Re: SMF Record types to capture

[Roger W Suhr]

z/OS 2.5 provides for new "extended" SMF record types >255.  They have a
standard type (I forgot the number) for backward compatibility, AND an
extended  type number (4 digits).

Roger W. Suhr

suhr...@gmail.com

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of
Michael Oujesky
Sent: Sunday, July 3, 2022 13:51
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: SMF Record types to capture

The standard header is still a one byte field, so 0:255 captures them all.

At each dump/off-load, I segmented our SMF records by
category/interest-group and anticipated retention period to reduce the
processing resources and time by not having to process record types that ere
superfluous.  As an example:

* CICS 110.1.3 transaction detail and further segmented by region
grouping 9production, development, etc)
* CICS 110.1.1 dictionary records for preparation of processing the
tracnsaction detail 110.1.3 records
* CICs exception records
* CICS DOMAIN interval records
* DB2 101
* DB2 100/102
* RMF 70 and 72
* RMF device 74.1
* Security 80
* WLM 99
* Dataset 14/15/60-series
And a number of others, but this set should give you an idea of ho this
approach orked.

Michael


At 10:44 AM 7/3/2022, Lizette Koehler wrote:
>I am reviewing our SMF Setup.  We are on z/OS V2.3 going to z/OS V2.4 
>We have not reviewed or updated our SMF record types in decades We only 
>use 0:255 for our archive/collection parms Is there a new  range to 
>change to use?
>If so, what should I use?
>Any suggestions or is this still valid
>
>Thank you
>
>--
>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send 
>email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email
to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: SMF Record types to capture

[Michael Oujesky]

The standard header is still a one byte field, so 0:255 captures them all.

At each dump/off-load, I segmented our SMF records by 
category/interest-group and anticipated retention period to reduce 
the processing resources and time by not having to process record 
types that ere superfluous.  As an example:


   * CICS 110.1.3 transaction detail and further segmented by region 
grouping 9production, development, etc)
   * CICS 110.1.1 dictionary records for preparation of processing 
the tracnsaction detail 110.1.3 records

   * CICs exception records
   * CICS DOMAIN interval records
   * DB2 101
   * DB2 100/102
   * RMF 70 and 72
   * RMF device 74.1
   * Security 80
   * WLM 99
   * Dataset 14/15/60-series
And a number of others, but this set should give you an idea of ho 
this approach orked.


Michael


At 10:44 AM 7/3/2022, Lizette Koehler wrote:

I am reviewing our SMF Setup.  We are on z/OS V2.3 going to z/OS V2.4
We have not reviewed or updated our SMF record types in decades
We only use 0:255 for our archive/collection parms
Is there a new  range to change to use?
If so, what should I use?
Any suggestions or is this still valid

Thank you

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

SMF Record types to capture

[Lizette Koehler]

I am reviewing our SMF Setup.  We are on z/OS V2.3 going to z/OS V2.4

 

We have not reviewed or updated our SMF record types in decades

 

We only use 0:255 for our archive/collection parms

 

Is there a new  range to change to use?

 

If so, what should I use?

 

Any suggestions or is this still valid

 

 

Thank you 

 

 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: TIMEUSED macro

[Peter Relson]

To add to what Jim Mulder wrote,

the z/OS MVS Programming: Assembler Services Reference for TIMEUSED has this:

,LINKAGE=SYSTEM
Indicates that the linkage is by non-branch entry. Do not specify LINKAGE with 
ECT=YES. You must specify LINKAGE=SYSTEM for all other unauthorized invocations.

Peter Relson
z/OS Core Technology Design


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Ad importance of the message paradigm (Re: Secure sockets (Re: Some questions on SYSCALL

[Rony G. Flatscher]

Hi Bob,

On 02.07.2022 22:06, Bob Bridges wrote:

Rony, could you (or someone) say more about that?  The ooRexx documentation has 
a lot to say about messaging, which is a bit confusing to me because I first 
got a handle on OOP in VBA and VBSCript, which do not.


VBA and VBS would allow referring to "third party (COM) objects" which can be seen as instances of 
structures/classes. They allow for dereferencing structures/classes, refer to fields/attributes and 
procedures/functions/methods (and invoke the latter) of such structures/classes. As 
structures/classes can be nested one can use the dot to dereference further.


So VBA and VBS per se have not been object-oriented programming languages in the sense that they 
would allow for defining (nested) structures/classes that they could instantiate; neither was 
possible with VB (with the exception that Microsoft defined VB programs with forms to be classes 
that can be instantiated) where today links usually refer to/cite VB.Net which is not VB.


VB.Net on the other hand, being a citizen of Microsoft's .NET/CLR framework allows for defining 
explicitly classes. VB.Net gets compiled to the .NET bytecode CLI (a.k.a. MSIL), which also C# gets 
compiled to and other such .NET/CLR languages.



If the big idea is messaging, does VBA do that and I just didn't notice?  Or 
are the VB flavors something different that don't do messaging, or not very 
much?


VBA, VBScript, VB and VB.Net (also all other .Net/CLR languages) do not implement the message 
paradigm (System.Message refers to message queuing).


If a language implements the message paradigm then it usually uses messages as first class objects 
(FCO) sometimes making its functionality fully available to the programmer like ooRexx.


Here a small example:

   a="... tsil niaM-MBI ,olleH"
   say "1) BIF :" reverse(a)-- reverse BIF (built-in function)

   say "2) message :" a~reverse -- sending a message to the string 
value/object/instance

   strMsg="reverse"  -- define name of the message
   say "3) a~send  :" a~send(strMsg)-- send the message strMsg defines to the 
string value/object/instance

   msg=.message~new(a,"reverse")
   say "4) msg~send:" msg~send

   msg=.message~new(a,"reverse")
   msg~start
   say "5) msg~start, followed by msg~result:" msg~result

Comments:

1. normal REXX reverse BIF

2. ooRexx alternative: send the 'reverse' message to the string 
object/value/instance

3. allow the message to be sent to be stored in the variable named "strMsg" and 
sent via the
   message "send" that each value/object/instance can understand (find the 
method named like the
   received message), reason being, that the ooRexx root class implements the 
"send" method which
   can therefore be always found due to inheritance; this adds a *lot* of 
flexibility to the
   language already

4. here the ooRexx .Message class gets used to create a value/object/instance 
that defines the
   receiver (the string value/object/instance referred to by the variable 'a') 
and the message name
   'reverse); this time the message gets sent off synchronically with the message 
"send" which
   means that execution blocks until the message returns with the result; this 
adds a *lot* of
   flexibility to the language as you may see

5. here the ooRexx .Message class gets used to create a value/object/instance 
that defines the
   receiver (the string value/object/instance referred to by the variable 'a') 
and the message name
   'reverse); this time the message gets sent off *Asynch*ronically with the Message 
"start":
   ooRexx will now create a new thread and have the message lookup execute on 
another thread. In
   order to fetch the result later we just need to send the 'result' message to 
the message object;
   this adds a *lot* of flexibility to the language as you may see.

Here the output of running the above program in ooRexx 5.0:

   1) BIF : Hello, IBM-Main list ...
   2) message : Hello, IBM-Main list ...
   3) a~send  : Hello, IBM-Main list ...
   4) msg~send: Hello, IBM-Main list ...
   5) msg~start, followed by msg~result: Hello, IBM-Main list ...

There is more to this, but you see among other things how easy it is in ooRexx to have messages 
execute on separate threads if need be. You could even use the ooRexx .Alarm class to start a 
message at a later time (e.g. in five minutes or at a certain date at a certain time like at the end 
of July at 23:59) and being able to cancel it if it has not been sent yet.


---

The interesting thing is that the message paradigm allows for new, maybe more efficient problem 
solutions for certain problems. E.g. while seeing my students having difficulties when creating Java 
GUIs with awt/swing and with JavaFX, even if they were fully aware of the importance of interacting 
with the GUI objects on the GUI thread, even if they knew about techniques how to achieve that, they 
would get into problems when using larger programs with complex interaction patter

Re: Ad importance of the message paradigm (Re: Secure sockets (Re: Some questions on SYSCALL

[Seymour J Metz]

There are a lot of theological arguments about what is or is not an 
object-oriented language. The basic idea is that objects send messages to other 
objects, and that some message delay the sending object until the receiver 
sneds a response, will other messages allow the sender to run asynchronously 
with the receiving object. Methodfs are built on top of that.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Bob 
Bridges [robhbrid...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, July 2, 2022 4:06 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Ad importance of the message paradigm (Re: Secure sockets (Re: 
Some questions on SYSCALL

Rony, could you (or someone) say more about that?  The ooRexx documentation has 
a lot to say about messaging, which is a bit confusing to me because I first 
got a handle on OOP in VBA and VBSCript, which do not.  If the big idea is 
messaging, does VBA do that and I just didn't notice?  Or are the VB flavors 
something different that don't do messaging, or not very much?

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* It is in vain to say that democracy is less vain, less proud, less selfish, 
less ambitious, or less avaricious than aristocracy or monarchyWhen clear 
prospects are opened before vanity, pride, avarice, or ambition, for their easy 
gratification, it is hard for the most considerate philosophers and the most 
conscientious moralists to resist the temptation. Individuals have conquered 
themselves. Nations and large bodies of men, never.  -from "The Letters of John 
and Abigail Adams" */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Rony G. Flatscher
Sent: Saturday, July 2, 2022 15:05

Alan Kay is regarded to have coined the term "object-oriented programming 
(OOP)" in the context of his work while at PARC. He is being cited on Wikipedia:

I'm sorry that I long ago coined the term "objects" for this topic because 
it gets many people
to focus on the lesser idea. The big idea is "messaging".[8]

Cf. 
.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Ad importance of the message paradigm (Re: Secure sockets (Re: Some questions on SYSCALL

[Seymour J Metz]

Well, Alonzo Church Published The Calculi of Lambda Conversion in 1941, which 
influenced LISP; Church, Goedel and Turing all had an influence. Simula played 
a big role in the history of object-oriented languages, prior to Smalltalk.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Rupert Reynolds [rreyno...@cix.co.uk]
Sent: Sunday, July 3, 2022 6:51 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Ad importance of the message paradigm (Re: Secure sockets (Re: 
Some questions on SYSCALL

The thing about Smalltalk (and a lot of other developments) is just how old
they are. And we keep re-inventing some things. Smalltalk was remarkable in
1970-ish. Lambdas in Algol-68, but it wasn't the first I believe, and they
can be tracked back further to maths in 1932.

Great insights in the 1968 NATO conference on "Software Engineering".

TDD can be traced back to awk and further bsck than that, I reckon.

I think a lot of Alan Kay's energy is frustration that everything takes so
long!

Roops

On Sun, 3 Jul 2022, 03:47 David Crayford,  wrote:

> He wasn't too complementary about Java either. I never used Smalltalk
> but I've seen examples in the GoF Design Patterns book. Guys I've spoken
> to that used it extensively talk very fondly about it.
>
> On 3/07/2022 5:37 am, Rupert Reynolds wrote:
> > I can't remember which of Alan Kay's talks it's in, but I have a few of
> his
> > saved and one or two have him saying "the big idea is messaging" and
> > something like "whatever I had in mind, I can tell you now it wasn't C++"
> > :-)
> >
> > The late great Joe Armstrong (of Erlang fame) also quoted Alan Kay on
> this
> > at least once.
> >
> > In my opinion, a lot of language development jumped on the OO bandwagon
> > without thinking things through properly.
> >
> > Roops
> >
> > On Sat, 2 Jul 2022, 21:06 Bob Bridges,  wrote:
> >
> >> Rony, could you (or someone) say more about that?  The ooRexx
> >> documentation has a lot to say about messaging, which is a bit
> confusing to
> >> me because I first got a handle on OOP in VBA and VBSCript, which do
> not.
> >> If the big idea is messaging, does VBA do that and I just didn't notice?
> >> Or are the VB flavors something different that don't do messaging, or
> not
> >> very much?
> >>
> >> ---
> >> Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
> >>
> >> /* It is in vain to say that democracy is less vain, less proud, less
> >> selfish, less ambitious, or less avaricious than aristocracy or
> >> monarchyWhen clear prospects are opened before vanity, pride,
> avarice,
> >> or ambition, for their easy gratification, it is hard for the most
> >> considerate philosophers and the most conscientious moralists to resist
> the
> >> temptation. Individuals have conquered themselves. Nations and large
> bodies
> >> of men, never.  -from "The Letters of John and Abigail Adams" */
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On
> Behalf
> >> Of Rony G. Flatscher
> >> Sent: Saturday, July 2, 2022 15:05
> >>
> >> Alan Kay is regarded to have coined the term "object-oriented
> programming
> >> (OOP)" in the context of his work while at PARC. He is being cited on
> >> Wikipedia:
> >>
> >>  I'm sorry that I long ago coined the term "objects" for this topic
> >> because it gets many people
> >>  to focus on the lesser idea. The big idea is "messaging".[8]
> >>
> >> Cf. 
> >> .
> >>
> >> --
> >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> >> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> >>
> > --
> > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--

Re: Ad importance of the message paradigm (Re: Secure sockets (Re: Some questions on SYSCALL

[Rupert Reynolds]

Yes, perhaps the best example :-)

On Sun, 3 Jul 2022, 12:01 David Crayford,  wrote:

> IIRC Lisp was designed in 1956. That must have been ground breaking at the
> time.
>
> > On 3 Jul 2022, at 18:51, Rupert Reynolds  wrote:
> >
> > The thing about Smalltalk (and a lot of other developments) is just how
> old
> > they are. And we keep re-inventing some things. Smalltalk was remarkable
> in
> > 1970-ish. Lambdas in Algol-68, but it wasn't the first I believe, and
> they
> > can be tracked back further to maths in 1932.
> >
> > Great insights in the 1968 NATO conference on "Software Engineering".
> >
> > TDD can be traced back to awk and further bsck than that, I reckon.
> >
> > I think a lot of Alan Kay's energy is frustration that everything takes
> so
> > long!
> >
> > Roops
>
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Ad importance of the message paradigm (Re: Secure sockets (Re: Some questions on SYSCALL

[David Crayford]

IIRC Lisp was designed in 1956. That must have been ground breaking at the 
time. 

> On 3 Jul 2022, at 18:51, Rupert Reynolds  wrote:
> 
> The thing about Smalltalk (and a lot of other developments) is just how old
> they are. And we keep re-inventing some things. Smalltalk was remarkable in
> 1970-ish. Lambdas in Algol-68, but it wasn't the first I believe, and they
> can be tracked back further to maths in 1932.
> 
> Great insights in the 1968 NATO conference on "Software Engineering".
> 
> TDD can be traced back to awk and further bsck than that, I reckon.
> 
> I think a lot of Alan Kay's energy is frustration that everything takes so
> long!
> 
> Roops
> 
>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022, 03:47 David Crayford,  wrote:
>> 
>> He wasn't too complementary about Java either. I never used Smalltalk
>> but I've seen examples in the GoF Design Patterns book. Guys I've spoken
>> to that used it extensively talk very fondly about it.
>> 
>>> On 3/07/2022 5:37 am, Rupert Reynolds wrote:
>>> I can't remember which of Alan Kay's talks it's in, but I have a few of
>> his
>>> saved and one or two have him saying "the big idea is messaging" and
>>> something like "whatever I had in mind, I can tell you now it wasn't C++"
>>> :-)
>>> 
>>> The late great Joe Armstrong (of Erlang fame) also quoted Alan Kay on
>> this
>>> at least once.
>>> 
>>> In my opinion, a lot of language development jumped on the OO bandwagon
>>> without thinking things through properly.
>>> 
>>> Roops
>>> 
 On Sat, 2 Jul 2022, 21:06 Bob Bridges,  wrote:
>>> 
 Rony, could you (or someone) say more about that?  The ooRexx
 documentation has a lot to say about messaging, which is a bit
>> confusing to
 me because I first got a handle on OOP in VBA and VBSCript, which do
>> not.
 If the big idea is messaging, does VBA do that and I just didn't notice?
 Or are the VB flavors something different that don't do messaging, or
>> not
 very much?
 
 ---
 Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
 
 /* It is in vain to say that democracy is less vain, less proud, less
 selfish, less ambitious, or less avaricious than aristocracy or
 monarchyWhen clear prospects are opened before vanity, pride,
>> avarice,
 or ambition, for their easy gratification, it is hard for the most
 considerate philosophers and the most conscientious moralists to resist
>> the
 temptation. Individuals have conquered themselves. Nations and large
>> bodies
 of men, never.  -from "The Letters of John and Abigail Adams" */
 
 -Original Message-
 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On
>> Behalf
 Of Rony G. Flatscher
 Sent: Saturday, July 2, 2022 15:05
 
 Alan Kay is regarded to have coined the term "object-oriented
>> programming
 (OOP)" in the context of his work while at PARC. He is being cited on
 Wikipedia:
 
 I'm sorry that I long ago coined the term "objects" for this topic
 because it gets many people
 to focus on the lesser idea. The big idea is "messaging".[8]
 
 Cf. .
 
 --
 For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
 send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
 
>>> --
>>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>> 
>> --
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>> 
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Ad importance of the message paradigm (Re: Secure sockets (Re: Some questions on SYSCALL

[Rupert Reynolds]

The thing about Smalltalk (and a lot of other developments) is just how old
they are. And we keep re-inventing some things. Smalltalk was remarkable in
1970-ish. Lambdas in Algol-68, but it wasn't the first I believe, and they
can be tracked back further to maths in 1932.

Great insights in the 1968 NATO conference on "Software Engineering".

TDD can be traced back to awk and further bsck than that, I reckon.

I think a lot of Alan Kay's energy is frustration that everything takes so
long!

Roops

On Sun, 3 Jul 2022, 03:47 David Crayford,  wrote:

> He wasn't too complementary about Java either. I never used Smalltalk
> but I've seen examples in the GoF Design Patterns book. Guys I've spoken
> to that used it extensively talk very fondly about it.
>
> On 3/07/2022 5:37 am, Rupert Reynolds wrote:
> > I can't remember which of Alan Kay's talks it's in, but I have a few of
> his
> > saved and one or two have him saying "the big idea is messaging" and
> > something like "whatever I had in mind, I can tell you now it wasn't C++"
> > :-)
> >
> > The late great Joe Armstrong (of Erlang fame) also quoted Alan Kay on
> this
> > at least once.
> >
> > In my opinion, a lot of language development jumped on the OO bandwagon
> > without thinking things through properly.
> >
> > Roops
> >
> > On Sat, 2 Jul 2022, 21:06 Bob Bridges,  wrote:
> >
> >> Rony, could you (or someone) say more about that?  The ooRexx
> >> documentation has a lot to say about messaging, which is a bit
> confusing to
> >> me because I first got a handle on OOP in VBA and VBSCript, which do
> not.
> >> If the big idea is messaging, does VBA do that and I just didn't notice?
> >> Or are the VB flavors something different that don't do messaging, or
> not
> >> very much?
> >>
> >> ---
> >> Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
> >>
> >> /* It is in vain to say that democracy is less vain, less proud, less
> >> selfish, less ambitious, or less avaricious than aristocracy or
> >> monarchyWhen clear prospects are opened before vanity, pride,
> avarice,
> >> or ambition, for their easy gratification, it is hard for the most
> >> considerate philosophers and the most conscientious moralists to resist
> the
> >> temptation. Individuals have conquered themselves. Nations and large
> bodies
> >> of men, never.  -from "The Letters of John and Abigail Adams" */
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On
> Behalf
> >> Of Rony G. Flatscher
> >> Sent: Saturday, July 2, 2022 15:05
> >>
> >> Alan Kay is regarded to have coined the term "object-oriented
> programming
> >> (OOP)" in the context of his work while at PARC. He is being cited on
> >> Wikipedia:
> >>
> >>  I'm sorry that I long ago coined the term "objects" for this topic
> >> because it gets many people
> >>  to focus on the lesser idea. The big idea is "messaging".[8]
> >>
> >> Cf. .
> >>
> >> --
> >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> >> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> >>
> > --
> > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN