I just ignore the stupidity of Ed G, but this was totally > uncalled for. > > Pull your head in Ed, or everyone will have you on their "kill list". > > Shane ... Shane: How could you respect anyone that worked for CA? I don't know (or care) about his reasoning for going to work for the "evil empire", that is his prerogative. Sure there were some people way back when who got bought out by CA and didn't have a choice. They have my sympathies but to leave a company and essentially sell their name to the evil empire (and not even announce it) tells me quite a bit about their themselves. Poor Russell he managed to keep himself out of the dirt that CA has cast far and wide, but he didn't have a choice in the matter. The company that he worked for was bought up so he is trying to make the best of it (and doing a decent job). You have had your day and duty speaking up on his behalf. I won't get into name calling , hope you have a great life. 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: Scotts new role
I respected the IBM Scott. Gee. I guess respect is conferred based on employment? Normally I just ignore the stupidity of Ed G, but this was totally uncalled for. Pull your head in Ed, or everyone will have you on their "kill list". -- Whether we agree or disagree with policies, etc. of ANY company, those of us who are participants on this list should NOT engage in personnal attacks of any kind, direct or indirect, against list participants. The vast majority of us, I even venture to say ALL of us, have very little effect on company pricing, support practices, or any other aspect of company management. We're all technicians here, and each of us is entitled to the respect due to our positions and expertise. Ed, I think you owe an apology for that very thoughtless remark. And I think you would be well-advised to refrain from any further remarks of that nature. -- 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: Scotts new role
>How could you respect anyone that worked for CA? People don't have many choices, these days. If I had a choice, I'd rather work for CA than be unemployed (as I am). You respect people for what they are! NOT for what they do for a living! But, your vindictive and ad hominem posts are very tiring. Fortunately, I no longer see them directly. (You are one of three IBM-Main posters that I have blocked) - Too busy driving to stop for gas! -- 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
SHOWzOS for R9 still waiting for OA22594
Hi folks, sorry I'm still waiting for closure of OA22594 before I'll release SHOWzOS 7.16 to support z/OS R9. Please don't try 7.15 as it fails because an OCO cblock has been changed. Of course SHOWzOS recover from this abend and will just miss some reports only. So far a tempfix is available so I wonder why IBM took so much time to build a PTF for this APAR. However it's out of my hands. Roland Schiradin ALTE LEIPZIGER Lebensversicherung auf Gegenseitigkeit IT Betrieb - DB/DC Tel. (06171) 66-4095, Fax (06171) 66-7500-4095 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.Alte-Leipziger.de -- 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: z/OS 1.9 Features summary
On 30 Oct 2007 09:18:04 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: >Howard, > >Yes, I agree, having the BLLSIZE=0 is the way to go now. Of course IBM should provide a compile option to default to BLOCK = 0 in the FD statement for COBOL. This is permissible within the COBOL standard, both 1985 and 2002. We should not have to code it. > >However effective use of BUFNO on the DD can really increase >efficiencies when you add enough buffers to match devices transfer >sizes, without going overboard on it. > >I've done some tinkering over the past few years and it appears that >128K to 1M of buffering per file seems to cover most devices well. So >you don't always have to change that in the JCL, just find a good value >for BUFNO that applies well to most devices and use the BLKSIZE=0 to get >the max block size for the device. > >I will disagree with the statement that efficiencies should not be in >programs or in Jobs. Sometimes it's needed. > >Darren > >> rest snipped -- 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: z/OS 1.9 Features summary
>Of course IBM should provide a compile option to default to BLOCK = 0 in the >FD statement for COBOL. Raise a requirement. They are not going to make changes based on comments on IBM-Main (pet peeve). - Too busy driving to stop for gas! -- 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: Scotts new role
Oh well I agree 100%. I just changed my client and nobody cares as I didn't change my brain. All I know is still where and I all miss also. Who care about Scott. It's just a change and I never recognize this change. It's just up to him > > I respected the IBM Scott. >>>Gee. I guess respect is conferred based on employment? >>> >>> >> >>Normally I just ignore the stupidity of Ed G, but this was totally >>uncalled for. >> >>Pull your head in Ed, or everyone will have you on their "kill list". >> >> >-- >Whether we agree or disagree with policies, etc. of ANY company, those >of us who are participants on this list should NOT engage in personnal >attacks of any kind, direct or indirect, against list participants. The >vast majority of us, I even venture to say ALL of us, have very little >effect on company pricing, support practices, or any other aspect of >company management. We're all technicians here, and each of us is >entitled to the respect due to our positions and expertise. Ed, I think >you owe an apology for that very thoughtless remark. And I think you >would be well-advised to refrain from any further remarks of that nature. -- 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: z/OS 1.9 Features summary
On Nov 3, 2007, at 8:05 PM, Clark Morris wrote: On 30 Oct 2007 09:18:04 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: Howard, Yes, I agree, having the BLLSIZE=0 is the way to go now. Of course IBM should provide a compile option to default to BLOCK = 0 in the FD statement for COBOL. This is permissible within the COBOL standard, both 1985 and 2002. We should not have to code it. --SNIP- Clark, You bring up an interesting point. One unfortunately there is probably no good answer for (at least that will make everyone happy). I sort of agree with you but I can definitely see where some companies would not agree to. None the less it would probably be worth writing up a SHARE requirement for. I would also be interested to hear how IBM would respond to it (other than a FO). I have not been part of the requirement process in quite some time, but the last I was in the loop was that IBM was rather err loose in responding to requirements. Most of the times that I saw IBM would give a non answer (to anything but accepted). I guess that is their right but (to me) it left the audience guessing if IBM really agreed with it or if they will bury it. I vaguely remember that (when GUIDE submitted requirements) it was floated around IBM and it usually got to the right people when they wanted to respond but most of the time it went into the holding pen in the sky when they didn't want to. I would think that there would be a rather spirited discussion in the COBOL Group about the requirement. 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: Scotts new role
I must have missed something, when did you (Ted MacNeil) become unemployed? --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Ted MacNEIL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Scotts new role Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 00:44:52 + >How could you respect anyone that worked for CA? People don't have many choices, these days. If I had a choice, I'd rather work for CA than be unemployed (as I am). You respect people for what they are! NOT for what they do for a living! But, your vindictive and ad hominem posts are very tiring. Fortunately, I no longer see them directly. (You are one of three IBM-Main posters that I have blocked) - Too busy driving to stop for gas! -- 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 _ Netscape. Just the Net You Need. -- 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: CSA 'above the bar'
Ok so how to you 'explicitly' share it? Since CSA is available to everyone, how do you make this 'above the 4GB bar' storage available to everyone (read only)? Thank you. Paul On Fri, 2 Nov 2007 20:32:28 -0700, Edward Jaffe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Paul Schuster wrote: >> Am I correct in believing that the method to obtain the equivalent of CSA >> above the bar is to use macro IARV64 with the REQUEST=GETSHARED option? >> > >That's the only "common" storage currently available above 2G. However, >unlike CSA, it must be explicitly shared. > >-- >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 -- 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: my free mainframe product and question?
More fixes to my product. Please download the new installation files in my site www.mfnetdisk.com Some people ask me about how much cost the product? I really do not know right now. In general I am not sure if I take money for this product in the future. If one day big company like IBM or EMC or HDS or what ever company like to buy my product then that is OK with me but now just play with my product. Please let me know what the product need to become more attractive. If someone want to have access to more devices for free please let me know. I like also to open discussion about is it acceptable for MF customers that MF data will be accessed with TCP and be stored in PC? Thanks, Shai -- 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
