date:20100816

I was told that today's obscene software prices goes back to the consolidation 
timeframe. Many shops were around back then and each paying a separate license 
fee. Then, huge service bureaus opened up and many shops consolidate to few. 
And the few then multiplexed their software licenses to all their clients. 
And the software vendors were badly hurt. So they invented the pay per MIP 
charging. 

Imagine what MS would __like__ to do (if possible) if Intel came out with a 128 
core processor and data centers collapsed all their servers on a 100:1 ratio? 
And wanted to do the same with their MS software licenses. Oh, and in addition 
decided to use Linux desktop which would remote desktop into a terminal 
server arrangement (so the users would still be running their normal Windows 
applications) so that MS got 1 server license instead of 100 desktop licenses. 
All of a sudden, MS would demand pay per MIP as well! Come to think of it, I 
think MS uses pay per seat for this arrangement just to make it undesirable.

--
John McKown 
Systems Engineer IV
IT

Administrative Services Group

HealthMarkets(r)

9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010
(817) 255-3225 phone * (817)-691-6183 cell
john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or 
proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact 
the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. 
HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the 
insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance 
Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The 
MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM

 

 -Original Message-
 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
 [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Brian Westerman
 Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 2:24 AM
 To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
 Subject: Re: DB/2 V7 on Z/os V1.11
 
 That's another problem that people point out when they 
 contact me.  I can't
 believe some of the prices that companies charge for their 
 upgrades.  I
 still have a problem understanding why it should cost more to 
 run a product
 on a faster machine than on a slower one.  I think someone in 
 IBM marketing
 thought that it might take more people resources (or maybe 
 smarter/more
 expensive ones) to support the same software on a fast machine. 
 
 We have almost 700 sites that we maintain in one way or 
 another, and there
 are many sites that have smaller boxes that pound the 
 software into the dirt
 with the number of users and resources consumed who are 
 paying far less for
 the same products than some other sites that just happen to 
 have a BIG box.
  The BIG box site(s) often put less load on the software and 
 in some cases
 may run CICS with DB/2 and have only a few to a couple hundred users,
 compared to a few thousand at the site with the smaller box.  For some
 reason, the BIG sites don't seem to get it that they are 
 over paying, and
 I think it's just a mentality that is developed that 
 mainframe software is
 supposed to be hugely expensive, and the bigger the box, the 
 bigger the
 charge.  
 
 I hate to use PC's as a comparison, but I have a PC with 2 
 quad-core Xeon
 processors and 12GB of memory with 4TB of HDD, and I pay the 
 same price for
 my software on it as I would if I was running a Pentium 4.  
 Why?  Probably
 because they don't have IBM doing the marketing for the hardware or
 software.  :)
 
 
 Brian
 
 --
 For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
 send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: [Fwd: Re: date formats]

 -Original Message-
 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
 [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
 Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 4:56 AM
 To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
 Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: date formats]

 In 1281901727.14657.141.ca...@mckown5.johnmckown.net, on 08/15/2010
at 02:48 PM, John McKown joa...@swbell.net said:

 Believe it or not, our 20xx dates are encoded x'9A001' for 2000,

 Which would imply that you had to track down every program that did
 arithmetic on dates.

 -- 
  Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT

Which we did. Every program was examined for Y2K.

--
John McKown 
Systems Engineer IV
IT

Administrative Services Group

HealthMarkets(r)

9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010
(817) 255-3225 phone * (817)-691-6183 cell
john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or 
proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact 
the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. 
HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the 
insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance 
Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The 
MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: DB/2 V7 on Z/os V1.11

2010-08-16 Thread Bob Shannon

 I was told that today's obscene software prices goes back to the 
 consolidation timeframe. 
 Many shops were around back then and each paying a separate license fee. 
 Then, huge service bureaus opened up and many shops consolidate to few. 
 And the few then multiplexed their software licenses to all their clients. 
 And the software vendors were badly hurt. So they invented the pay per MIP 
 charging. 

Imagine what MS would __like__ to do (if possible) if Intel came out with a 
128 core processor and data centers collapsed all their servers on a 100:1 
ratio? And wanted to do the same with their MS software licenses. Oh, and in 
addition decided to use Linux desktop which would remote desktop into a 
terminal server arrangement (so the users would still be running their 
normal Windows applications) so that MS got 1 server license instead of 100 
desktop licenses. All of a sudden, MS would demand pay per MIP as well! 
Come to think of it, I think MS uses pay per seat for this arrangement just 
to make it undesirable.

I thought you saved your rants for Fridays.


Bob Shannon

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

McKown, John pisze:
I was told that today's obscene software prices goes back to the consolidation timeframe. Many shops were around back then and each paying a separate license fee. Then, huge service bureaus opened up and many shops consolidate to few. And the few then multiplexed their software licenses to all their clients. And the software vendors were badly hurt. So they invented the pay per MIP charging.

1. MIPS, not MIP. MIPS is singular, not plural.
Both are meaningless ;-))) but in different meaning.
2. I don't think that price per MIPS came from service bureaus. IMHO it
was the method to charge as much as you can pay. Avg price per shop
would be to much for small shops and to little (money) for large ones.
BTW: similar pricing models can be observed in other businesses,
examples: tire change in Jeep costs more than in van or truck (here, in
Lodz). Cabel TV connection fee depends on your house size the larger
the more expensive. No relationship to real costs.

Imagine what MS would __like__ to do (if possible) if Intel came out with a 128 core processor and data centers
collapsed all their servers on a 100:1 ratio? And wanted to do the same with their MS software licenses. Oh, and in
addition decided to use Linux desktop which would remote desktop into a terminal server
arrangement (so the users would still be running their normal Windows applications) so that MS got 1 server license
instead of 100 desktop licenses. All of a sudden, MS would demand pay per MIP as well! Come to think of it,
I think MS uses pay per seat for this arrangement just to make it undesirable.

Impossible. In most cases M$ servers run underutilized, but
consolidation is not done because of (real or assumed) troubles with
putting many apps on one server (*). That's why people use crowd of
blade servers, usually small to average in terms of CPU power.
BTW: M$ and other comapnies on this platform also uses pay as much as
you can model. Price can be related to DB size, number of cores, number
of servers, etc. etc. They don't use MIPS or MSU, WLC, but that's
related to technical issues.

(*) Nowadays it's popular to perform consolidation based on VMWare - a
kind of VM for PC. Applications (OSes) are still on different virtual
machines, but they share (fewer number) of real PC servers.

--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland

--
BRE Bank SA
ul. Senatorska 18
00-950 Warszawa
www.brebank.pl

Sd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy
XII Wydzia Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sdowego,
nr rejestru przedsibiorców KRS 025237

NIP: 526-021-50-88
Wedug stanu na dzie 01.01.2009 r. kapita zakadowy BRE Banku SA (w caoci
wpacony) wynosi 118.763.528 zotych. W zwizku z realizacj warunkowego
podwyszenia kapitau zakadowego, na podstawie uchway XXI WZ z dnia 16 marca
2008r., oraz uchway XVI NWZ z dnia 27 padziernika 2008r., moe ulec
podwyszeniu do kwoty 123.763.528 z. Akcje w podwyszonym kapitale zakadowym
BRE Banku SA bd w caoci opacone.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: DB/2 V7 on Z/os V1.11

2010-08-16 Thread Elardus Engelbrecht

Bob Shannon wrote:
I thought you saved your rants for Fridays.

zShields 100% on

Ranting is still more or less free on Blue Mondays... ;-D

zShields on powersave mode

;-D

Groete / Greetings
Elardus Engelbrecht

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 11:27:09 +, Bob Shannon
bshan...@rocketsoftware.com wrote:

 Right now because of the bug I wrote about in a previous post, it just
takes a lot more
planning than it should have

What was the resolution of the Sev 1? BAD? I can understand something not
working correctly, but I can't understand it not working correctly forever.



Graham already gave the APAR number in response to my
post:  OA31116.

But he indicated it had nothing other than a description (and I 
thought I saw the same thing last week).   The description was 
VARIOUS LARGE PAGE COALESCE AND RECOVERY FIXES

However, I just looked and some detail has now been added
(changed today).  Just a WAG that this thread has something
to do with it.  :-)  


Note the description of what will be fixed  sigh

  INCLUDING FIXING THE LOGIC TO ACTUALLY BREAK UP A
 LARGE PAGE.



  APAR Identifier .. OA31116  Last Changed  10/08/16
  VARIOUS LARGE PAGE COALESCE AND RECOVERY FIXES
 
 
  Symptom .. NF FUNCTION  Status ... OPEN
  Severity ... 4  Date Closed .
  Component .. 5752SC1CR  Duplicate of 
  Reported Release . 750  Fixed Release 
  Component Name RSM - REAL STOR  Special Notice
  Current Target Date ..10/10/15  Flags
  SCP ...
  Platform 
 
  Status Detail: DESIGN/CODE - APAR solution is being designed
   and coded.
 
  PE PTF List:
 
  PTF List:
 
 
  Parent APAR:
  Child APAR list:
 
 
  ERROR DESCRIPTION:
  THIS APAR FIXES THE FOLLOWING LARGE PAGE RELATED PROBLEMS:
 
  1) INSTALLATIONS CAN USE THE LFAREA PARAMETER TO DEFINE
 THE SIZE OF THEIR LARGE PAGE AREA. ONCE DEFINED,
 THIS AREA CAN ONLY USED FOR LARGE PAGE REQUESTS.
 THE ONLY EXCEPTION TO THIS RULE WAS WHEN THE SYSTEM
 WAS STORAGE CONSTRAINTED. WHEN STORAGE IS
 CONSTRAINED, RSM WILL BREAK UP A LARGE PAGE INTO
 256 4K PAGES IN ORDER TO SATISFY 4K PAGE REQUESTS.
 WHEN STORAGE IS NO LONGER CONSTRAINED, RSM WILL
 PERFORM LARGE PAGE COALESCE (I.E. REFORM THE 256
 BROKEN UP 4K PAGE BACK INTO 1 LARGE PAGE). THISEMS,
 APAR WILL FIX VARIOUS LARGE PAGE COALESCE PROBLEMS,
 INCLUDING FIXING THE LOGIC TO ACTUALLY BREAK UP A
 LARGE PAGE.
  2) RSM RECOVERY DOES NOT PROPERLY CLEAN UP LARGE PAGES
 OR BROKEN UP LARGE PAGES (I.E. LARGE PAGE SINGLES)
 DURING TASK/ADDRESS SPACE TERMINATION IF LARGE PAGES
 OR LARGE PAGE SINGLES ARE ALLOCATED.  THIS CAN
 RESULT IN PERMANENT LOSS OF THESE LARGE PAGES AND
 LARGE PAGE SINGLES.
 
 
  LOCAL FIX:



--
Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS   
mailto:mzel...@flash.net  
Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html 
Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

DAE / ADYSET00 / SYSMDUMP

My client had a situation last week where a script was executing a 
DB2 stored procedure to load some data into a QA data base.  The
program abended at each invocation and it had 5000 loads to do.
It looked like recursive abends at the time (we found out later it
was a script doing 5000 loads). 

For some reason the WLM controlled DB2 stored procedure PROC had
SYSMDUMP DD SYSOUT=* coded and the spool started to fill up.  Operations
couldn't get the stored procedure ASID stopped nor cancel it.  DB2 support
couldn't either even after shutting down DB2.   Eventually the ASID was 
forced and the output purged but not until after the spool hit 100% which
caused some other problems during the period the spool was 100% full.  

For postmortem action items, I want the SYSMDUMP DDs removed
or not to point to sysout.  But I was wondering if there was any reason I am
not thinking of that the DAE SYSMDUMP setting can't be changed to suppress
duplicates like SVCDUMP?If no good reason, I wonder why is that not
the done in the IBM supplied member (ok, I know IBM has a history of bad
defaults, but this is a parmlib setting, not a default)?  

Regards,

Mark
--
Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS   
mailto:mzel...@flash.net  
Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html 
Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Return code x'00000010' from Latch Create

2010-08-16 Thread Dave Day

The latch set happens to be obtained in subpool 229 of the caller's 
primary address space.

My guess is that in some way or other the value passed in was not for 6 
entries.

Peter Relson
z/OS Core Technology Design


Peter, 
Looking at the trace table from a dump created at the time of the bad 
return code. (Jim Mulder's suggestion) 

A  PC entry from stub module ISGLCRT into the GRS address space.
A  Storage Obtain PC 
An SSRV entry for the Storage request, but it was in sub-pool E6.  I 
believe that is 230, not 229
A PR entry from the Storage Obtain PC
A PR entry from GRS back to ISGLCRT



Looks like the storage is in the GRS address space, not the caller's 
primary.  You are correct, it was a bad parameter that was passed.  I was 
passing the value of 6 in the 1st parm, as opposed to the address of a full 
word with a value of 6.  Haven't got a clue as to why this has been working 
since z/OS 1.6, but I'm glad it hit when it did, so I could make the code 
correct.  It threw me a bit, as the same code worked on 1.10, but got the error 
on 1.11.

--Dave Day

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Server Name of SMTP from Mainframe

2010-08-16 Thread George Rodriguez

Can anyone point me where I can find out the name of the server when
email is routed from my z10?

 

Thanks in advance for the help.

 

George Rodriguez

Specialist II - IT Solutions

Application Support / Quality Assurance

PX - 47652

(561) 357-7652 (office)

(561) 707-3496 (mobile)

School District of Palm Beach County

3348 Forest Hill Blvd.

Room B-332

West Palm Beach, FL. 33406-5869

Florida's Only A-Rated Urban District For Six Consecutive Years


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger?

The support to address the issue where 1MB pages were not used for 4K when 
there was a real storage shortage for 4K frames was fixed in z/OS 1.12 and 
IBM opened APAR OA31116 to ship this fix for z/OS  1.10 and z/OS 1.11. 
Today we updated the APAR description to be clear and concise as to what 
the APAR is addressing:
OA31116 ERROR DESCRIPTION

THIS APAR FIXES THE FOLLOWING LARGE PAGE RELATED PROBLEMS:

1) INSTALLATIONS CAN USE THE LFAREA PARAMETER TO DEFINE 
   THE SIZE OF THEIR LARGE PAGE AREA.  ONCE DEFINED,
   THIS AREA CAN ONLY USED FOR LARGE PAGE REQUESTS.
   THE ONLY EXCEPTION TO THIS RULE WAS WHEN THE SYSTEM 
   WAS STORAGE CONSTRAINTED.   WHEN STORAGE IS
   CONSTRAINED, RSM WILL BREAK UP A LARGE PAGE INTO 
   TO 256 4K PAGES IN ORDER TO SATISFY 4K PAGE REQUESTS.
   WHEN STORAGE IS NO LONGER CONSTRAINED, RSM WILL 
   PERFORM LARGE PAGE COALESCE (I.E. REFORM THE 256 
   BROKEN UP 4K PAGE BACK INTO 1 LARGE PAGE).  THIS
   APAR WILL FIX VARIOUS LARGE PAGE COALESCE PROBLEMS,
   INCLUDING FIXING THE LOGIC TO ACTUALLY BREAK UP A
   LARGE PAGE.

2) RSM RECOVERY DOES NOT PROPERLY CLEAN UP LARGE PAGES
   OR BROKEN UP LARGE PAGES (I.E. LARGE PAGE SINGLES)
   DURING TASK/ADDRESS SPACE TERMINATION IF LARGE PAGES 
   OR LARGE PAGE SINGLES ARE ALLOCATED.  THIS CAN
   RESULT IN PERMANENT LOSS OF THESE LARGE PAGES AND
   LARGE PAGE SINGLES.


The APAR severity was also changed to a SEV 1 and we are looking at pulling 
the apar target date in from its current target date of 10/15/2010.

The capability for additional dynamic adjustment of the LFAREA is currently 
being considered as a future enhancement.

Also please do not hesitate to contact me with any additional questions or  
concerns with the Large Page Support. I will address the RMF and 
performance questions raised by others in a subsequent append shortly

Elpida Tzortzatos
Phone (845) 435-3125
email: elp...@us.ibm.com






On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 09:26:44 -0500, Mark Zelden mzel...@flash.net 
wrote:

On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 10:24:02 +0100, Graham Harris 
harris...@gmail.com wrote:

Is anyone actively using z10 (or z196!!) Large Pages in any significant way
yet?


Yes.  On my clients WebSphere LPARs.   First we used a small LFAREA and
migrated some WAS regions to 64-bit.  All was fine.  Then on a weekend we
allocated about 40G more to LFAREA and IPLed with the plan of converting
more regions during the week.   Much to our chagrin, Monday morning
was a nightmare because paging went through the roof and thousands
of enclaves were backed up in the system and couldn't be processed.

It turns out the support didn't work as documented and 1M pages weren't
really used for 4K when there was a shortage!   After we opened a Sev 1
PMR with IBM during the problem IBM said something like well, this isn't
really supported.

Huh?!!! This was z/OS 1.10 and I thought the support was z/OS 1.9
with PTFs.   :-)The SHARE presentations I was at and documentation I 
had
read sure made it sound like it was supported!

During a tech call with IBM they admitted that the support wasn't working
as intended (?) and the LFAREA was really just stuck there all for 1M
pages and couldn't be used to back 4K page requests.  So in essence we
lost 40G of real memory when we IPLed.

We converted a some additional regions to 64-bit over a few hours around 
lunch
time to limp through the day without an outage, then backed out the 
changes
that evening with an IPL along with any WAS regions that were converted
to 64-bit.

We are still using large pages but have been doing it in steps over the last
6 months (IPL with larger LFAREA, convert more WAS regions to 64-bit).

We are z/OS 1.11 now and I honestly can't say if anything was changed in
the code or if it works yet.   The person closest to this works on the
WebSphere team and I haven't asked.   Maybe Elpida is lurking and
can say.

This weekend my client is doing a memory upgrade and also increasing 
LFAREA
in one of the LPARs from around 64G to 80G (out of about 170G total).

Mark
--
Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS
mailto:mzel...@flash.net
Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html
Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Server Name of SMTP from Mainframe

2010-08-16 Thread Mark T. Regan, K8MTR

Check in your SMTP procs CONFIG file and see if you have a IPMAILERNAME 
statement in it. That's what we use at my site to route (offload) all outgoing 
email through.
 Thanks,

Mark Regan 





From: George Rodriguez rodrigu...@palmbeach.k12.fl.us
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Sent: Mon, August 16, 2010 10:59:05 AM
Subject: Server Name of SMTP from Mainframe

Can anyone point me where I can find out the name of the server when
email is routed from my z10?

Thanks in advance for the help.

George Rodriguez

Specialist II - IT Solutions

Application Support / Quality Assurance

PX - 47652

(561) 357-7652 (office)

(561) 707-3496 (mobile)

School District of Palm Beach County

3348 Forest Hill Blvd.

Room B-332

West Palm Beach, FL. 33406-5869

Florida's Only A-Rated Urban District For Six Consecutive Years


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Server Name of SMTP from Mainframe

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 11:23 AM, Mark T. Regan, K8MTR
netsfw-ibmm...@yahoo.com wrote:
 Check in your SMTP procs CONFIG file and see if you have a IPMAILERNAME
 statement in it. That's what we use at my site to route (offload) all outgoing
 email through.

Might also be able to telnet to port 25 and see if it identifies itself.
-- 
zMan -- I've got a mainframe and I'm not afraid to use it

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: DAE / ADYSET00 / SYSMDUMP

2010-08-16 Thread Brian Peterson

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 09:06:27 -0500, Mark Zelden wrote:

For postmortem action items, I want the SYSMDUMP DDs removed
or not to point to sysout.  But I was wondering if there was any reason I am
not thinking of that the DAE SYSMDUMP setting can't be changed to suppress
duplicates like SVCDUMP?If no good reason, I wonder why is that not
the done in the IBM supplied member (ok, I know IBM has a history of bad
defaults, but this is a parmlib setting, not a default)?

Regards,

Mark

Interestingly, my z/OS 1.11 Init and Tuning Reference says this:

3.4  IBM-supplied defaults for ADYSETxx   

   IBM supplies three ADYSETxx parmlib members:   

   o   ADYSET00 automatically starts DAE. It contains:
 DAE=START,RECORDS(400),SVCDUMP(MATCH,SUPPRESSALL,UPDATE,
 NOTIFY(3,30))
 SYSMDUMP(MATCH,UPDATE,SUPPRESSALL)
 
But, the z/OS 1.11 SYS1.IBM.PARMLIB(ADYSET00) actually says this instead:

 BROWSESYS1.IBM.PARMLIB(ADYSET00) Line 0009 
 Command ===  Scrol
  DAE=START,RECORDS(400),   
SVCDUMP(MATCH,SUPPRESSALL,UPDATE,NOTIFY(3,30)), 
SYSMDUMP(MATCH,UPDATE)  

Note the difference in the SYSMDUMP value between the manual and the shipped
parmlib member

Brian

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: date formats

2010-08-16 Thread Paul Gilmartin

On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 20:01:49 -0500, Joel C. Ewing wrote:

The point of Shmuel's comment, of course, is that the one most common,
unavoidable-in-MVS place where dates of the form yyddd were in
wide-scale use was in SMF accounting records.  The format there is
packed-decimal, so hex digits are out.  The old format was actually
+00yyddd, where the 00 was reserved, so the one and only way to preserve
the packed decimal representation and also preserve the existing
relationship that the representation for the next year is current year +
1 (in base 10) was to go  with 2000-01-01 == 011, which is what IBM
did.  For those who were already converting SMF dates into a four-digit
year via 00yyddd + 190, this extension was so compatible that it
wasn't even necessary to make any code changes for Y2K!

Thanks.  I had been unfamiliar with the format of SMF data.

Which still leaves me wondering why, if they used 4-byte packed
decimal, they didn't from the very beginning place the century
ratner than 00 in the left byte, making the conversion to a
4-digit year even simpler by one addition?

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: DAE / ADYSET00 / SYSMDUMP

2010-08-16 Thread Jim Mulder

IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu wrote on 08/16/2010 
10:06:27 AM:

 For postmortem action items, I want the SYSMDUMP DDs removed
 or not to point to sysout.  But I was wondering if there was any reason 
I am
 not thinking of that the DAE SYSMDUMP setting can't be changed to 
suppress
 duplicates like SVCDUMP?If no good reason, I wonder why is that not
 the done in the IBM supplied member (ok, I know IBM has a history of bad
 defaults, but this is a parmlib setting, not a default)? 

  I imagine the think was that it is OK to suppress SVC dumps,
since they are intended for the systems programmer, who has
access to all of the SVC dumps which have been taken.

   But SYSMDUMPs are typically intended for users.  So suppose
application developer Joe hits a problem and gets a SYSMDUMP.
Later, application developer John hits the
same problem and his SYSMDUMP is suppressed.  John does not have
access to Joe's SYSMDUMP, and doesn't even know that Joe has 
the SYSMDUMP which John needs.  And neither Joe nor John 
have the authority to update the DAE data set to allow another
SYSMDUMP to be taken for this condition (only Mark, the
all powerful systems programmer, has that authority). 
 
  In a production-only z/OS image, you may have a view of
things which might make suppressing of SYSMDUMPs reasonable.
The ADYSETxx members supplied by IBM were created in 
MVS/XA SP2.1.1, many years before the advent of LPAR,
in a time when production and development were more likely
to be in the same MVS image, since separating them 
required separate physical machines (or VM). 
 

Jim Mulder   z/OS System Test   IBM Corp.  Poughkeepsie,  NY

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: optimizing compilers

2010-08-16 Thread Paul Gilmartin

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 06:11:00 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:

Not honestly. If the code is intended to deal with a computation of
gamma functions, then I would regard the *first* form as needlessly
obscure. I might buy

declare (pi  value(3.14159_26535_89793_23846),
   sqrt_pi  value(sqrt(pi)) binary float(52)
   gamma_1half value(sqrt_pi) binary float(52) ;

although even then I would consider it clearer to simply write

declare gamma_1half value(1.77245_38509_05516_02729)
binary float(53)
/* gamma(1/2) = pi^.5 */ ;

Maintainability?  Which requires the lesser code change if the
program is upgraded to even greater precision and values of
both pi and gamma_1half are needed?

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

z/XDC announcement: Release z1.12 is now available for beta test

2010-08-16 Thread David Cole

z/XDC release z1.12 is now available for beta testing. Major new 
features include:


  - SRB debugging support improvements

  - New reporting commands regarding access lists and data spaces

  - The ability to access (display and zap) data spaces that 
previously were not accessible


  - Improvements in formatted storage displays

  - New Helper Dialogs for assisting with various debugging 
processes (in progress)


  - New z/Enterprise machine instructions (planned)

  - Infrastructure for planned new capabilities

For more details, please check www.colesoft.com/News.



Dave Cole  REPLY TO: dbc...@colesoft.com
ColeSoft Marketing WEB PAGE: http://www.colesoft.com
736 Fox Hollow RoadVOICE:540-456-8536
Afton, VA 22920FAX:  540-456-6658 


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: DB/2 V7 on Z/os V1.11

2010-08-16 Thread Paul Gilmartin

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 02:24:30 -0500, Brian Westerman wrote:

That's another problem that people point out when they contact me.  I can't
believe some of the prices that companies charge for their upgrades.  I
still have a problem understanding why it should cost more to run a product
on a faster machine than on a slower one.  I think someone in IBM marketing
thought that it might take more people resources (or maybe smarter/more
expensive ones) to support the same software on a fast machine.

Take the opposite perspective, that you're getting a discount for the
slower machine rather than paying a premium for the faster.  And
regardless, it makes more sense than the specialty engines where you
pay less to run on the (sometimes) faster processor.

And why should it cost more to run a product on several systems than
on one system?

The vendors do their best to make a profit while being fair (except
with regard to the specialty engines).  Are they able to base their
rates on how much the customer uses the product, analogous to the
per-mile fee on some rental cars or the per-minute fee on some
communication services?

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger

The impetus for large page exploitation is well documented. I have discussed 
this at length at both SHARE and CMG conferences. Also you can reference 
the papers below which describe specific success stories for JAVA and z/OS

http://www-
304.ibm.com/jct09002c/partnerworld/wps/servlet/ContentHandler/whitepaper/s
ystemz/java_websphere/performance

http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/abstracts/rd/531/tzortzatos.html


I believe the issue here is not the performance benefits of large pages but 
rather the difficulty with capacity planning for the size of the LFAREA 
IEASYSxx parameter.  That issue is being addressed (see my previous 
appends). 

Elpida Tzortzatos
phone (845) 435-3125
email: elp...@us.ibm.com


On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 12:23:47 -0700, Gerhard Adam 
gada...@charter.net wrote:

 We are still using large pages but have been doing it in steps over the
 last  6 months (IPL with larger LFAREA, convert more WAS regions to 64-
bit).

OK, I give up.  Why?  What is the benefit versus the cost?  Even the original 
literature suggested that it could cause performance degradation for some 
applications (although obviously not because of bugs).

So I'm curious.  Who is actually measuring this?  What is being measured?  
and how did anyone determine that it would be beneficial?

Adam

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger

Bob,

As I posted in my previous append, APAR OA31116 and z/OS 1.12 base 
support address this issue. Also the severity of this APAR has been raised to a 
SEV 1. 

I do want to emphasize that even with the APAR, capacity planning needs to 
be done before selecting the LFAREA size. The optimal configuration is when 
there is enough in the 4K memory pool to handle the 4K workload and enough 
in the 1MB memory pool  to handle the 1MB workload. The APAR corrects for 
an over-specification of the LFAREA size (and under-specification of the 4K 
memory pool). However you still need to ensure that the 4K memory pool is 
large enough to accommodate the 4K workload, especially since large pages 
can not be used to back 4K fixed storage (SQA or fix requests from non-
swappable address spaces like DB2). 

On the flip side of the coin if you under specify the LFAREA size you may be 
giving up some large page performance benefits. 

DOC APAR OA34024 has been opened to provide some guidance on how to 
size the LFAREA. 

Elpida Tzortzatos
phone (845) 435-3125
email: elp...@us.ibm.com


On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 11:27:09 +, Bob Shannon 
bshan...@rocketsoftware.com wrote:

 Right now because of the bug I wrote about in a previous post, it just 
takes a lot more
planning than it should have

What was the resolution of the Sev 1? BAD? I can understand something not 
working correctly, but I can't understand it not working correctly forever.

Bob Shannon
Rocket Software

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger

2010-08-16 Thread Ed Finnell

 
In a message dated 8/16/2010 12:09:08 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
elp...@us.ibm.com writes:

On the flip side of the coin if you under specify the LFAREA size  you may 
be 
giving up some large page performance benefits. 

DOC  APAR OA34024 has been opened to provide some guidance on how to 
size the  LFAREA. 



Sure would be nice if there were tuning  knobs available 
from RMF. Maybe Large Page used, high  water marks, Large pages converted 
to 4k, etc... I'm sure there are more.  Maybe the tuning
gurus can suggest more. 




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: DB/2 V7 on Z/os V1.11

I understand and somewhat agree with your logic. What hurts us is that we 
upgrade a CPU so that we can run more of software that is written in-house. And 
now some vendors want a lump sum upgrade fee as well as an increased monthly 
license fee. Despite the fact that we aren't using their particular software 
more. What I personally dislike is the lump sum upgrade payment. I, 
personally, can understand the license fee increase (monthly) because I 
__might__ use the software more (especially something like CA-7, CA-11, or 
CA-1). Yes, I'm particularly thinking of one vendor who will remain nameless. 
Upgrade your MSUs and they want a lump sum upgrade fee. Curiously, if you 
downgrade your MSUs (as we are doing), they don't give a refund.

--
John McKown 
Systems Engineer IV
IT

Administrative Services Group

HealthMarkets®

9151 Boulevard 26 . N. Richland Hills . TX 76010
(817) 255-3225 phone . (817)-691-6183 cell
john.mck...@healthmarkets.com . www.HealthMarkets.com

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or 
proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact 
the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. 
HealthMarkets® is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the 
insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance 
Company®, Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA 
Life and Health Insurance Company.SM

 

 -Original Message-
 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
 [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Charles Mills
 Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 1:42 PM
 To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
 Subject: Re: DB/2 V7 on Z/os V1.11
 
 Anyone who thinks that owning a software company is a license to print
 money: you're free to start one of your own. Ask Dave Salt or 
 any of the
 other software entrepreneurs who hang out here just how obscene their
 profits are.
 
 Everyone rails against capacity pricing, but what's the 
 alternative? When I
 started selling Outbound in 1988 my first plan was to charge everyone
 $24,000 no matter how big their processor was. Didn't work. We priced
 ourselves out of the market for the smaller shops, and left ourselves
 without the resources to compete with the $100,000 products 
 at the bigger
 shops. Yes, the best thing would be pricing on a business metric
 (transactions, basically) rather that a computer metric 
 (MIPS, etc.) but
 IBM has not made it easy to do that.
 
 We did in fact go to exactly what Gil suggests. We stopped 
 saying that a
 Group 80 machine was more than a Group 18 machine. Instead, 
 we said the
 product is $60,000 ... oh, you have a Group 18 machine? 
 Great, you get a 75%
 discount. People loved it. I don't know why every vendor 
 doesn't do it that
 way.
 
 When you are selling a tangible product like widgets, it's 
 easy for the
 customers to understand that it costs you $1 to make each 
 widget so you sell
 it for $2. It's harder for people to grasp your pricing when 
 it costs you $1
 million to engineer a product, and then 1¢ each time people 
 download it.
 What's a fair price? Okay, we won't charge for upgrades and 
 we won't charge
 for bigger CPUs and we won't charge for multiple CPUs. 
 Exactly what WOULD
 you have us charge for so we can pay those darned programmers, not to
 mention the landlord, the power company, and the tax man?
 
 Charles
 
 -Original Message-
 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
 [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
 Of Paul Gilmartin
 Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 12:57 PM
 To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
 Subject: Re: DB/2 V7 on Z/os V1.11
 
 On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 02:24:30 -0500, Brian Westerman wrote:
 
 That's another problem that people point out when they 
 contact me.  I can't
 believe some of the prices that companies charge for their 
 upgrades.  I
 still have a problem understanding why it should cost more 
 to run a product
 on a faster machine than on a slower one.  I think someone 
 in IBM marketing
 thought that it might take more people resources (or maybe 
 smarter/more
 expensive ones) to support the same software on a fast machine.
 
 Take the opposite perspective, that you're getting a discount for the
 slower machine rather than paying a premium for the faster.  And
 regardless, it makes more sense than the specialty engines where you
 pay less to run on the (sometimes) faster processor.
 
 And why should it cost more to run a product on several systems than
 on one system?
 
 The vendors do their best to make a profit while being fair (except
 
 --
 For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
 send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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

Re: Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 12:51:46 -0500, Elpida Tzortzatos. elp...@us.ibm.com
wrote:

I am working with RMF to open an APAR that would provide at least some of
the information you described below. In addition I am looking at providing a
z/OS DISPLAY command to report on the LFAREA size, amount used, amount
available, and how much has been converted to 4K. A high water mark of large
page usage can also be reported.


Meanwhile, some of what you need is in RMF III and I've been using my
RXSTOR64 exec also to monitor 64-bit storage usage (before RMF III
showed any numbers).  RXSTOR64 is on CBT file 434 and my web site
(url below in my signature). 

A sample of the entire RXSTOR64 exec output can be found here:
http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/rxstor64.html

On one of my systems, this is what the summary section looks like for
large memory:


64-BIT LARGE MEMORY VIRTUAL STORAGE - SYSTEM WIDE USAGE
---
   
LARGE MEMORY AREA (LFAREA): 65G
LARGE MEMORY STORAGE ALLOCATED: 61160M 
LARGE MEMORY OBJECTS ALLOCATED: 160


The allocated number does match the RMF III STORM (option 3.7a) summary
under 1M frames.

Regards,

Mark
--
Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS   
mailto:mzel...@flash.net  
Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html 
Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/

  

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: z/XDC announcement: Release z1.12 is now available for beta test

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 12:48 PM, David Cole dbc...@colesoft.com wrote:
 z/XDC release z1.12 is now available for beta testing. Major new features
 include:

  - New z/Enterprise machine instructions (planned)

I know I'm gonna regret this, but: that's zEnterprise. It's hardware.
-- 
zMan -- I've got a mainframe and I'm not afraid to use it

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: DAE / ADYSET00 / SYSMDUMP

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 12:44:35 -0400, Jim Mulder d10j...@us.ibm.com wrote:

IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu wrote on 08/16/2010
10:06:27 AM:

 For postmortem action items, I want the SYSMDUMP DDs removed
 or not to point to sysout.  But I was wondering if there was any reason
I am
 not thinking of that the DAE SYSMDUMP setting can't be changed to
suppress
 duplicates like SVCDUMP?If no good reason, I wonder why is that not
 the done in the IBM supplied member (ok, I know IBM has a history of bad
 defaults, but this is a parmlib setting, not a default)?

  I imagine the think was that it is OK to suppress SVC dumps,
since they are intended for the systems programmer, who has
access to all of the SVC dumps which have been taken.

   But SYSMDUMPs are typically intended for users.  So suppose
application developer Joe hits a problem and gets a SYSMDUMP.
Later, application developer John hits the
same problem and his SYSMDUMP is suppressed.  John does not have
access to Joe's SYSMDUMP, and doesn't even know that Joe has
the SYSMDUMP which John needs.  And neither Joe nor John
have the authority to update the DAE data set to allow another
SYSMDUMP to be taken for this condition (only Mark, the
all powerful systems programmer, has that authority).


Thanks Jim.  This was almost exactly what I said to one of my Jr. Sysprogs
who asked why it wasn't set.  But I also thought it could even be the same
programmer who made a small change, but had the same abend
and wanted the SYSMDUMP. 

I figured if I set the suppress option and someone complained and actually
needed a SYSMDUMP, we could always set a SLIP for them too.But I
can't think of any people I know at my shop that want / use  SYSMDUMPs.

I know there have been some discussions in the past on IBM-MAIN about
writing them to SYSOUT and using insert your favorite spool browser 
product here to copy the dump to a data set with the proper attributes
to open it up in IPCS.


  In a production-only z/OS image, you may have a view of
things which might make suppressing of SYSMDUMPs reasonable.
The ADYSETxx members supplied by IBM were created in
MVS/XA SP2.1.1, many years before the advent of LPAR,
in a time when production and development were more likely
to be in the same MVS image, since separating them
required separate physical machines (or VM).


In this case there was a shared spool between a QA and prod environment,
even though the LPARs were separate.  But I think prod wins here and
and I'm going to set the SYSMDUMP supress option to prevent something
like this from happening again.

Regards,

Mark
--
Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS   
mailto:mzel...@flash.net  
Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html 
Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger

2010-08-16 Thread Michael Wickman

Sounds like a future health check item. 

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of 
Elpida Tzortzatos.
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 12:52 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger

I am working with RMF to open an APAR that would provide at least some of 
the information you described below. In addition I am looking at providing a 
z/OS DISPLAY command to report on the LFAREA size, amount used, amount 
available, and how much has been converted to 4K. A high water mark of large 
page usage can also be reported. 

Elpida Tzortzatos
Phone: (845) 435-3125
email: elp...@us.ibm.com

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 13:19:52 EDT, Ed Finnell efinnel...@aol.com wrote:

In a message dated 8/16/2010 12:09:08 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
elp...@us.ibm.com writes:

On the flip side of the coin if you under specify the LFAREA size  you may
be
giving up some large page performance benefits.

DOC  APAR OA34024 has been opened to provide some guidance on how to
size the  LFAREA.

Sure would be nice if there were tuning  knobs available
from RMF. Maybe Large Page used, high  water marks, Large pages converted
to 4k, etc... I'm sure there are more.  Maybe the tuning
gurus can suggest more.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

font size=1
div style='border:none;border-bottom:double windowtext 2.25pt;padding:0in 0in 
1.0pt 0in'
/div
This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient
 and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential.
 If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
 any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email
 and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited.  If you have
 received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by
 return email and delete this email from your system.
/font

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger

I am working with RMF to open an APAR that would provide at least some of 
the information you described below. In addition I am looking at providing a 
z/OS DISPLAY command to report on the LFAREA size, amount used, amount 
available, and how much has been converted to 4K. A high water mark of large 
page usage can also be reported. 

Elpida Tzortzatos
Phone: (845) 435-3125
email: elp...@us.ibm.com

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 13:19:52 EDT, Ed Finnell efinnel...@aol.com wrote:


In a message dated 8/16/2010 12:09:08 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
elp...@us.ibm.com writes:

On the flip side of the coin if you under specify the LFAREA size  you may
be
giving up some large page performance benefits.

DOC  APAR OA34024 has been opened to provide some guidance on how to
size the  LFAREA.



Sure would be nice if there were tuning  knobs available
from RMF. Maybe Large Page used, high  water marks, Large pages converted
to 4k, etc... I'm sure there are more.  Maybe the tuning
gurus can suggest more.




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: DB/2 V7 on Z/os V1.11

Anyone who thinks that owning a software company is a license to print
money: you're free to start one of your own. Ask Dave Salt or any of the
other software entrepreneurs who hang out here just how obscene their
profits are.

Everyone rails against capacity pricing, but what's the alternative? When I
started selling Outbound in 1988 my first plan was to charge everyone
$24,000 no matter how big their processor was. Didn't work. We priced
ourselves out of the market for the smaller shops, and left ourselves
without the resources to compete with the $100,000 products at the bigger
shops. Yes, the best thing would be pricing on a business metric
(transactions, basically) rather that a computer metric (MIPS, etc.) but
IBM has not made it easy to do that.

We did in fact go to exactly what Gil suggests. We stopped saying that a
Group 80 machine was more than a Group 18 machine. Instead, we said the
product is $60,000 ... oh, you have a Group 18 machine? Great, you get a 75%
discount. People loved it. I don't know why every vendor doesn't do it that
way.

When you are selling a tangible product like widgets, it's easy for the
customers to understand that it costs you $1 to make each widget so you sell
it for $2. It's harder for people to grasp your pricing when it costs you $1
million to engineer a product, and then 1¢ each time people download it.
What's a fair price? Okay, we won't charge for upgrades and we won't charge
for bigger CPUs and we won't charge for multiple CPUs. Exactly what WOULD
you have us charge for so we can pay those darned programmers, not to
mention the landlord, the power company, and the tax man?

Charles

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 12:57 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: DB/2 V7 on Z/os V1.11

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 02:24:30 -0500, Brian Westerman wrote:

That's another problem that people point out when they contact me.  I can't
believe some of the prices that companies charge for their upgrades.  I
still have a problem understanding why it should cost more to run a product
on a faster machine than on a slower one.  I think someone in IBM marketing
thought that it might take more people resources (or maybe smarter/more
expensive ones) to support the same software on a fast machine.

Take the opposite perspective, that you're getting a discount for the
slower machine rather than paying a premium for the faster.  And
regardless, it makes more sense than the specialty engines where you
pay less to run on the (sometimes) faster processor.

And why should it cost more to run a product on several systems than
on one system?

The vendors do their best to make a profit while being fair (except

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger

2010-08-16 Thread Norman Hollander on DesertWiz

IMHO- needs to be in RMF and/or monitor.  DISPLAY commands are not good for
being proactive.

zNorman

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Michael Wickman
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 Monday 11:05 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger

Sounds like a future health check item. 

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Elpida Tzortzatos.
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 12:52 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger

I am working with RMF to open an APAR that would provide at least some of
the information you described below. In addition I am looking at providing a
z/OS DISPLAY command to report on the LFAREA size, amount used, amount
available, and how much has been converted to 4K. A high water mark of large
page usage can also be reported. 

Elpida Tzortzatos
Phone: (845) 435-3125
email: elp...@us.ibm.com

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 13:19:52 EDT, Ed Finnell efinnel...@aol.com wrote:

In a message dated 8/16/2010 12:09:08 P.M. Central Daylight Time, 
elp...@us.ibm.com writes:

On the flip side of the coin if you under specify the LFAREA size  you 
may be giving up some large page performance benefits.

DOC  APAR OA34024 has been opened to provide some guidance on how to 
size the  LFAREA.

Sure would be nice if there were tuning  knobs available from RMF. 
Maybe Large Page used, high  water marks, Large pages converted to 4k, 
etc... I'm sure there are more.  Maybe the tuning gurus can suggest 
more.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send 
email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the
archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

font size=1
div style='border:none;border-bottom:double windowtext 2.25pt;padding:0in
0in 1.0pt 0in' /div This email is intended to be reviewed by only the
intended recipient  and may contain information that is privileged and/or
confidential.
 If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that  any
review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email  and its
attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited.  If you have  received this
email in error, please immediately notify the sender by  return email and
delete this email from your system.
/font

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email
to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: z/XDC announcement: Release z1.12 is now available for beta test

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of zMan
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 2:04 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: z/XDC announcement: Release z1.12 is now
available for beta test

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 12:48 PM, David Cole
dbc...@colesoft.com wrote:
z/XDC release z1.12 is now available for beta testing.
Major new features
include:

- New z/Enterprise machine instructions (planned)

I know I'm gonna regret this, but: that's zEnterprise. It's hardware.
--
zMan -- I've got a mainframe and I'm not afraid to use it

Yes, you are.

http://www-01.ibm.com/software/lotus/passportadvantage/pvu_requirement_for_IBM_zEnterprise_196.html

quote
IBM announced the next generation of our leading workload optimization and
consolidation system, the IBM zEnterpriseT System, on July 22nd.
/quote

IBM is nothing if not inconsistent!

--
John McKown
Systems Engineer IV
IT

Administrative Services Group

HealthMarkets®

9151 Boulevard 26 . N. Richland Hills . TX 76010
(817) 255-3225 phone . (817)-691-6183 cell
john.mck...@healthmarkets.com . www.HealthMarkets.com

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or
proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
HealthMarkets® is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the
insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance
Company®, Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA
Life and Health Insurance Company.SM

z millicode: where does it reside?

This is just curiousity on my part. Does the millicode for a processor reside 
on the TCM in a special memory area, similar to L1 cache? Or in a shared memory 
area on the TCM? Or in HSA?

If it resides in L1 cache type memory, then I would think that a millicoded 
routine would execute faster than the equivalent user code written in 
non-millicoded instructions. Eg: MVCL would be faster than an MVC loop. Well, 
at least to begin with. I guess once the non-millicode loop code is in L1 
cache, it could be just as fast.

John McKown
Systems Engineer IV
IT

Administrative Services Group

HealthMarkets(r)

9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010
(817) 255-3225 phone * (817)-691-6183 cell
john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or 
proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact 
the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. 
HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the 
insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance 
Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The 
MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: optimizing compilers

2010-08-16 Thread Rick Fochtman


---snip--
It's best to write code that is readable and maintainable before 
worrying about performance.

unsnip
An appropriate use of comments can make ANY code understandable.

Write for performance and comment for understanding.

Or has the practice of commenting code come into disrepute?

Rick

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: DB/2 V7 on Z/os V1.11

2010-08-16 Thread Rick Fochtman


--snip-
That's another problem that people point out when they contact me. I 
can't believe some of the prices that companies charge for their 
upgrades. I still have a problem understanding why it should cost more 
to run a product on a faster machine than on a slower one. I think 
someone in IBM marketing thought that it might take more people 
resources (or maybe smarter/more expensive ones) to support the same 
software on a fast machine.

unsnip-
One vendor's rep gave me a small insight in this area: A faster machine 
lets you get more use from the product. His argument was that our 
machine was upgraded to allow for more use of his product. I handed him 
back his head as he left the office. :-)  He's lucky I couldn't reach 
into his trousers or he'd have been crawling out. Very slowly!!


Rick

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: optimizing compilers

2010-08-16 Thread Ted MacNEIL

Or has the practice of commenting code come into disrepute?

Real programmers don't document code.
It was hard to write, so it should be hard to read!

(8-{]}


A joke!
-
I'm a SuperHero with neither powers, nor motivation!
Kimota!

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: DB/2 V7 on Z/os V1.11

2010-08-16 Thread Rick Fochtman


-snip
BTW: similar pricing models can be observed in other businesses, 
examples: tire change in Jeep costs more than in van or truck (here, in 
Lodz). Cabel TV connection fee depends on your house size the larger 
the more expensive. No relationship to real costs.

-unsnip---
They all charge what the market will bear. And all too many DUMB 
management people will pay for it, just because there are pretty bells 
and whistles attached. Go figure!


Rick

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: optimizing compilers

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 3:32 PM, Ted MacNEIL eamacn...@yahoo.ca wrote:
Or has the practice of commenting code come into disrepute?

 Real programmers don't document code.
 It was hard to write, so it should be hard to read!

 (8-{]}

 A joke!

Alas, not a joke with too many folks. I heard a VP of Engineering with
a PhD in Computer Science tell his team not to comment because the
comments might not describe what the code actually does. Apparently
his degree didn't include anything like design.
-- 
zMan -- I've got a mainframe and I'm not afraid to use it

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: optimizing compilers

2010-08-16 Thread Bill Fairchild

Or perhaps real managers don't allow their programmers enough time during 
development to produce documentation?  Real sales and marketing people pressure 
the development managers to shove undocumented (but more or less debugged) code 
out the door?  Real CEOs want faster and larger ROI?  Real stockholders, some 
of the biggest of whom are on the real Boards of Directors, want big quarterly 
dividends more than they want happy customers who give repeat business because 
they are planning to sell off their holdings at the end of this quarter?  Maybe 
the programmers should not take all the blame.

A joke!

Bill Fairchild
Rocket Software
 
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of 
Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 2:33 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: optimizing compilers

Or has the practice of commenting code come into disrepute?

Real programmers don't document code.
It was hard to write, so it should be hard to read!

A joke!
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: optimizing compilers

2010-08-16 Thread Roberto Halais

http://wiretap.area.com/Gopher/Library/Humor/Nerd/quiche.txt

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Ted MacNEIL eamacn...@yahoo.ca wrote:

 Or has the practice of commenting code come into disrepute?

 Real programmers don't document code.
 It was hard to write, so it should be hard to read!

 (8-{]}


 A joke!
 -
 I'm a SuperHero with neither powers, nor motivation!
 Kimota!

 --
 For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
 send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
 Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html




-- 
It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick
society. -Krishnamurti

I am as you, in you, for you. One as you in all, as all, forever. My call
is your call.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: DB/2 V7 on Z/os V1.11

Hopefully you do also, asking in salary what the going price is, rather than
a little more than it actually costs you to drive to work, plus lunch money.

Hopefully good managers procure equipment, software, and staff based on
benefits and ROI, not bells, whistles, or how good it looks in a tight
sweater.

Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Rick Fochtman
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 3:34 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: DB/2 V7 on Z/os V1.11

They all charge what the market will bear. And all too many DUMB 
management people will pay for it, just because there are pretty bells 
and whistles attached. Go figure!

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: DB/2 V7 on Z/os V1.11

As I said, with widgets everyone agrees the right price is some markup on
manufacturing costs. With software it is very tough to find a pricing model
that customer perceive as fair. Believe me, vendors want to! No one comes up
with a pricing model based on boy, this'll really get our sales guys and
gals an earful from customers. The more that customers perceive the pricing
model as fair, the easier the sale.

Charles

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of McKown, John
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 2:56 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: DB/2 V7 on Z/os V1.11

I understand and somewhat agree with your logic. What hurts us is that we
upgrade a CPU so that we can run more of software that is written in-house.
And now some vendors want a lump sum upgrade fee as well as an increased
monthly license fee. Despite the fact that we aren't using their particular
software more. What I personally dislike is the lump sum upgrade payment.
I, personally, can understand the license fee increase (monthly) because I
__might__ use the software more (especially something like CA-7, CA-11, or
CA-1). Yes, I'm particularly thinking of one vendor who will remain
nameless. Upgrade your MSUs and they want a lump sum upgrade fee.
Curiously, if you downgrade your MSUs (as we are doing), they don't give a
refund.

--
John McKown 
Systems Engineer IV
IT

Administrative Services Group

HealthMarkets®

9151 Boulevard 26 . N. Richland Hills . TX 76010
(817) 255-3225 phone . (817)-691-6183 cell
john.mck...@healthmarkets.com . www.HealthMarkets.com

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or
proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please
contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
message. HealthMarkets® is the brand name for products underwritten and
issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake
Life Insurance Company®, Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of
TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM

 

 -Original Message-
 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
 [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Charles Mills
 Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 1:42 PM
 To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
 Subject: Re: DB/2 V7 on Z/os V1.11
 
 Anyone who thinks that owning a software company is a license to print
 money: you're free to start one of your own. Ask Dave Salt or 
 any of the
 other software entrepreneurs who hang out here just how obscene their
 profits are.
 
 Everyone rails against capacity pricing, but what's the 
 alternative? When I
 started selling Outbound in 1988 my first plan was to charge everyone
 $24,000 no matter how big their processor was. Didn't work. We priced
 ourselves out of the market for the smaller shops, and left ourselves
 without the resources to compete with the $100,000 products 
 at the bigger
 shops. Yes, the best thing would be pricing on a business metric
 (transactions, basically) rather that a computer metric 
 (MIPS, etc.) but
 IBM has not made it easy to do that.
 
 We did in fact go to exactly what Gil suggests. We stopped 
 saying that a
 Group 80 machine was more than a Group 18 machine. Instead, 
 we said the
 product is $60,000 ... oh, you have a Group 18 machine? 
 Great, you get a 75%
 discount. People loved it. I don't know why every vendor 
 doesn't do it that
 way.
 
 When you are selling a tangible product like widgets, it's 
 easy for the
 customers to understand that it costs you $1 to make each 
 widget so you sell
 it for $2. It's harder for people to grasp your pricing when 
 it costs you $1
 million to engineer a product, and then 1¢ each time people 
 download it.
 What's a fair price? Okay, we won't charge for upgrades and 
 we won't charge
 for bigger CPUs and we won't charge for multiple CPUs. 
 Exactly what WOULD
 you have us charge for so we can pay those darned programmers, not to
 mention the landlord, the power company, and the tax man?
 
 Charles
 
 -Original Message-
 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
 [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
 Of Paul Gilmartin
 Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 12:57 PM
 To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
 Subject: Re: DB/2 V7 on Z/os V1.11
 
 On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 02:24:30 -0500, Brian Westerman wrote:
 
 That's another problem that people point out when they 
 contact me.  I can't
 believe some of the prices that companies charge for their 
 upgrades.  I
 still have a problem understanding why it should cost more 
 to run a product
 on a faster machine than on a slower one.  I think someone 
 in IBM marketing
 thought that it might take more people resources (or maybe 
 smarter/more
 expensive ones) to support the same software on a fast machine.
 
 Take the opposite perspective, that you're getting a discount for the
 slower machine rather than paying a premium for the faster.  And
 regardless, it makes more sense than the specialty engines

Re: DB/2 V7 on Z/os V1.11

What I used to tell customers is that if you bought a bigger box it must be
because your business is growing or you are utilizing your mainframe to give
you more business benefits, and as a result we would like to think that the
benefit you are getting from our software is increasing also. We don't
charge you when you get more benefit from our software, but we do have a
pricing model that charges you more for the bigger box.

Charles

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Rick Fochtman
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 3:28 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: DB/2 V7 on Z/os V1.11

One vendor's rep gave me a small insight in this area: A faster machine 
lets you get more use from the product. His argument was that our 
machine was upgraded to allow for more use of his product. I handed him 
back his head as he left the office. :-)  He's lucky I couldn't reach 
into his trousers or he'd have been crawling out. Very slowly!!

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: optimizing compilers

2010-08-16 Thread Bernd Oppolzer


john gilmore schrieb:
 
declare (pi  value(3.14159_26535_89793_23846),

   sqrt_pi  value(sqrt(pi)) binary float(52) ;


What I find most interesting in this example:
will the sqrt(pi) function call be evaluated at compile time?

I hope so.

What I expect from an optimizing compiler, is, at least, that I don't
get punished if I use normal and pratical language elements, for example

structure = '';

in PL/1, to initialize a (big) structure, all elements with their proper
initialization values, depending on type.

But there were compiler versions which generated such horrible machine 
code,
that in our shop we were told to define a STATIC INITed structure with 
the same layout and

to do a physical copy out of this INIT structure.

Some of us refused to do so - argueing that it is the job of the
compiler to generate appropriate machine code.

My opinion: if the language allows to express things in an easy and 
comfortable way,
the compiler must support this by generating efficient machine code. 
Otherwise,
if it's not possible, it's better to leave the features out of the 
language.


And: the user of the language should have an idea of the performance 
implications
of the language elements he or she uses. I'm not sure, if this is always 
the case - especially

with PL/1 and less experienced programmers.

Kind regards

Bernd

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: optimizing compilers

2010-08-16 Thread Howard Brazee

On 16 Aug 2010 12:35:09 -0700, zedgarhoo...@gmail.com (zMan) wrote:

Alas, not a joke with too many folks. I heard a VP of Engineering with
a PhD in Computer Science tell his team not to comment because the
comments might not describe what the code actually does. Apparently
his degree didn't include anything like design.
-- 

I have often worked in places where the documentation was not
maintained.   That made the original documentation misleading.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: optimizing compilers

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Howard Brazee howard.bra...@cusys.edu wrote:
 I have often worked in places where the documentation was not
 maintained.   That made the original documentation misleading.

Sure, but that's not an excuse for not trying. When the lead architect
steps in front of a bus (or even just leaves), you'll be really,
really unhappy that you can't tell what the CreateBrick call is
supposed to do. You can guess, but what kind of brick? What color?
Whole? Half? Painted? Etc. So you wind up reading the code. Now you
know what it *does*, but if you're trying to fix a bug, that only
helps a bit -- you still don't know if that's the right thing.

Not that I think you were disagreeing, just elaborating lest someone
else say See? Documentation is bad!
-- 
zMan -- I've got a mainframe and I'm not afraid to use it

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger

2010-08-16 Thread Ed Finnell


  Thanks, Sounds encouraging. Lots of tuning opportunities.
 
 
In a message dated 8/16/2010 12:51:54 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
elp...@us.ibm.com writes:

I am  working with RMF to open an APAR that would provide at least some of 
the  information you described below. In addition I am looking at providing 
a  
z/OS DISPLAY command to report on the LFAREA size, amount used, amount  
available, and how much has been converted to 4K. A high water mark of  
large 
page usage can also be reported.  


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger

I was not advocating having a z/OS DISPLAY command over monitor/reporting 
in RMF. Some of the information is monitored by RMF today and RMF will 
enhance their support to report the number of available large pages. I think 
there is also value in having a quick and handy z/OS command that will give 
you the current large page utilization statistics.

Elpida Tzortzatos
phone: (845) 435-3125
email: elp...@us.ibm.com 

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 11:38:10 -0700, Norman Hollander on DesertWiz 
norman.hollan...@desertwiz.biz wrote:

IMHO- needs to be in RMF and/or monitor.  DISPLAY commands are not good 
for
being proactive.

zNorman

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On 
Behalf
Of Michael Wickman
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 Monday 11:05 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger

Sounds like a future health check item.



-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On 
Behalf
Of Elpida Tzortzatos.
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 12:52 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger

I am working with RMF to open an APAR that would provide at least some of
the information you described below. In addition I am looking at providing a
z/OS DISPLAY command to report on the LFAREA size, amount used, amount
available, and how much has been converted to 4K. A high water mark of 
large
page usage can also be reported.

Elpida Tzortzatos
Phone: (845) 435-3125
email: elp...@us.ibm.com

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 13:19:52 EDT, Ed Finnell efinnel...@aol.com wrote:


In a message dated 8/16/2010 12:09:08 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
elp...@us.ibm.com writes:

On the flip side of the coin if you under specify the LFAREA size  you
may be giving up some large page performance benefits.

DOC  APAR OA34024 has been opened to provide some guidance on how to
size the  LFAREA.



Sure would be nice if there were tuning  knobs available from RMF.
Maybe Large Page used, high  water marks, Large pages converted to 4k,
etc... I'm sure there are more.  Maybe the tuning gurus can suggest
more.




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send
email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the
archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html





font size=1
div style='border:none;border-bottom:double windowtext 2.25pt;padding:0in
0in 1.0pt 0in' /div This email is intended to be reviewed by only the
intended recipient  and may contain information that is privileged and/or
confidential.
 If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that  any
review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email  and its
attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited.  If you have  received this
email in error, please immediately notify the sender by  return email and
delete this email from your system.
/font

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email
to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger

2010-08-16 Thread Brian Peterson

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 12:09:04 -0500, Elpida Tzortzatos. wrote:

I do want to emphasize that even with the APAR, capacity planning needs to
be done before selecting the LFAREA size. The optimal configuration is when
there is enough in the 4K memory pool to handle the 4K workload and enough
in the 1MB memory pool  to handle the 1MB workload. The APAR corrects for
an over-specification of the LFAREA size (and under-specification of the 4K
memory pool). However you still need to ensure that the 4K memory pool is
large enough to accommodate the 4K workload, especially since large pages
can not be used to back 4K fixed storage (SQA or fix requests from non-
swappable address spaces like DB2).

Workloads vary.

I'm wondering if a better approach would be for a system component, such as
WLM for example, to periodically set an LFAREA size appropriate for the
now-running workload.  Asking me to predict how many large pages I will need
for the life of my NEXT IPL is a strategy that can only work by accident, in
my opinion.  I would prefer an approach that is self-tuning.

Brian

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger

2010-08-16 Thread Ed Finnell

 
In a message dated 8/16/2010 4:49:09 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
brian.peterson.ibm.m...@comcast.net writes:

WLM for example, to periodically set an LFAREA size appropriate for  the
now-running workload.  Asking me to predict how many large pages I  will 
need
for the life of my NEXT IPL is a strategy that can only work by  accident, 
in
my opinion.  I would prefer an approach that is  self-tuning.



Foist, let's gather the data, then we can  figure out if it varies enough 
to matter.




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger

2010-08-16 Thread Norman Hollander on DesertWiz

Very much agree, Brian.  You can never predict who will start up another
region or when.
Of course you may know when the phones start ringing with poor performance
to find
your system is paging excessively...

zNorman

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Brian Peterson
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 Monday 2:49 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 12:09:04 -0500, Elpida Tzortzatos. wrote:

I do want to emphasize that even with the APAR, capacity planning needs 
to be done before selecting the LFAREA size. The optimal configuration 
is when there is enough in the 4K memory pool to handle the 4K workload 
and enough in the 1MB memory pool  to handle the 1MB workload. The APAR 
corrects for an over-specification of the LFAREA size (and 
under-specification of the 4K memory pool). However you still need to 
ensure that the 4K memory pool is large enough to accommodate the 4K 
workload, especially since large pages can not be used to back 4K fixed 
storage (SQA or fix requests from non- swappable address spaces like DB2).

Workloads vary.

I'm wondering if a better approach would be for a system component, such as
WLM for example, to periodically set an LFAREA size appropriate for the
now-running workload.  Asking me to predict how many large pages I will need
for the life of my NEXT IPL is a strategy that can only work by accident, in
my opinion.  I would prefer an approach that is self-tuning.

Brian

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email
to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger

2010-08-16 Thread Brian Peterson

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 15:26:54 -0700, Norman Hollander on DesertWiz wrote:

Very much agree, Brian.  You can never predict who will start up another
region or when.
Of course you may know when the phones start ringing with poor performance
to find
your system is paging excessively...

zNorman

I guess I would simply expect the system to do the best that it can with the
resources it has been given.  I just think asking *me* to predict how many
large pages my system will need for the life of the NEXT IPL is simply
hopeless in terms of a strategy.

Brian

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: optimizing compilers

2010-08-16 Thread Gerhard Postpischil


On 8/16/2010 3:20 PM, Rick Fochtman wrote:

---snip--

It's best to write code that is readable and maintainable before
worrying about performance.
unsnip

An appropriate use of comments can make ANY code understandable.


That depends on how much time you have available to gain that 
understanding. Case in point being an APL program, fully 
documented, that failed for some input data. All the 
documentation tells you is what the programmer hopes the program 
does.



Gerhard Postpischil
Bradford, VT

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: DB/2 V7 on Z/os V1.11

2010-08-16 Thread Gerhard Postpischil


On 8/16/2010 2:41 PM, Charles Mills wrote:

Anyone who thinks that owning a software company is a license to print
money: you're free to start one of your own. Ask Dave Salt or any of the
other software entrepreneurs who hang out here just how obscene their
profits are.


It seems to come down to motivation. Small companies have lower 
overhead, and frequently the owner(s) are more interested in 
helping out that making money. Large companies are stuck with 
investors who want to see their stock prices and dividends 
increase very three months



Everyone rails against capacity pricing, but what's the alternative? When I
started selling Outbound in 1988 my first plan was to charge everyone
$24,000 no matter how big their processor was. Didn't work. We priced
ourselves out of the market for the smaller shops, and left ourselves
without the resources to compete with the $100,000 products at the bigger
shops. Yes, the best thing would be pricing on a business metric
(transactions, basically) rather that a computer metric (MIPS, etc.) but
IBM has not made it easy to do that.


To me higher prices make sense only if you actually get more for 
your money - more and better results, better support, etc. So 
fees based on actual usage, with credit for spoiled runs, might 
make sense. Per seat or machine capacity does not reflect the 
value to the buyer; my cars costs the same whether I drive alone 
or carry five passengers. If I need more, I step up to a minivan 
or commercial bus, but in no case would the dealer double the 
price to sell the same vehicle to a larger company.



Gerhard Postpischil
Bradford, VT

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: optimizing compilers

2010-08-16 Thread Gerhard Postpischil


On 8/16/2010 4:42 PM, Bernd Oppolzer wrote:

And: the user of the language should have an idea of the
performance implications
of the language elements he or she uses. I'm not sure, if this
is always the case - especially
with PL/1 and less experienced programmers.


Trite but true - in the late seventies my boss wanted to migrate 
our service bureau from MVT to MVS. I wanted to do all the 
development work on weekends (back then the Saturday and Sunday 
third shifts were used by systems for testing); my boss had the 
better idea of running VM (and hire a VM specialist) to allow 
production to run while we were testing MVS. VM at the time had 
no preferred guest support; we did get an IBM zap to reduce 
paging during IPL. With the VM system running nothing but MVT, 
and MVT idle except for a test IEFBR14, the job got only 25% of 
the CPU. One of our clients had a fairly simple ForTran job that 
began by initializing some matrices; under VM it never finished 
within the class time constraints due to VM paging overhead. 
With hindsight it's easy to tell the author he should have used 
BLOCK DATA from the outset, but the amount of keypunching and 
verification was daunting, and explains why he used code rather 
than data. Should he have considered the possibilities of 
putative hardware and system changes five years after 
development? Or the fact that some contemporaneous version of 
ForTran didn't support BLOCK DATA?


(Due to the horrible performance, several employees left, some 
customers left when their contracts expired, and a competitor 
picked up much of the business. Eventually the boss left, too).


Gerhard Postpischil
Bradford, VT

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Date formats

2010-08-16 Thread Lloyd Fuller


zMan wrote:

On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Brian Kennelly
brian+ibm-m...@bkennelly.net wrote, re days so far in the year as
a date format:

That is actually a very import format, as well as the full format returned
by the TIME macro: 0cyyddd.  (Century, year, days in year.)


Sure, days this year can be useful, but does anyone store dates as
days so far in the year? It's basically the Julian date without
the year.


Nomad's internal date format is number of days since 1600/01/01.  Rolls 
over in a few thousand years.


Lloyd

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

CBT Tape Version 479 has been cut

2010-08-16 Thread Sam Golob


Hi Folks,

   CBT Tape Version 479 has just been cut.  Quite a few changes (52) 
have been made in this version (first cut since the beginning of the 
year).  The www.cbttape.org web site has also been updated in most 
places.  Use all the stuff well.


   All the best of everything to all of you...

Sincerely,Sam Golob

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: optimizing compilers

2010-08-16 Thread David Crayford


Bernd Oppolzer wrote:

john gilmore schrieb:
 
declare (pi  value(3.14159_26535_89793_23846),

   sqrt_pi  value(sqrt(pi)) binary float(52) ;


What I find most interesting in this example:
will the sqrt(pi) function call be evaluated at compile time?

I hope so.



I doubt that any optimizer will be that smart. That's usually achieved 
by metaprogramming, like
template metaprogramming in C++. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_metaprogramming#Compile-time_code_optimization




What I expect from an optimizing compiler, is, at least, that I don't
get punished if I use normal and pratical language elements, for example

structure = '';

in PL/1, to initialize a (big) structure, all elements with their proper
initialization values, depending on type.

But there were compiler versions which generated such horrible machine 
code,
that in our shop we were told to define a STATIC INITed structure with 
the same layout and

to do a physical copy out of this INIT structure.

Some of us refused to do so - argueing that it is the job of the
compiler to generate appropriate machine code.

My opinion: if the language allows to express things in an easy and 
comfortable way,
the compiler must support this by generating efficient machine code. 
Otherwise,
if it's not possible, it's better to leave the features out of the 
language.


And: the user of the language should have an idea of the performance 
implications
of the language elements he or she uses. I'm not sure, if this is 
always the case - especially

with PL/1 and less experienced programmers.

Kind regards

Bernd

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: CBT Tape Version 479 has been cut

2010-08-16 Thread Paul Strauss

Hi Sam,

I haven't seen your name in a long time. Good to see you are still around.
I used to enjoy your articles about my favorite CBTTAPE tool, PDS.  I have
PDS85 on our system now. I believe it is a pre Y2K version but still does
the trick. What would you consider new features that would make installing
an updated release worth while?  Would an updated version work with PDSE's?
I'm afraid that if we go to all PDSE's, I'll loose my friend.

Thank You,

Paul Strauss

Integrated Technology Delivery, Global Services, IBM
L0DB z/OS MVS/Program Products/Security
150 Kettletown Rd.
Southbury, CT 06488
(203) 272-2758
strau...@us.ibm.com



  
  From:   Sam Golob sbgo...@cbttape.org   
  

  
  To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu  
  

  
  Date:   08/16/2010 10:36 PM   
  

  
  Subject:CBT Tape Version 479 has been cut 
  

  
  Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu  
  

  





Hi Folks,

CBT Tape Version 479 has just been cut.  Quite a few changes (52)
have been made in this version (first cut since the beginning of the
year).  The www.cbttape.org web site has also been updated in most
places.  Use all the stuff well.

All the best of everything to all of you...

Sincerely,Sam Golob

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: DB/2 V7 on Z/os V1.11

2010-08-16 Thread Ted MacNEIL

Per seat or machine capacity does not reflect the value to the buyer;

I disagree with that statement.
While I've not been a big fan of capacity based pricing (because the whole 
model sucks), usage basis does make sense.
It's just a matter of what is your usage metric.

Seats, or transactions, make more sense than MSUs.


my cars costs the same whether I drive alone or carry five passengers.

A weak analogy.


If I need more, I step up to a minivan or commercial bus, 

Which costs more.
So, you are paying for more.

but in no case would the dealer double the price to sell the same vehicle to a 
larger company.

True, but the dealer is probably selling more to the larger company.

This is where the analogy breaks down.

A bigger machine costs more.
In general, it drives more work through and (potentially) has the effect of 
discovering more issues, hence more support.

Why I don't buy the whole support costs more at bigger sites argument, I do 
understand the rationale.

The pricing model should be closer to a utilility/business based one than a 
Capacity based one.

Look at hydro, phone (mobile or landline) or even water.

We pay for kilowatt hours, minutes/long distance, or litres, not by how big our 
stereo is, how pretty our phone is, or whatever.

What we need is a billable business metric, such as invoices, queries, or even 
the number of beds (hospital example).

By definition, larger companies are going to do more business volume than small 
ones.

So, if we can grab a metric, other than capacity, we should hold on tight.

Unfortunately, RMF/SMF doesn't measure that.
So, we are stuck with a generalised metric, that satisfies nobody.


-
I'm a SuperHero with neither powers, nor motivation!
Kimota!

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger