Re: OS/390 2.4 guest under z/VM 5.3
John, there is at least one serious financial implication when running all (or any part of) OS/390, so please be aware of this. Please note that, as always here, I do not speak in an official capacity for IBM. One of the (very few!) requirements for enjoying (or continuing to enjoy) any sub-capacity IBM software pricing is that *all* OS/390 must be completely off the machine(s) in question. [Furthermore, all z/OS on the machine(s) must be IPLed in 64-bit mode.] Said another way, when you IPL OS/390 on your z990 -- 1 VM or 20, inside or outside z/VM, it doesn't matter -- you must have an OS/390 license (plus licenses for the other software running on OS/390), and *all* the OS/390 *and* z/OS *and* middleware products running on that z990 must now be paid at full capacity, including "One-Time Charge" products. The whole box zooms up to full capacity charges, instantly and irrevocably for the month(s) that you're running OS/390. Here's one reference to those terms (though your VWLC contract is controlling -- and says much the same no doubt): http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/z/resources/swprice/subcap/zos.html Quoting: "When you are running z/OS in 64-bit mode and are no longer running OS/390 on your System z server, you have the option to pay the charges for your eligible software on a sub-capacity basis." In a large majority of cases the loss of sub-capacity licensing is financially unattractive, particularly on a sustained basis. At a minimum, I would strongly recommend upgrading the OS/390 workload quickly to z/OS. And talk to your IBM rep *before* you IPL any licensed software that you are not currently licensing and/or that you're not paying at the correct capacity. Or, at the very least, shut down now and talk to your IBM rep now if you are unlicensed and/or not paying full capacity for all licensed software on your z990. Sorry if that's bad news, but I'm personally familiar with a customer who was not aware of this and which owed IBM (and perhaps other vendors) a significant amount of money. They were not happy. Now, I'm sure someone is going to say, "Yes, but, here's why my company needs to run OS/390 for X months" (or whatever). Simple: talk to your IBM rep *first*, present the business case, and get an approval and price! IBM (and presumably most vendors) take a very dim view otherwise, and their hands are tied. It then becomes a contract enforcement/accounts receivable exercise, not subject to discretion. Thanks, everybody. - - - - - Timothy Sipples IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan / Asia-Pacific E-Mail: timothy.sipp...@us.ibm.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: OS/390 2.4 guest under z/VM 5.3
Mark and Paolo, it works.. I reduced memory to 256M in the CP directory. Issued CP TRACE IPTE RUN NOTERM from the CP console and the old beast IPLed. I have defined only one engine in the CP directory. I am in a rush this afternoon, I will try and bump the memory to 512M during the week. Believe it or not there are still people running old stuff like this out there. Again, thank you all. Regards, JC => Can you provide details please? Paolo wrote just prior to your post that => it worked for only one CP and less no more that .5G of memory. => => I'm trying to remember back to OS/390 2.4 and even a single z990 engine is => much faster than the 9672 machines my clients were using back then and => half a gig of memory was probably enough for many of those systems => also.I'm curious: are these systems that are still running a decade+ => old OS basically still the same size as they were when they were => installed? => => Mark => -- => Mark Zelden => Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead => Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO => mailto:mark.zel...@zurichna.com => z/OS Systems Programming expert at => http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ => Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html => => => On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:00:20 +0100, J. Cassidy wrote: => =>>Thank you Mark. =>> =>> =>>It works... =>> =>> =>> =>>Regards, =>> =>> =>> =>>John =>>=> On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 12:50:29 +0100, J. Cassidy =>> wrote: =>>=> =>>=>>** Already cross-posted to IBMVM ** =>>=>> =>>=>> =>>=>>Hello all, =>>=>> =>>=>>am trying to run (believe it or not) an OS/390 2.4 guest under z/VM =>> 5.3 =>>=>>(0703) on a CP (z990). =>>=>> =>>=>>The usual CP Directory statements are in place, memory is 1G. =>>=>> =>>=>>I am getting as far as the first reply request, see below: =>>=> =>>=> =>>=> =>>=>>I hope this is not an "architectural" problem.. =>>=>> =>>=> =>>=> It is. You need at least OS/390 2.10 or higher plus the add-on =>>=> compatibility =>>=> and/or exploitation support. =>>=> =>>=> =>> http://www-03.ibm.com/support/techdocs/atsmastr.nsf/WebIndex/FLASH10236 =>>=> =>>=> You can also search the archives. There was a post in April 2006 and =>>=> from Jim Mulder that suggested that this VM setting might get around =>>=> the problem, but I don't recall anyone ever reporting that it worked =>> or =>>=> not: =>>=> =>>=> #CP TRACE IPTE RUN NOTERM =>>=> =>>=> =>> http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0604&L=ibm-main&D=1&O=D&P=16015 =>>=> =>>=> Mark =>>=> -- =>>=> Mark Zelden =>>=> Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead =>>=> Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO =>>=> mailto:mark.zel...@zurichna.com =>>=> z/OS Systems Programming expert at =>>=> http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ =>>=> Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html =>>=> =>>=> -- =>>=> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, =>>=> send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO =>>=> Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html =>>=> =>> =>> =>>John Cassidy (Dipl.-Ingr.) =>> =>>Kapellenstr. 21a =>> =>>D-65193 Wiesbaden =>> =>>EU =>> =>> =>> =>>Mobile: +49 (0) 170 794 3616 =>> =>> =>>http://www.JDCassidy.net =>> =>>http://en.federaleurope.org/ =>> =>>http://sva-zhosting.com/en/index.php =>> =>>-- =>>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 => John Cassidy (Dipl.-Ingr.) Kapellenstr. 21a D-65193 Wiesbaden EU Mobile: +49 (0) 170 794 3616 http://www.JDCassidy.net http://en.federaleurope.org/ http://sva-zhosting.com/en/index.php -- 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: OS/390 2.4 guest under z/VM 5.3
Can you provide details please? Paolo wrote just prior to your post that it worked for only one CP and less no more that .5G of memory. I'm trying to remember back to OS/390 2.4 and even a single z990 engine is much faster than the 9672 machines my clients were using back then and half a gig of memory was probably enough for many of those systems also.I'm curious: are these systems that are still running a decade+ old OS basically still the same size as they were when they were installed? Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:mark.zel...@zurichna.com z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:00:20 +0100, J. Cassidy wrote: >Thank you Mark. > > >It works... > > > >Regards, > > > >John >=> On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 12:50:29 +0100, J. Cassidy wrote: >=> >=>>** Already cross-posted to IBMVM ** >=>> >=>> >=>>Hello all, >=>> >=>>am trying to run (believe it or not) an OS/390 2.4 guest under z/VM 5.3 >=>>(0703) on a CP (z990). >=>> >=>>The usual CP Directory statements are in place, memory is 1G. >=>> >=>>I am getting as far as the first reply request, see below: >=> >=> >=> >=>>I hope this is not an "architectural" problem.. >=>> >=> >=> It is. You need at least OS/390 2.10 or higher plus the add-on >=> compatibility >=> and/or exploitation support. >=> >=> http://www-03.ibm.com/support/techdocs/atsmastr.nsf/WebIndex/FLASH10236 >=> >=> You can also search the archives. There was a post in April 2006 and >=> from Jim Mulder that suggested that this VM setting might get around >=> the problem, but I don't recall anyone ever reporting that it worked or >=> not: >=> >=> #CP TRACE IPTE RUN NOTERM >=> >=> http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0604&L=ibm-main&D=1&O=D&P=16015 >=> >=> Mark >=> -- >=> Mark Zelden >=> Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead >=> Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO >=> mailto:mark.zel...@zurichna.com >=> z/OS Systems Programming expert at >=> http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ >=> Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html >=> >=> -- >=> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >=> send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO >=> Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html >=> > > >John Cassidy (Dipl.-Ingr.) > >Kapellenstr. 21a > >D-65193 Wiesbaden > >EU > > > >Mobile: +49 (0) 170 794 3616 > > >http://www.JDCassidy.net > >http://en.federaleurope.org/ > >http://sva-zhosting.com/en/index.php > >-- >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: OS/390 2.4 guest under z/VM 5.3
Paolo Cacciari wrote: Mark, we actually tried CP TRACE statement to let an OS/390 2.4 start under Z/VM 5.3 on a Z9 CPU, and it runs Provided that (as per our experience): 1 - you don't define more than ONE CP to the virtual machine; 2 - you don't assign more than 512MB of central storage to the virtual machine; under these assumptions, IPL was completed and all was up and running. Wow! And, I thought we were doing something "special" running z/OS 1.4 under z/VM 5.3 on a z10... Congratulations! -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 Los Angeles, CA 90045 310-338-0400 x318 edja...@phoenixsoftware.com http://www.phoenixsoftware.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: OS/390 2.4 guest under z/VM 5.3
Thank you Mark. It works... Regards, John => On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 12:50:29 +0100, J. Cassidy wrote: => =>>** Already cross-posted to IBMVM ** =>> =>> =>>Hello all, =>> =>>am trying to run (believe it or not) an OS/390 2.4 guest under z/VM 5.3 =>>(0703) on a CP (z990). =>> =>>The usual CP Directory statements are in place, memory is 1G. =>> =>>I am getting as far as the first reply request, see below: => => => =>>I hope this is not an "architectural" problem.. =>> => => It is. You need at least OS/390 2.10 or higher plus the add-on => compatibility => and/or exploitation support. => => http://www-03.ibm.com/support/techdocs/atsmastr.nsf/WebIndex/FLASH10236 => => You can also search the archives. There was a post in April 2006 and => from Jim Mulder that suggested that this VM setting might get around => the problem, but I don't recall anyone ever reporting that it worked or => not: => => #CP TRACE IPTE RUN NOTERM => => http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0604&L=ibm-main&D=1&O=D&P=16015 => => Mark => -- => Mark Zelden => Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead => Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO => mailto:mark.zel...@zurichna.com => z/OS Systems Programming expert at => http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ => Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html => => -- => For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, => send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO => Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html => John Cassidy (Dipl.-Ingr.) Kapellenstr. 21a D-65193 Wiesbaden EU Mobile: +49 (0) 170 794 3616 http://www.JDCassidy.net http://en.federaleurope.org/ http://sva-zhosting.com/en/index.php -- 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: OS/390 2.4 guest under z/VM 5.3
Mark, we actually tried CP TRACE statement to let an OS/390 2.4 start under Z/VM 5.3 on a Z9 CPU, and it runs Provided that (as per our experience): 1 - you don't define more than ONE CP to the virtual machine; 2 - you don't assign more than 512MB of central storage to the virtual machine; under these assumptions, IPL was completed and all was up and running. Ciao. . snip >** Already cross-posted to IBMVM ** > > >Hello all, > >am trying to run (believe it or not) an OS/390 2.4 guest under z/VM 5.3 >(0703) on a CP (z990). > >The usual CP Directory statements are in place, memory is 1G. > >I am getting as far as the first reply request, see below: >I hope this is not an "architectural" problem.. > It is. You need at least OS/390 2.10 or higher plus the add-on compatibility and/or exploitation support. http://www-03.ibm.com/support/techdocs/atsmastr.nsf/WebIndex/FLASH10236 You can also search the archives. There was a post in April 2006 and from Jim Mulder that suggested that this VM setting might get around the problem, but I don't recall anyone ever reporting that it worked or not: #CP TRACE IPTE RUN NOTERM http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0604&L=ibm-main&D=1&O=D&P=16015 ... snip _ Paolo Cacciari IBM Italia S.p.A. Business Continuity and Resiliency Services, IBM Global Services - South Region, EMEA Via Darwin 85, 20019 Settimo Milanese(MI) ? Italy - MISET001 IBM Italia S.p.A. Sede Legale: Circonvallazione Idroscalo - 20090 Segrate (MI) Cap. Soc. euro 384.506.359,00 C. F. e Reg. Imprese MI 01442240030 - Partita IVA 10914660153 Società soggetta all?attività di direzione e coordinamento di International Business Machines Corporation (Salvo che sia diversamente indicato sopra / Unless stated otherwise above) -- 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: OS/390 2.4 guest under z/VM 5.3
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 12:50:29 +0100, J. Cassidy wrote: >** Already cross-posted to IBMVM ** > > >Hello all, > >am trying to run (believe it or not) an OS/390 2.4 guest under z/VM 5.3 >(0703) on a CP (z990). > >The usual CP Directory statements are in place, memory is 1G. > >I am getting as far as the first reply request, see below: >I hope this is not an "architectural" problem.. > It is. You need at least OS/390 2.10 or higher plus the add-on compatibility and/or exploitation support. http://www-03.ibm.com/support/techdocs/atsmastr.nsf/WebIndex/FLASH10236 You can also search the archives. There was a post in April 2006 and from Jim Mulder that suggested that this VM setting might get around the problem, but I don't recall anyone ever reporting that it worked or not: #CP TRACE IPTE RUN NOTERM http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0604&L=ibm-main&D=1&O=D&P=16015 Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:mark.zel...@zurichna.com z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 2.4 guest under z/VM 5.3
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 12:50:29 +0100 "J. Cassidy" wrote: :>am trying to run (believe it or not) an OS/390 2.4 guest under z/VM 5.3 :>(0703) on a CP (z990). :>The usual CP Directory statements are in place, memory is 1G. :>I am getting as far as the first reply request, see below: :>=== :>IEA371I SYS1.PARMLIB ON DEVICE 0847 SELECTED FOR IPL PARAMETERS :>IEA246I LOAD ID 00 SELECTED :>IEA519I IODF DSN = SYS1.IODF01 :>IEA520I CONFIGURATION ID = MVSCP00 . IODF DEVICE NUMBER = 0847 :>IEA091I NUCLEUS 1 SELECTED :>IEA370I MASTER CATALOG SELECTED IS SYS1.MCAT.VRESI25 :>IEA101A SPECIFY SYSTEM PARAMETERS FOR OS/390 02.04.00 JBB6604 :>=== :>As soon as I reply with >>r 00,sysp=00,clpa<< everything dies with a :>HCPGIR453W CP entered; program interrupt loop message. :>There is not much on Google about the above configuration, I have tried :>everything I can think of. :>I hope this is not an "architectural" problem.. :>Anyone any ideas?? What does the program old psw show? What does the directory entry show? What is the response from Q SET? -- Binyamin Dissen http://www.dissensoftware.com Director, Dissen Software, Bar & Grill - Israel Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me, you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain. I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems, especially those from irresponsible companies. -- 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: OS/390
I've seen threads digress many times. But I think this one beats them all. Thanks, Jim Weidt Senior Systems Engineer Jostens Inc. France Place james.we...@jostens.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail communication and any attached documentation may be privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure and is intended only for the use of the designated recipient(s). It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized person. The use, distribution, transmittal or retransmittal by an unintended recipient of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, please delete it from your system without copying it and notify the above sender. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Mary Anne Matyaz Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 10:29 AM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: OS/390 Wow, what a motley crew! Do we all look like that now?? MA On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 10:43 AM, David Andrews wrote: > On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 10:14 -0400, Ed Finnell wrote: > > You know, it would be fun to have a "who's who" website with photo's. > > I'm sure none of us look like people imagine. > > The linux-390 folks have something like that: >http://linuxvm.org/community/index.html > > -- > David Andrews > A. Duda and Sons, Inc. > david.andr...@duda.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 -- 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: OS/390
Wow, what a motley crew! Do we all look like that now?? MA On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 10:43 AM, David Andrews wrote: > On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 10:14 -0400, Ed Finnell wrote: > > You know, it would be fun to have a "who's who" website with photo's. > > I'm sure none of us look like people imagine. > > The linux-390 folks have something like that: >http://linuxvm.org/community/index.html > > -- > David Andrews > A. Duda and Sons, Inc. > david.andr...@duda.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: OS/390
On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 10:14 -0400, Ed Finnell wrote: > You know, it would be fun to have a "who's who" website with photo's. > I'm sure none of us look like people imagine. The linux-390 folks have something like that: http://linuxvm.org/community/index.html -- David Andrews A. Duda and Sons, Inc. david.andr...@duda.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: OS/390
In a message dated 7/1/2009 8:54:21 A.M. Central Daylight Time, david.jou...@53.com writes: You know, it would be fun to have a "who's who" website with photo's. I'm sure none of us look like people imagine. >> Have to balance jollies index vs security risk/exposure. **Dell Laptops: Huge Savings on Popular Laptops – Deals starting at $399(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222883570x1201497211/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Faltfarm.mediaplex.com%2Fad%2Fck%2F12309%2D81939%2D1629%2D0) -- 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: OS/390
You know, it would be fun to have a "who's who" website with photo's. I'm sure none of us look like people imagine. I always find myself scanning nametags at SHARE first, then face's second. Kinda funny, really. _ Dave Jousma Assistant Vice President, Mainframe Services david.jou...@53.com 1830 East Paris, Grand Rapids, MI 49546 MD RSCB1G p 616.653.8429 f 616.653.8497 -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Edward Jaffe Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 8:11 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: OS/390 Eric Bielefeld wrote: > Thanks Roger. Phil doesn't look anything like I thought he would. He looks a little like Roy Kinnear, playing the role of Algernon, Professor Foot's assistant, in Help! (1965) :-D -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 Los Angeles, CA 90045 310-338-0400 x318 edja...@phoenixsoftware.com http://www.phoenixsoftware.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 This e-mail transmission contains information that is confidential and may be privileged. It is intended only for the addressee(s) named above. If you receive this e-mail in error, please do not read, copy or disseminate it in any manner. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. Please reply to the message immediately by informing the sender that the message was misdirected. After replying, please erase it from your computer system. Your assistance in correcting this error is appreciated. -- 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: OS/390
Eric Bielefeld wrote: Thanks Roger. Phil doesn't look anything like I thought he would. He looks a little like Roy Kinnear, playing the role of Algernon, Professor Foot's assistant, in Help! (1965) :-D -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 Los Angeles, CA 90045 310-338-0400 x318 edja...@phoenixsoftware.com http://www.phoenixsoftware.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: OS/390
On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:12:59 -0500, Dave Day wrote: >If IBM's current mainframe revenue stream was to dwindle >to one twentieth of its current, how long do you think we >would continue to see the improvements we have seen in both >harware and software in recent years? Just to maintain >current revenue, they would have to increase market share >twenty fold. Estimates are that there are somewhere >between 6 and 10 thousand z/OS shops, worldwide. Taking >the smaller number, do you actually think z/SO could grow to >120,000 paying installations? Allowing small mainframe shops to run on hardware such as Roger mentioned would not equate to IBM getting 5% of their current revenue. For one thing, small machines such as this would not suffice for large shops. For another, the software charges for running OS/390 on the machine that the OP is currently running are, based upon Timothy's post, $16,260 per month. How much does it matter that the hardware can be purchased for $5,000 rather than for $100,000? IBM mainframe market share has been dwindling for 20 years, during which time the need for servers has increased dramatically. This happened because the mainframe is perceived as too expensive. That perception came about because of the cost of software. In the old days, the pricing model was simple, both for hardware and software. As the compute power increased, the price increased proportionately. That, by the way is the reason that Amdahl computers came to be. Dr. Amdahl presented his design to IBM, who rejected it because, based upon their price/performance curve, they figured that they would have to charge $10 million for it, and they wouldn't be able to sell enough of them. Amdahl said that he thought they could make a profit at $4 Million, but his idea was rejected. When IBM started charging for software, the pricing curve was very nearly linear. It remained that way for many years. Every few years, shops would buy a new computer with about double the power of the one that they had before. It would cost about the same as the last one that they bought, and the cost for the software doubled. It didn't take many cycles of this for people to notice that the price of software was increasing rapidly. Computer billing departments had similar charging algorithms. Where I worked in the '70s, every time a new computer was purchased, they had a set of billing benchmarks that were run and the rate per CPU minute was adjusted so that users paid about the same price for the work done on the new computer as they did on the old one. It seemed to make sense at the time, but the charges soon became unreasonable as the faster computers became available for similar prices. So, mainframe market share has been decreasing for many years. IBM, to their credit, has reduced the charges for software, but IMO, not nearly quickly enough. Over the last ten years or so, the cost of the operating system has fallen to about a quarter of what it was. So, again, based upon Tim's post, it is now $4,403 per month for similar sized hardware. In that same time frame, the processing power of the high end mainframe has increased 20 fold. I know one shop that had 10 of the largest available mainframes in one site 30 years ago. Over the years, as their computing needs grew, they tended to put new workload on other platforms because of the cost, perceived or actual. Now they have one mainframe in each site. If IBM had changed its pricing model 30 years ago, I have no doubt that the number of mainframe shops would have grown with the rest of the industry. There could easily be 100 times as many mainframe shops as there are today. Instead, every few months we hear about another shop that has migrated off of the mainframe. > >I'm not a fan of IBM's current pricing strategy, as I do feel >it is way to complicated, and overpriced. But 1/20th of the >current revenue? I think we would all be taking in each >other's wash to find work. They could not stay in the business. >My .02, for what its worth. -- Tom Marchant -- 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: OS/390
On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:12:59 -0500, Dave Day wrote: >Roger, If IBM's current mainframe revenue stream was to dwindle to one >twentieth of its current, how long do you think we would continue to see the >improvements we have seen in both harware and software in recent years? >Just to maintain current revenue, they would have to increase market share >twenty fold. Estimates are that there are somewhere between 6 and 10 >thousand z/OS shops, worldwide. Taking the smaller number, do you actually >think z/SO could grow to 120,000 paying installations? Unfortunately it's too late now. When the CMOS processors arrived in the 1990s there was a golden opportunity to bring mainframe prices down to more reasonable levels, which might well have resulted in the kind of growth you mention. z/OS could have established the same foothold in small and medium sized companies as it has today in large companies. But IBM took the choice to keep mainframe prices high, and they could do this because at that time there was really no alternative. In 1990 the idea of running a production workload on a PC was still laughable. But now that the "toy" computers have caught up and overtaken the mainframe in almost all respects, we are seeing the inevitable dwindling in the number of mainframe sites. In the 1990's it was estimated that there were 22000 CICS installations alone. Now we are talking about figures of 6 thousand sites and falling. IBM reports growth in mainframe hardware revenues. Increased MIPS at the high end and increasing server prices (yes, a z10 does cost more than a similarly powered z9) account for this. But the astonishing pace of system z hardware and software development, funded by premium price tags, does little to improve the employment prospects of the bulk of mainframe professionals. The number of installations diminishes, and the improvements to z/OS reduce the staffing requirements even further. >1/20th of the current revenue? I think we would all be taking in each other's >wash to find work. They could not stay in the business. Most of us reading this forum probably have a common interest: to keep a healthy market alive for our skills. IBM's interest is to maximise its profits by continuing to squeeze as much as possible out of the mainframe market while it still exists. The question is, do IBM's methods coincide or conflict with our interest, given that z/OS will never now achieve mass market penetration? I don't claim to know the answer to that question (although of course I have my opinion). Regards, Roger Bowler -- 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: OS/390
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 11:32:07 +0900, Timothy Sipples wrote: >Just for "fun," let's assume that the company had migrated to z/OS V1 five >years ago. They would have saved $711,420 on the base operating system >charge by now. That would have purchased some very nice hardware plus many >hamburgers. ... >Methinks there was some grave mismanagement of IT infrastructure at >this company. But it's not too late to correct that. Hmm. That's a novel way to promote customer loyalty. Overcharge them 700 grand for obsolete software, and then tell them it's *their* fault for mismanaging their account! Regards, Roger Bowler -- 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: OS/390
This assumes that all of IBM's revenue comes form hardware. I expect quite a bit of it comes from software license charges which are not linearly related to the hardware prices. -Original Message- From: Dave Day Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 2:13 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: OS/390 Roger, If IBM's current mainframe revenue stream was to dwindle to one twentieth of its current, how long do you think we would continue to see the improvements we have seen in both harware and software in recent years? Just to maintain current revenue, they would have to increase market share twenty fold. Estimates are that there are somewhere between 6 and 10 thousand z/OS shops, worldwide. Taking the smaller number, do you actually think z/SO could grow to 120,000 paying installations? I'm not a fan of IBM's current pricing strategy, as I do feel it is way to complicated, and overpriced. But 1/20th of the current revenue? I think we would all be taking in each other's wash to find work. They could not stay in the business. My .02, for what its worth. -- 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: OS/390
Roger, If IBM's current mainframe revenue stream was to dwindle to one twentieth of its current, how long do you think we would continue to see the improvements we have seen in both harware and software in recent years? Just to maintain current revenue, they would have to increase market share twenty fold. Estimates are that there are somewhere between 6 and 10 thousand z/OS shops, worldwide. Taking the smaller number, do you actually think z/SO could grow to 120,000 paying installations? I'm not a fan of IBM's current pricing strategy, as I do feel it is way to complicated, and overpriced. But 1/20th of the current revenue? I think we would all be taking in each other's wash to find work. They could not stay in the business. My .02, for what its worth. --Dave Day There are plenty of modern machines that *can* run OS/390. Here's just one example: http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/x/hardware/rack/x3650m2/index.html The IBM x3650 M2 with Hercules software is quite capable of running OS/390. What's more, it will outperform the 2098-A02 in terms of MIPS, floor space, and energy consumption, for about one twentieth the price. Yes, that's just 5% of the price of a small z10 BC including DASD. So if IBM cannot meet the customer's stated requirement (which was to continue running OS/390 on newer hardware) the reason is certainly not technical. It's because of the artificial barriers which IBM's software licensing policy puts in their way. Regards, Roger Bowler Hercules "the people's mainframe" http://www.openmainframe.org -- 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: OS/390
On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:51:52 -0400, Eric Bielefeld wrote: >Thanks Roger. Phil doesn't look anything like I thought he would. Here's another one: http://www.legsreunited.org.uk/reunion/reunionpics/lastlegs/fr-jds/slides/2005-12-041.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: OS/390
Thanks Roger. Phil doesn't look anything like I thought he would. Eric Bielefeld Sr. Systems Programmer Milwaukee, Wisconsin 414-475-7434 - Original Message - From: "Roger Bowler" Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main To: Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 4:37 PM Subject: Re: OS/390 On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 14:24:05 -0400, Eric Bielefeld wrote: I assume you mean Phil Payne. Does anyone know what happened to him? I assume from some of his last posts that he was getting out of mainframes. I always enjoyed Phil's wit and aserbic comments. Eric, You can continue to enjoy Phil Payne's ready wit and repartee in the google webmaster support forums. Here's an example: http://tinyurl.com/nl6bb6 And here you even get to see a photo of Uncle Phil himself: http://tinyurl.com/lyzkf3 Enjoy, Roger Bowler -- 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: OS/390
On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 14:24:05 -0400, Eric Bielefeld wrote: >I assume you mean Phil Payne. Does anyone know what happened to him? I >assume from some of his last posts that he was getting out of mainframes. I >always enjoyed Phil's wit and aserbic comments. Eric, You can continue to enjoy Phil Payne's ready wit and repartee in the google webmaster support forums. Here's an example: http://tinyurl.com/nl6bb6 And here you even get to see a photo of Uncle Phil himself: http://tinyurl.com/lyzkf3 Enjoy, Roger Bowler -- 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: OS/390
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 11:32:07 +0900, Timothy Sipples wrote: >Sorry, it is not technically possible to move to newer hardware and >continue running OS/390 1.3. :-( Have to take issue with you there, Timothy! There are plenty of modern machines that *can* run OS/390. Here's just one example: http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/x/hardware/rack/x3650m2/index.html The IBM x3650 M2 with Hercules software is quite capable of running OS/390. What's more, it will outperform the 2098-A02 in terms of MIPS, floor space, and energy consumption, for about one twentieth the price. Yes, that's just 5% of the price of a small z10 BC including DASD. So if IBM cannot meet the customer's stated requirement (which was to continue running OS/390 on newer hardware) the reason is certainly not technical. It's because of the artificial barriers which IBM's software licensing policy puts in their way. Regards, Roger Bowler Hercules "the people's mainframe" http://www.openmainframe.org -- 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: OS/390
I assume you mean Phil Payne. Does anyone know what happened to him? I assume from some of his last posts that he was getting out of mainframes. I always enjoyed Phil's wit and aserbic comments. Eric Eric Bielefeld Sr. Systems Programmer Milwaukee, Wisconsin 414-475-7434 - Original Message - From: "Shane" (Still) can't resist tugging the tigers tail Roger ?. Phil would be proud ... ;0) -- 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: OS/390
On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 06:07 -0500, Roger Bowler wrote: > Thanks, Timothy. That's about the clearest statement I've seen so far from > IBM. May we take this as official IBM policy? > > I guess your statement must be based upon some sort of official documents or > other information that you have access to as an IBMer. If you could > elaborate on the basis for your statement, that would be extremely helpful. (Still) can't resist tugging the tigers tail Roger ?. Phil would be proud ... ;0) Interesting site in your sig - hadn't been there before. Interesting mix of links. Shane ... -- 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: OS/390
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 11:32:07 +0900, Timothy Sipples wrote: >OS/390 V1 is licensed software, and it is licensed to a specific machine. >If the original poster wants to move OS/390 to another machine, he must >seek IBM's permission. Permission will likely be granted for IBM, >Fujitsu-Amdahl, and Hitachi hardware, new or used. It will likely not be >granted for Hercules. ... >Timothy Sipples >IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect >Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan / Asia-Pacific >E-Mail: timothy.sipp...@us.ibm.com Thanks, Timothy. That's about the clearest statement I've seen so far from IBM. May we take this as official IBM policy? I guess your statement must be based upon some sort of official documents or other information that you have access to as an IBMer. If you could elaborate on the basis for your statement, that would be extremely helpful. Thanks, Roger Bowler http://www.openmainframe.org -- 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: OS/390
The machine capacities vary. The Multiprise 2000 (2003-xxx) was available in several different capacities, ranging from roughly 3 to just shy of 170 MIPS. The Model 116 (2003-116) specifically is approximately 38 MIPS and exactly 6 MSUs (and Group 38). - - - - - Timothy Sipples IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan / Asia-Pacific E-Mail: timothy.sipp...@us.ibm.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: OS/390
>Just out of curiosity, is the 38 MIPS figure a recent adjustment? >From August 2008 to April 2009, IBM Japan has consistently told us the figure >was 26 MIPS. Misleading Indicator of Processor Speed. The MIPS rating depends on the workload, and the current implementation of the (hardware & software) architecture. I wrote a short article on it, in November 2004, and, while it appears to be dated, the issues haven't changed. If you're interested, please see: http://www.ibmsystemsmag.com/mainframe/enewsletterexclusive/9806p1.aspx - Too busy driving to stop for gas! -- 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: OS/390
http://www.tech-news.com/publib/pl2003.html lists it as 37 "Schwarz, Barry A" IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Sent by: IBM cc Mainframe Discussion List Subject 06/29/2009 02:52 PM Please respond to IBM Mainframe Discussion List Just out of curiosity, is the 38 MIPS figure a recent adjustment? From August 2008 to April 2009, IBM Japan has consistently told us the figure was 26 MIPS. -Original Message- From: Timothy Sipples [mailto:e99...@jp.ibm.com] Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2009 7:32 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: OS/390 snip The Multiprise 2000 Model 116 (2003-116) was introduced in September, 1996. It is a one-way machine rated at 6 MSUs (Group 38) and about 38 MIPS. Assuming that machine configuration currently provides sufficient capacity, the most appropriate replacement models probably include the System z9 BC Model B01 (only 5 MSUs and about 38 MIPS) and the System z10 BC Model C01 (only 5 MSUs and about 38 MIPS). (The z10 would be preferable since it offers smaller capacity increments, along with other technology improvements.) Another possible option is the System z10 BC Model A02, a two-way machine with 6 MSUs and about 48 MIPS, if a two-way machine would be more appropriate. -- 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: OS/390
Just out of curiosity, is the 38 MIPS figure a recent adjustment? From August 2008 to April 2009, IBM Japan has consistently told us the figure was 26 MIPS. -Original Message- From: Timothy Sipples [mailto:e99...@jp.ibm.com] Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2009 7:32 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: OS/390 snip The Multiprise 2000 Model 116 (2003-116) was introduced in September, 1996. It is a one-way machine rated at 6 MSUs (Group 38) and about 38 MIPS. Assuming that machine configuration currently provides sufficient capacity, the most appropriate replacement models probably include the System z9 BC Model B01 (only 5 MSUs and about 38 MIPS) and the System z10 BC Model C01 (only 5 MSUs and about 38 MIPS). (The z10 would be preferable since it offers smaller capacity increments, along with other technology improvements.) Another possible option is the System z10 BC Model A02, a two-way machine with 6 MSUs and about 48 MIPS, if a two-way machine would be more appropriate. -- 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: OS/390
Brian Westerman writes: >I think you might be able to run it under z/VM, you certainly >can run it under Hercules. If you get a fast enough PC, you >can probably beat the MIPS of what your running it on now;) OS/390 V1 is licensed software, and it is licensed to a specific machine. If the original poster wants to move OS/390 to another machine, he must seek IBM's permission. Permission will likely be granted for IBM, Fujitsu-Amdahl, and Hitachi hardware, new or used. It will likely not be granted for Hercules. The same is likely true for other vendor software (if any). Billy R. Bingham writes: >The company currently has a 2003-116 and IBM will be dropping >maintenance 12/31/2009. They want to go to newer hardware >(z890/z990) but does not want to upgrade their software, I >repeat, does not want to upgrade their software. They want >to stay on OS/390 1.3 until they migrate off to an ERP >package. Sorry, it is not technically possible to move to newer hardware and continue running OS/390 1.3. :-( OS/390 1.3 (IBM program number 5645-001) became generally available on March 28, 1997. Last order date for 1.3 was December 31, 1998. The Multiprise 2000 Model 116 (2003-116) was introduced in September, 1996. It is a one-way machine rated at 6 MSUs (Group 38) and about 38 MIPS. Assuming that machine configuration currently provides sufficient capacity, the most appropriate replacement models probably include the System z9 BC Model B01 (only 5 MSUs and about 38 MIPS) and the System z10 BC Model C01 (only 5 MSUs and about 38 MIPS). (The z10 would be preferable since it offers smaller capacity increments, along with other technology improvements.) Another possible option is the System z10 BC Model A02, a two-way machine with 6 MSUs and about 48 MIPS, if a two-way machine would be more appropriate. Let me give you some very rough and very quick information on monthly license charges. I cannot vouch completely for the accuracy here, but my numbers should be close. The Model 116 is a Group 38 machine, so I estimate that the U.S. monthly license charge for the base operating system (only) is $16,260. Full capacity licensing is required for OS/390. The System z9 or z10 models mentioned above, at 5 MSUs, would be eligible for Entry Workload License Charge (EWLC), and the charge for z/OS Version 1 (5694-A01) would be $4,403 per month for the base operating system, even at full capacity. (The company you are working with may find sub-capacity possible, depending on their current and projected utilization.) That's a 72.9% reduction in the monthly charge for the base operating system. As an aside: do you know if Oracle, Microsoft, or SAP has cut their prices by 72.9%? :-) Just for "fun," let's assume that the company had migrated to z/OS V1 five years ago. They would have saved $711,420 on the base operating system charge by now. That would have purchased some very nice hardware plus many hamburgers. There should also be an inflation adjustment here. The 2009 $4,403 monthly charge is actually equal to approximately $3,420 in 1998 dollars. With this inflation adjustment, the real reduction in price is just shy of 79%. Also, in that time the labor required to manage a mainframe has declined faster than for other platforms. If the 1998 fully burdened full time equivalent (FTE) employee cost was $150,000, today (with inflation) it would be just shy of $200,000. (Labor costs are quite regional, though, so YMMV.) There is also a substantial reduction in hardware maintenance charges, and the first year is under warranty. Methinks there was some grave mismanagement of IT infrastructure at this company. But it's not too late to correct that. To give yet one more data point, let's suppose you double the MSUs for z/OS. What's the price for incremental growth? Answer: $1,670. That is, you can increase z/OS capacity by 100% for 37.9% more software price. Of course, there's probably more on the machine than just base OS/390. There are no doubt various operating system features, plus middleware products. YMMV. Hope that helps. - - - - - Timothy Sipples IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan / Asia-Pacific E-Mail: timothy.sipp...@us.ibm.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: OS/390
While it may be able to run under z/VM using a kludge that to my knowledge, has never been tested, search the archives for a posting by Jim Mulder 2 or three years back. The issue has to do with the introduction of the multi-level TLB's in the current machines. === Wayne Driscoll OMEGAMON DB2 L3 Support/Development wdrisco(AT)us.ibm.com === Brian Westerman Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 06/26/2009 04:21 AM Please respond to IBM Mainframe Discussion List To IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu cc Subject Re: OS/390 I think you might be able to run it under z/VM, you certainly can run it under Hercules. If you get a fast enough PC, you can probably beat the MIPS of what your running it on now;) What is the purpose of the question? Is it just a "gee, I wonder", or is there a real need to give it a go? I have done a lot of (well over 100) conversions from even as far back as MVS/SP and MVS/XA to z/OS in the past few years and it's not impossible to convert quickly, but there are a lot of better ways to handle the conversion to a newer operating system level than to just dump the old version on a new processor type and hope to be able to convert that way.:) I was going to give a Share presentation on just this type of thing, but the revenue to send me this time just wasn't available. :( 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: OS/390
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Mark Zelden wrote: > On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 14:26:10 +0100, Jim McAlpine > wrote: > > > > > > >Have you looked at the FLEX-ES option. That should run any version I > >believe and because it runs on pc technology, the hardware will be > available > >for some other use when the mainframe application is finished with. > > > >Jim McAlpine > > > > Jim, where have you been the last few years? Don't you know FLEX-ES > is dead? > > Mark > -- > I thought it was only dead for the Partnerworld and 64 bit version of z/OS. I was under the impression that it was still available for commercial users as long as they ran a 31 bit flavour of MVS. If I'm mistaken then my apologies, I've obviously got the wrong end of the stick. Jim McAlpine -- 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: OS/390
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 14:26:10 +0100, Jim McAlpine wrote: >On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 1:19 PM, Billy R. Bingham < >billy.bingham...@suddenlink.net> wrote: > >> The company currently has a 2003-116 and IBM will be dropping maintenance >> 12/31/2009. They want to go to newer hardware (z890/z990) but does not want >> to upgrade their software, I repeat, does not want to upgrade their >> software. They want to stay on OS/390 1.3 until they migrate off to an ERP >> package. >> >> >> Billy >> > > >Have you looked at the FLEX-ES option. That should run any version I >believe and because it runs on pc technology, the hardware will be available >for some other use when the mainframe application is finished with. > >Jim McAlpine > Jim, where have you been the last few years? Don't you know FLEX-ES is dead? Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:mark.zel...@zurichna.com z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 1:19 PM, Billy R. Bingham < billy.bingham...@suddenlink.net> wrote: > The company currently has a 2003-116 and IBM will be dropping maintenance > 12/31/2009. They want to go to newer hardware (z890/z990) but does not want > to upgrade their software, I repeat, does not want to upgrade their > software. They want to stay on OS/390 1.3 until they migrate off to an ERP > package. > > > Billy > Have you looked at the FLEX-ES option. That should run any version I believe and because it runs on pc technology, the hardware will be available for some other use when the mainframe application is finished with. Jim McAlpine -- 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: OS/390
You weren't specific before, so I wasn't either. IIRC, it won't IPL even under z/VM without the z990 exploitation code. http://www-03.ibm.com/support/techdocs/atsmastr.nsf/WebIndex/FLASH10236 Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:mark.zel...@zurichna.com z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 07:19:53 -0500, Billy R. Bingham wrote: >The company currently has a 2003-116 and IBM will be dropping maintenance 12/31/2009. They want to go to newer hardware (z890/z990) but does not want to upgrade their software, I repeat, does not want to upgrade their software. They want to stay on OS/390 1.3 until they migrate off to an ERP package. > > >Billy > Timothy Sipples wrote: >> For the record, IBM never supported OS/390 1.3 on the z900 model. The >> earliest OS/390 release supported on the z900 was 2.6. On the z800 the >> earliest was 2.8. >> >> Perhaps it would be a good idea if the original poster described what he is >> trying to do. We might have some alternative ideas for solving the problem >> (s). >> >> - - - - - >> Timothy Sipples >> IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect >> Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan / Asia-Pacific >> E-Mail: timothy.sipp...@us.ibm.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: OS/390
That being the case, I would search for a third party maintenance contract, do time and materials and keep the 2003-116. - Robert B. Richards(Bob) US Office of Personnel Management 1900 E Street NW Room: BH04L Washington, D.C. 20415 Phone: (202) 606-1195 Email: robert.richa...@opm.gov - -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Billy R. Bingham Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 8:20 AM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: OS/390 The company currently has a 2003-116 and IBM will be dropping maintenance 12/31/2009. They want to go to newer hardware (z890/z990) but does not want to upgrade their software, I repeat, does not want to upgrade their software. They want to stay on OS/390 1.3 until they migrate off to an ERP package. Billy Timothy Sipples wrote: > For the record, IBM never supported OS/390 1.3 on the z900 model. The > earliest OS/390 release supported on the z900 was 2.6. On the z800 the > earliest was 2.8. > > Perhaps it would be a good idea if the original poster described what he is > trying to do. We might have some alternative ideas for solving the problem > (s). > > - - - - - > Timothy Sipples > IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect > Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan / Asia-Pacific > E-Mail: timothy.sipp...@us.ibm.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: OS/390
The company currently has a 2003-116 and IBM will be dropping maintenance 12/31/2009. They want to go to newer hardware (z890/z990) but does not want to upgrade their software, I repeat, does not want to upgrade their software. They want to stay on OS/390 1.3 until they migrate off to an ERP package. Billy Timothy Sipples wrote: > For the record, IBM never supported OS/390 1.3 on the z900 model. The > earliest OS/390 release supported on the z900 was 2.6. On the z800 the > earliest was 2.8. > > Perhaps it would be a good idea if the original poster described what he is > trying to do. We might have some alternative ideas for solving the problem > (s). > > - - - - - > Timothy Sipples > IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect > Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan / Asia-Pacific > E-Mail: timothy.sipp...@us.ibm.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: OS/390
I think you might be able to run it under z/VM, you certainly can run it under Hercules. If you get a fast enough PC, you can probably beat the MIPS of what your running it on now;) What is the purpose of the question? Is it just a "gee, I wonder", or is there a real need to give it a go? I have done a lot of (well over 100) conversions from even as far back as MVS/SP and MVS/XA to z/OS in the past few years and it's not impossible to convert quickly, but there are a lot of better ways to handle the conversion to a newer operating system level than to just dump the old version on a new processor type and hope to be able to convert that way.:) I was going to give a Share presentation on just this type of thing, but the revenue to send me this time just wasn't available. :( 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: OS/390
For the record, IBM never supported OS/390 1.3 on the z900 model. The earliest OS/390 release supported on the z900 was 2.6. On the z800 the earliest was 2.8. Perhaps it would be a good idea if the original poster described what he is trying to do. We might have some alternative ideas for solving the problem (s). - - - - - Timothy Sipples IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan / Asia-Pacific E-Mail: timothy.sipp...@us.ibm.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: OS/390
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:16:34 -0500, Billy R. Bingham wrote: >Hello all, > >Just subscribed to ibm-main so go easy :) > >Does anyone know if OS/390 1.3 will run on a z Series box. Either in an LPAR or under VM. > > zSeries, yes. System z, no. z900/z800 - Yes. z990/z890 or above, no. Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:mark.zel...@zurichna.com z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 2.10 TCPIP problem
Try posting to the TCPIP newsgroup For IBMTCP-L subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO IBMTCP-L Lizette [>] Snip [>] First please forgive me to ask question regarding so outdated OS. I have a problem that we found the resolver in OS/390 2.10 resolve hostname to two IP address, one of them is never defined. FQN=: "SDMF1" host_alias: "" host_addr: "171.17.0.3" host_addr: "3.211.230.193" Our hostname is SDMF1, first IP is defined by us, second one is unknown. My question is: How can I know where is it defined? How can we turn on RESOLVE trace to see what happen during gethostbyname socket API? Or is turning on RESOLVE trace enough? Any other suggestions? [>] unsnip -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 V2R4 on Z9
I think that I might have mentioned this before but I have successfully (several times) migrated 2.8 and 2.9 system to a Z9. Admittedly, we didn't leave the client there for very long, (less than a week) while we moved them to z/OS, but it ran okay. Brian Westerman -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 V2R4 on Z9
-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rankin, Bob Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 12:57 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: OS/390 V2R4 on Z9 Our production environment is running OS390 V2R4 (9708 PUT). My management wants to purchase a Z9 to replace our aging Multiprise 2003-125 and move our existing OS to run on the Z9. While we know that OS390 V2R4 has not been certified to run on the Z9, my management thinks it possible that it might work anyway. Personally I don't think this is feasible but IBM has done stranger things in the past. Can anyone out there provide more specific information regarding this topic. While I know that there are significant instruction set differences, perhaps V2R4 may not encounter them, I don't know. Has anyone done this? Does anyone know what will happen if we attempt to do this? Based on my experience with OS/390 V2R9, you will get a PI-LOOP. That is, it will go to a "check stop state" during the IPL itself. I'm trying to remember the release that I once tried to IPL on a z890 (It wasn't a z800 because that's where we were going to migrate from). During the SAPR meeting, you should have seen the look on a few people's faces when IBM's people said that only 2.10 and up would run. Well, I was told to give it a try and the Production system (OS/390 2.9) died before I could get my finger off the enter key from doing the load. Regards, Steve Thompson -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 V2R4 on Z9
I can only speak for OS/390 2.9 and 2.10 on the Z9 as being able to run, I have never tried an older version, mostly because we have not had a client with an older version move to a Z9 (at least not with my help). I think that there are better ways to accomplish what you need though, I could easily set up a supported system (z/OS) on the Z9 in a weekend and depending on your configuration, it might be possible to share most of your hardware and cut over incrementally in a very short period of time. I have had a lot of experience getting older versions of the subsystems to run under the newer z/OS versions which would allow you to move your subsystems intact changing (mostly) just the operating system. Obviously I'm simplifying this, but depending on what your current installed subsystem configuration is, it might be quite simple and quick to get you up on the Z9 with only a minor amount of fuss. It might be worth a try to see if we could get 2.4 to run as well, but I wouldn't want to bet the farm on it. If your interested, give me a off list email and we can discuss it. Brian Westerman -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 V2R4 on Z9
On Mon, 1 Oct 2007 10:56:34 -0700, Rankin, Bob wrote: >Our production environment is running OS390 V2R4 (9708 PUT). My management >wants to purchase a Z9 to replace our aging Multiprise 2003-125 and move our >existing OS to run on the Z9. While we know that OS390 V2R4 has not been >certified to run on the Z9, my management thinks it possible that it might >work anyway. Personally I don't think this is feasible but IBM has done >stranger things in the past. > >Can anyone out there provide more specific information regarding this topic. >While I know that there are significant instruction set differences, perhaps >V2R4 may not encounter them, I don't know. > >Has anyone done this? > >Does anyone know what will happen if we attempt to do this? Search the archives for [(Mulder) and (purge)] and you should find this: "z890, z990, and z9 machines have a 2-level TLB. Nothing lower than OS/390 2.10 will run reliably on a machine with a 2-level TLB because lower releases than 2.10 do not do some of the necessary TLB purges. I have heard some speculation that you might be able to get around this by running an older MVS under VM, with the following VM trace: "#CP TRACE IPTE RUN NOTERM "Of course, this would cause some performance degradation, since VM would intercepting and simulating every IPTE for this virtual machine. I don't know of anyone who has tried this. It was just some hall talk with a VM developer. "There may be other issues that would prevent an older MVS from running on a modern machine, such as missing support for a larger storage increment size. The storage increment size might also be avoided under VM if the virtual machine does not have too much real storage defined - I think VM simulates the increment size but I wouldn't swear to that." ...which leads me to believe that you can expect 'difficulties' (at minimum) unless you are running your OS/390 2.4 system under z/VM - and maybe even IF you are running under z/VM. (It was just hallway talk, after all.) Jim's post was addressing a jump from a newer-than-your machine to a z/9-BC and he posted it back in (or around) February. (Thanks, as always, Jim!) -- Tom Schmidt Madison, WI -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 V2R4 on Z9
IBM Mainframe Discussion List wrote on 10/01/2007 01:56:34 PM: > Our production environment is running OS390 V2R4 (9708 PUT). My management > wants to purchase a Z9 to replace our aging Multiprise 2003-125 and move our > existing OS to run on the Z9. While we know that OS390 V2R4 has not been > certified to run on the Z9, my management thinks it possible that it might > work anyway. Personally I don't think this is feasible but IBM has done > stranger things in the past. > Can anyone out there provide more specific information regarding this topic. > While I know that there are significant instruction set differences, perhaps > V2R4 may not encounter them, I don't know. > > Has anyone done this? > Does anyone know what will happen if we attempt to do this? In the archives: http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0702&L=ibm-main&P=R25482&I=1&X=- Jim Mulder z/OS System Test IBM Corp. Poughkeepsie, NY -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 V2R4 on Z9
You are running a production environment on an operating system which has not been supported for a number of years? Is your application environment (CICS, DB2, what have you) similarly in an unsupported state? I hope, for your sake, that some application doesn't come along which breaks this fragile setup, or you will be installing a LOT of software in a very short time (or paying through the nose to have it done). Tim Hare Senior Systems Programmer Florida Department of Transportation Tel: +1 (850) 414-4209 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 V2R4 on Z9
We attempted to run a "soon to be eliminated" OS/390 2.6 system on a z/890 a while back. The system did IPL, but once more than a few users got on, performance was terrible. We moved them back to the Amdahl that came off lease until we could upgrade it to OS/390 2.10 (then supported). -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 V2R4 on Z9
We are currently running a production OS390 V2R10 on a z9 BC. BUT, we have to do any HCD changes from a z/OS 1.4 lpar with the z990 compatibility ptfs installed. I do not know about V2R4. Silvio On Mon, 1 Oct 2007 10:56:34 -0700, "Rankin, Bob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Our production environment is running OS390 V2R4 (9708 PUT). My > management wants to purchase a Z9 to replace our aging Multiprise 2003- > 125 and move our existing OS to run on the Z9. While we know that > OS390 V2R4 has not been certified to run on the Z9, my management > thinks it possible that it might work anyway. Personally I don't think > this is feasible but IBM has done stranger things in the past. > > > > Can anyone out there provide more specific information regarding this > topic. While I know that there are significant instruction set > differences, perhaps V2R4 may not encounter them, I don't know. > > > > Has anyone done this? > > > > Does anyone know what will happen if we attempt to do this? > > > > Bob Rankin > > City of Portland, Oregon > > > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO > Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 V2R4 on Z9
Mark Jacobs wrote: On what factual basis does your management think that this will work? IBM had compatibility FMID's back in the early zOS releases that would enable them to run on a zxxx processor. There never was an equalvilent for OS/390 releases of the operating system. The fact is OS/390 2.10 *was* supported on z/990. Compatibility fmids were for multiple channel subsystem machines (z/990, z/890), not z at all. Earlier OS/390 releases worked on z/900, without compatibility fmid, although with some recommended service (PTFs). AFAIK even OS/390 2.10 with compatibility fmids won't work on z9. "Won't work", no "not supported". -- 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 01.01.2007 r. kapita zakadowy BRE Banku SA (w caoci opacony) wynosi 118.064.140 z. W zwizku z realizacj warunkowego podwyszenia kapitau zakadowego, na podstawie uchwa XVI WZ z dnia 21.05.2003 r., kapita zakadowy BRE Banku SA moe ulec podwyszeniu do kwoty 118.760.528 z. Akcje w podwyszonym kapitale zakadowym bd w caoci opacone. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 V2R4 on Z9
On what factual basis does your management think that this will work? IBM had compatibility FMID's back in the early zOS releases that would enable them to run on a zxxx processor. There never was an equalvilent for OS/390 releases of the operating system. I would bet against it, but I don't have any hard facts to back it up. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rankin, Bob Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 1:57 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: OS/390 V2R4 on Z9 Our production environment is running OS390 V2R4 (9708 PUT). My management wants to purchase a Z9 to replace our aging Multiprise 2003-125 and move our existing OS to run on the Z9. While we know that OS390 V2R4 has not been certified to run on the Z9, my management thinks it possible that it might work anyway. Personally I don't think this is feasible but IBM has done stranger things in the past. Can anyone out there provide more specific information regarding this topic. While I know that there are significant instruction set differences, perhaps V2R4 may not encounter them, I don't know. Has anyone done this? Does anyone know what will happen if we attempt to do this? Bob Rankin City of Portland, Oregon -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 Catalog in z/OS V1R7
Thanks all for the help. John was correct. The new master catalog will be created using OS390 1.4 and not used by it - only in zOS 1.7 and higher. There is no chance that any co-existence of toleration maintenance is available. Any suggestions on what to do with the user catalogs. My thought is to repro them using the OS390 system and then not touch them with OS390 after zOS uses them. Again, thanks. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 Catalog in z/OS V1R7
On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 13:57 -0500, Mark Baron wrote: > Does anyone on the list know if I can create a new catalog under OS390 2.4 > and use that new catalog in z/OS V1R7 or V1R8 with no problem. I know I > won't be able to use a V1R7 catalog on the old OS390 but what about the > other way?? > > I need to upgrade a client's system As the others have said, can't see a problem with it. So long as it ain't shared. Build it, get it across, get it offline to OS/390 - and keep it that way. If you have updates to the original, manually apply same to the new catalog - from the z/OS system. Alastair Gray has a beaut replacement for MCNVTCAT on the cbt that should be useful in that case. Shane ... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 Catalog in z/OS V1R7
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 14:32:53 -0500, McKown, John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> There has been code in the past that changed the >> catalog/catindex once it >> was opened under the higher level. When this was the case >> (and ESA V4 dot >> something may have been one of those versions that changed it) there >> were toleration PTFs to allow the lower level system to share >> the catalog. >> If you were sill running a very old system and created a >> catalog that would >> then get touched by z/OS 1.8, there is a chance that any code that >> changed the catalog / catindex may not still be there. >> -- > >True. The original post made me think that the poster wanted to create >the catalog on the old system, then use it on the new. I read it the same way. > I did not get the >impression that he wanted to share the catalog on both systems. Perhaps >I misread his intention. It's been known to happen It didn't sound like it.. but I don't think it matters in this jump. I was just pointing out that in your extreme example (ESA 4.3 to z/OS 1.8) it could matter - and just because the catalog was originally created under ESA 4.3 and still existed today doesn't mean that you could take that leap all in a single step. Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group: G-ITO mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] z/OS and OS390 expert at http://searchDataCenter.com/ateExperts/ Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 Catalog in z/OS V1R7
I'd be careful. Back around our migration to OS390 2.5, I remember some long nights and days restoring catalogs after they were touched by the new level system. If I remember right, we didn't get all the toleration ptfs on. I haven't made that mistake since. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Zelden Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 12:24 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: OS/390 Catalog in z/OS V1R7 On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 14:05:12 -0500, McKown, John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Does anyone on the list know if I can create a new catalog >> under OS390 2.4 >> and use that new catalog in z/OS V1R7 or V1R8 with no >> problem. I know I >> won't be able to use a V1R7 catalog on the old OS390 but what >> about the >> other way?? >> >> I need to upgrade a client's system > >Sure. Just don't use the IMBED or REPLICATE attribute when you do the >create. That won't keep it from working (yet). But it is good advise not to create it that way. >I have catalogs around here which were originally created on MVS >4.3! That is my HSM catalog. I am running z/OS 1.6. > AFAIK it should work. However, in your example, the fact that it was created under ESA 4.3 and is still in use under a current OS level doesn't really mean anything. There has been code in the past that changed the catalog/catindex once it was opened under the higher level. When this was the case (and ESA V4 dot something may have been one of those versions that changed it) there were toleration PTFs to allow the lower level system to share the catalog. If you were sill running a very old system and created a catalog that would then get touched by z/OS 1.8, there is a chance that any code that changed the catalog / catindex may not still be there. Mark -- -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 Catalog in z/OS V1R7
> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Zelden > Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 2:24 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: OS/390 Catalog in z/OS V1R7 > > > On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 14:05:12 -0500, McKown, John > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There has been code in the past that changed the > catalog/catindex once it > was opened under the higher level. When this was the case > (and ESA V4 dot > something may have been one of those versions that changed it) there > were toleration PTFs to allow the lower level system to share > the catalog. > If you were sill running a very old system and created a > catalog that would > then get touched by z/OS 1.8, there is a chance that any code that > changed the catalog / catindex may not still be there. > > Mark > -- True. The original post made me think that the poster wanted to create the catalog on the old system, then use it on the new. I did not get the impression that he wanted to share the catalog on both systems. Perhaps I misread his intention. It's been known to happen . -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged and/or confidential. It is for intended addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal offense. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing it. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 Catalog in z/OS V1R7
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 14:05:12 -0500, McKown, John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Does anyone on the list know if I can create a new catalog >> under OS390 2.4 >> and use that new catalog in z/OS V1R7 or V1R8 with no >> problem. I know I >> won't be able to use a V1R7 catalog on the old OS390 but what >> about the >> other way?? >> >> I need to upgrade a client's system > >Sure. Just don't use the IMBED or REPLICATE attribute when you do the >create. That won't keep it from working (yet). But it is good advise not to create it that way. >I have catalogs around here which were originally created on MVS >4.3! That is my HSM catalog. I am running z/OS 1.6. > AFAIK it should work. However, in your example, the fact that it was created under ESA 4.3 and is still in use under a current OS level doesn't really mean anything. There has been code in the past that changed the catalog/catindex once it was opened under the higher level. When this was the case (and ESA V4 dot something may have been one of those versions that changed it) there were toleration PTFs to allow the lower level system to share the catalog. If you were sill running a very old system and created a catalog that would then get touched by z/OS 1.8, there is a chance that any code that changed the catalog / catindex may not still be there. Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group: G-ITO mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] z/OS and OS390 expert at http://searchDataCenter.com/ateExperts/ Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 Catalog in z/OS V1R7
> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Baron > Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 1:57 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Subject: OS/390 Catalog in z/OS V1R7 > > > Does anyone on the list know if I can create a new catalog > under OS390 2.4 > and use that new catalog in z/OS V1R7 or V1R8 with no > problem. I know I > won't be able to use a V1R7 catalog on the old OS390 but what > about the > other way?? > > I need to upgrade a client's system Sure. Just don't use the IMBED or REPLICATE attribute when you do the create. I have catalogs around here which were originally created on MVS 4.3! That is my HSM catalog. I am running z/OS 1.6. -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged and/or confidential. It is for intended addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal offense. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing it. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 2.10 architecture level set 1 (and beyond)?
Basically, IBM tries (not always as successfully as some on this list would like) to make hardware advances well ahead of the software that requires them. For example 64 bit hardware was available well before z/OS 1.5 which requires it. The ALS for OS/390 2.10 was also supported in hardware for about 2 years before the release of 2.10. Wayne Driscoll Product Developer JME Software LLC NOTE: All opinions are strictly my own. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Schwarz, Barry A Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 1:54 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: OS/390 2.10 architecture level set 1 (and beyond)? So the "scheduled for availability" phrase applies to 2.10, not the hardware features. I guess I don't read enough announcements to appreciate the nuances of IBM's phrasing. Thanks -Original Message- From: Edward Jaffe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 11:40 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: OS/390 2.10 architecture level set 1 (and beyond)? Schwarz, Barry A wrote: > Where is the Twilight Zone music when you need it? > > The first URL describes hardware features needed for OS/390 2.10 and > says they will be available in Sept 2000. We bought our 2003-106 no > later than summer of 98 and it has been running 2.10 for several years > now. Did IBM really beat the target data by more than 2 years? > No. They were right on time. The hardware features comprising the ALS were available for many years before the Sep. 2000 availability of OS/390 R10. The ALS was supported all the way back to 9672-G2 and, as you've stated, the old MP2K machines. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 2.10 architecture level set 1 (and beyond)?
So the "scheduled for availability" phrase applies to 2.10, not the hardware features. I guess I don't read enough announcements to appreciate the nuances of IBM's phrasing. Thanks -Original Message- From: Edward Jaffe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 11:40 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: OS/390 2.10 architecture level set 1 (and beyond)? Schwarz, Barry A wrote: > Where is the Twilight Zone music when you need it? > > The first URL describes hardware features needed for OS/390 2.10 and > says they will be available in Sept 2000. We bought our 2003-106 no > later than summer of 98 and it has been running 2.10 for several years > now. Did IBM really beat the target data by more than 2 years? > No. They were right on time. The hardware features comprising the ALS were available for many years before the Sep. 2000 availability of OS/390 R10. The ALS was supported all the way back to 9672-G2 and, as you've stated, the old MP2K machines. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 2.10 architecture level set 1 (and beyond)?
Schwarz, Barry A wrote: Where is the Twilight Zone music when you need it? The first URL describes hardware features needed for OS/390 2.10 and says they will be available in Sept 2000. We bought our 2003-106 no later than summer of 98 and it has been running 2.10 for several years now. Did IBM really beat the target data by more than 2 years? No. They were right on time. The hardware features comprising the ALS were available for many years before the Sep. 2000 availability of OS/390 R10. The ALS was supported all the way back to 9672-G2 and, as you've stated, the old MP2K machines. -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 Los Angeles, CA 90045 310-338-0400 x318 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 2.10 architecture level set 1 (and beyond)?
Where is the Twilight Zone music when you need it? The first URL describes hardware features needed for OS/390 2.10 and says they will be available in Sept 2000. We bought our 2003-106 no later than summer of 98 and it has been running 2.10 for several years now. Did IBM really beat the target data by more than 2 years? -Original Message- From: Edward Jaffe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 9:04 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: OS/390 2.10 architecture level set 1 (and beyond)? Jeffrey D. Smith wrote: > Is architecture level set (ALS) 1 required for OS/390 2.10? > > What machine instructions are required for architecture level set 1, > as oppposed to ALS 0? I seem to recall that Perform Locked Operation > (PLO) is ALS 1. What are the others? > http://www.ibm.com/servers/s390/os390/plug.html > Is there a set of CVT flags for the ALS, or maybe there are bits for > individual instructions? > CVTH7703 implies ALS 1 is present. > Also, is ALS 2 the 64-bit architecture? > No. http://www.ibm.com/servers/s390/os390/plug1.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 2.10 architecture level set 1 (and beyond)?
Jeffrey D. Smith wrote: Is architecture level set (ALS) 1 required for OS/390 2.10? What machine instructions are required for architecture level set 1, as oppposed to ALS 0? I seem to recall that Perform Locked Operation (PLO) is ALS 1. What are the others? http://www.ibm.com/servers/s390/os390/plug.html Is there a set of CVT flags for the ALS, or maybe there are bits for individual instructions? CVTH7703 implies ALS 1 is present. Also, is ALS 2 the 64-bit architecture? No. http://www.ibm.com/servers/s390/os390/plug1.html Is there another ALS for the very recent instructions, like Load And Test (LT) and Load Logical Immediate (LLILF)? No. -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 Los Angeles, CA 90045 310-338-0400 x318 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: OS/390 2.10 7 z/OS 1.4 in a Sysplex
When 1.4 was still orderable, 2.10 was within N+3, and as such was a supported coexistence candidate. Given appropriate toleration levels. Can't see how the z/990 exploitation would affect things - don't recall seeing any lower level tolerations when I did it. That said, if you are planning to introduce "foreign" systems into an important 'plex, I'd be seriously looking at setting up a testplex for it, and keep it totally isolated from your important systems. Shane ... From: "Robert Luebkemann" > I have an opportunity to run 2 OS 390 2.10 systems in a sysplex of z/OS > 1.4 systems (z990 support / Enhanced Console support installed/ RSU0503 > level). There is no intent to share DASD or use any sysplex supported > availability features. Does anyone have any experience running this > configuration, or know of any specific reasons (particular maintenance / > functions) that will cause this not to work? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
