Re: z/VM 5.2 on z800 with 8G of memory
On 5/24/06, Edward M. Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Could you explain this a little better. please? Oh, and have a look at what you're using expanded storage for right now. Make sure not to set MDC not to use expanded storage, but use it for paging only. With current 64-bit z/VM in larger machines, we want expanded storage to provide hierarchy for the paging algorithms. The default settings for the MDC arbiter often make a large portion of your expanded storage (as well as central) used for MDC. That's not the best use. So normally we will set a maximum or bias for MDC in central, and set the maximum for MDC in expanded at 0. If you do want to dedicate a huge part of memory to MDC, it makes no sense to do that in the form of expanded because MDC could as well use it in central and avoid the overhead of moving in and out. It's really hard to do this with rules-of-thumb and guessing. There's caveats with different level of z/VM, Linux virtual machine sizes, workload, etc. If you have numbers to look at, I will be most happy to review them with you. Rob -- Rob van der Heij Velocity Software, Inc http://velocitysoftware.com/
Re: z/VM 5.2 on z800 with 8G of memory
On 5/24/06, Bill Bitner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One of the caveats of using MDC and Xstore is whether your workload is CMS or VSE based vs. Linux. Many of the traditional Another big one I learned was that before z/VM 5.2 the code path caused the virtual machine page go under the bar even when the I/O was satisfied out of MDC. -- Rob van der Heij Velocity Software, Inc http://velocitysoftware.com/
Re: z/VM 5.2 on z800 with 8G of memory
Hello Everyone, Thank you all for the info about XSTORE, paging, MDC, and the like. I would like your opinions on what I am doing planning right now. We are running a MP3000 with 2gig total, no Xstore defined. One V=R, 2 V=F, and bunches of V=V machines. Paging is near zero but cpu is at 100%. ind AVGPROC-100% 01 MDC READS-01/SEC WRITES-01/SEC HIT RATIO-093% STORAGE-003% PAGING-/SEC STEAL-000% Q0-2(0) DORMANT-00021 Q1-0(0) E1-0(0) Q2-0(0) EXPAN-001 E2-0(0) Q3-5(0) EXPAN-001 E3-0(0) PROC -100% LIMITED-0 Ready; T=0.01/0.01 11:41:15 q mdc Minidisk cache ON for system Storage MDC min=0M max=1600M, usage=49%, bias=1.00 Xstore MDC min=0M max=0M, usage=0%, bias=1.00 Ready; T=0.01/0.01 12:01:21 We are going to a z890-160 with 8 gig. All V=R/V=F will go away. I will run those VSE machines with NOPDS, giving them the storage to match them. Total sizes for these machines will be 2799 meg (2.73 gig). So I am thinking 2 gig for xstore, 3 gig for the VSE/ESA Nopds stuff, Leaves 3 gig for z/VM. Does anyone have any other suggestion? I am really open to new and improved ideas. Ed Martin Aultman Health Foundation 330-588-4723 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ext. 40441
Re: z/VM 5.2 on z800 with 8G of memory
Sounds good to me. But, because of that silly HSA you won't actually have anything close to 8GB available, it will likely be closer to 7GB. But you're allocation idea is sound. On Wednesday 24 May 2006 11:02 am, Edward M. Martin wrote: Hello Everyone, Thank you all for the info about XSTORE, paging, MDC, and the like. I would like your opinions on what I am doing planning right now. We are running a MP3000 with 2gig total, no Xstore defined. One V=R, 2 V=F, and bunches of V=V machines. Paging is near zero but cpu is at 100%. ind AVGPROC-100% 01 MDC READS-01/SEC WRITES-01/SEC HIT RATIO-093% STORAGE-003% PAGING-/SEC STEAL-000% Q0-2(0) DORMANT-00021 Q1-0(0) E1-0(0) Q2-0(0) EXPAN-001 E2-0(0) Q3-5(0) EXPAN-001 E3-0(0) PROC -100% LIMITED-0 Ready; T=0.01/0.01 11:41:15 q mdc Minidisk cache ON for system Storage MDC min=0M max=1600M, usage=49%, bias=1.00 Xstore MDC min=0M max=0M, usage=0%, bias=1.00 Ready; T=0.01/0.01 12:01:21 We are going to a z890-160 with 8 gig. All V=R/V=F will go away. I will run those VSE machines with NOPDS, giving them the storage to match them. Total sizes for these machines will be 2799 meg (2.73 gig). So I am thinking 2 gig for xstore, 3 gig for the VSE/ESA Nopds stuff, Leaves 3 gig for z/VM. Does anyone have any other suggestion? I am really open to new and improved ideas. Ed Martin Aultman Health Foundation 330-588-4723 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ext. 40441 -- Rich Smrcina VM Assist, Inc. Main: (262)392-2026 Cell: (414)491-6001 Ans Service: (360)715-2467 rich.smrcina at vmassist.com Catch the WAVV! http://www.wavv.org WAVV 2007 - Green Bay, WI - May 18-22, 2007
Re: GIVE command on a tape drive with intervention required
I've run some traces and know why DDR is abending. If you don't want to read the technical details below, the question is: Is this an APAR'able DDR problem or user error caused by the HALT - don't do that? The sequence is as follows: 1) DDR is running and the tape drive is attached but not ready (for ease of debug I'm doing this at DDR startup, rather than at EOV). 2) DDR issues a DIAG A8 (Synchronous I/O) for the tape drive. 3) Message HCPERP2233I TAPE NOT READY, CP-OPERATOR NOTIFIED is issue d 4) I do a HALT to the rdev 5) The DIAG A8 gets a rc=13 (Permanent I/O error) 6) DDR drives it's error recovery routine CKDIAGER, then returns control to the return address stored in IOBERROR - which sends it to INOUTER. 7) The INOUTER routine determines it's a unit check and goes to UNITCHKE, which tests the sense information and thinks it's a deferred reissue. 8) So it does a BRANCH IOWAIT, which causes R12 to be loaded with the address of IOWAIT. IOWAIT loads a wait state PSW. The problem is that the code around IOWAIT uses R12 as a base register whose expected value i s STARTIO. 9) I detach the tape drive. 10) I re-attach the tape drive. This causes an I/O interrupt that satisfies the wait state PSW loaded by IOWAIT. 11) A dozen instructions later the code does a BNH to label TRCTSCH using R12 as it's base register. Because R12 has the wrong value, this is a wild branch. It deteriorates immediately with another wild branch, and executes a handful of instructions before wild branching again to an address which results in the operation exception. Brian Nielsen On Tue, 23 May 2006 12:16:03 -0500, Brian Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm running z/VM 5.2. I think it's the HALT that is ultimatly messing u p DDR. DDR abends as soon as the button on 3590 tape drive is pushed to start the tape loading, so it's probably related to I/O interrupt particulars different from what DDR is expecting. I'll be interested in seeing what you did differently or if this is the result of improved error recovery in DDR. I've even experimented with using the tape drive attached in multiuser mode, but a HALT (and more) is still required to the tape drive in order to update the operator display. End result is the same - DDR abends. Brian Nielsen On Tue, 23 May 2006 11:14:36 -0500, Huegel, Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Brian, I don't remember having any problem with DDR abending, I ran this on z/ VM 4.3 and z/VM 5.1. In my case after I (prop) detached the tape I (prop) attached it to an 'automated tape manager' that recorded the tape then unloaded it and mounted a new tape and then I (prop) attached the drive back to 'DDR'. I believ e DDR saw the new tape and continued the dump without any problem. I am still looking for the exec but I was at a different company when I wrote it, I think they still use it, I just need to find someone there that will re-share it with me. Tom -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Brian Nielsen Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 9:50 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: GIVE command on a tape drive with intervention required On Mon, 22 May 2006 17:00:05 -0500, Huegel, Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I remember doing pretty much what you are attempting to do just a coup le of years ago. The old brain cells fail me but I do remember it worked and I had to u se the 'HALT' command. I think I did a DETACH rdev (LEAVE and an ATTACHn not GIVE, but I don't know why. It may have been something with the sequence... I'll look for the code, but to be honest, I don't think I have it anymore. I was able to do a HALT, DETACH the drive from the user running DDR, an d ATTACH it to a different user. However, when I ATTACH it back to the D DR user DDR gets an operation exception. Did you encounter that? Brian Nielsen __ ella for Spam Control has removed VSE-List messages and set aside VM-List for me You can use it too - and it's FREE! http://www.ellaforspam.com = ===
TCPIP4VSE and z/VM OSAX QDIO VSWITCH
FINALLY we are licensed to run TCPIP4VSE! We are trying to get it to get to the network via a virtual NIC TYPE QDIO associated with a VSWITCH under z/VM 5.2. However, I cant get it to initialize. I did upgrade TCPIP to 1.5E on our VSE/ESA 2.62 systems. Here are some definitions: In the VM directory entry for the VSE guest: nicdef D00 type QDIO dev 3 lan system dtcvsw1 In the VSE IPL proc: ADD D00:D02,OSAX,EML (I had 1st tried it w/o the ,EML same results) In VM SYSTEM CONFIG: Define vswitch dtcvsw1 rdev b000 c000 connect controller dtcvsw1, IP vlan unaware In IPINITxx.L: DEFINE LINK,ID=VM_TCPIP,TYPE=OSAX,DEV=(D00,D01),MTU=8192, - DATAPATH=D02,IPADDR=172.30.8.53,FRAGMENT=NO,PORTNAME=UNASSIGNED (Should the IP address used here be the same as VSEs IP address?). When TCP4VSE comes up, I get: T1 0137 IPN631I Control has been passed to the TCP/IP engine T1 0137 0001: IPL605E Unable to Initialize IJBOSA, return code: 1 T1 0137 0001: IPL609E Unable to initialize OSA Express, Link: VM_TCPIP AR 0014 0P27I I UNKNWN DEV SYSXXX=D00 CCSW=06CB280E000100 CCB=00 SNS= 8200 I opened an ETR with IBM and they referred me to a couple of APARS but they do not seem applicable. Any ideas? Do the definitions look correct? I cant find the return code for IPL605E anywhere. Does anyone know what it means? (Leo?) Thanks in advance, Don Hooker
Adding Devices to z/VM
Title: Adding Devices to z/VM We recently removed an old tape silo that housed our 3490 drives. Instead, we have a standalone bank of 2 3490 drives. I updated my IODF/IOCDS on the z/OS side giving all LPAR's access to the channels and shared the devices among all LPARs. However, when I query the device on z/VM, it returns a message that the device does not exist. Is there a way to dynamically add these devices to my z/VM system? Thanks, Chuck Kreiter Lead Systems Programmer State Auto Insurance * This message was scanned by the corporate mail server for viruses and objectionable content.
Re: Adding Devices to z/VM
Title: Adding Devices to z/VM Thanks. That was the trickI needed. From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Huegel, ThomasSent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 3:33 PMTo: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDUSubject: Re: Adding Devices to z/VM try the SET RDEV command -Original Message-From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Kreiter, ChuckSent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 2:21 PMTo: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDUSubject: Adding Devices to z/VM We recently removed an old tape silo that housed our 3490 drives. Instead, we have a standalone bank of 2 3490 drives. I updated my IODF/IOCDS on the z/OS side giving all LPAR's access to the channels and shared the devices among all LPARs. However, when I query the device on z/VM, it returns a message that the device does not exist. Is there a way to dynamically add these devices to my z/VM system? Thanks, Chuck Kreiter Lead Systems Programmer State Auto Insurance * This message was scanned by the corporate mail server for viruses and objectionable content. ella for Spam Control has removed 4529 VSE-List messages and set aside 2694 VM-List for meYou can use it too - and it's FREE!www.ellaforspam.com* This message was scanned by the corporate mail server for viruses and objectionable content. * This message was scanned by the corporate mail server for viruses and objectionable content.
Re: GIVE command on a tape drive with intervention required
On Wednesday, 05/24/2006 at 01:37 EST, Brian Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've run some traces and know why DDR is abending. If you don't want to read the technical details below, the question is: Is this an APAR'able DDR problem or user error caused by the HALT - don't do that? Please open a PMR, Brian. Because you asked so nicely [he's such a *nice* boy] and you have such helpful problem determination skills, we're inclined to treat it initially as a bug. (And I'm not 100% certain, but I think it helps that the developer is also named Brian.] But I ask you, why can't everyone else include a nice detailed analysis of the problem in *their* problem descriptions? I mean, it's not like in some alien language like Java or C++! ;-) [OCO modules excluded, of course] Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: mainframe tcp/ip based session manager???
On Wednesday, 05/24/2006 at 12:31 EST, Huegel, Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Interesting, I didn't know PVMG/VSE existed. Anyone have an idea what this puppy might cost on a 700mip z/890? The price is based on MSUs, so please talk to your IBM Business Partner for numbers. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: Emulated tape/ECKD disk
On Tuesday, 05/23/2006 at 02:25 EST, Jeff Gribbin, EDS [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As you so rightly say, this is hopefully addressed by dialogue with the developers at the design / concept stage - ensuring that the problem description accurately reflects the vision of what is needed. Alas, so far it only seems to be you-and-me that're willing to get excited by this - I really expected you to start a mailstorm with this one but it seems to have failed to capture the community's imagination. We'll certainly need more opinions than just yours-and-mine if this ever gets to the, IBM asking for feedback stage! The concept isn't new to us, of course. (I've bandied it around here for several years myself.) If/when we ever get to the point of wanting to do this, we will indeed be coming to the community (or a some subset at the very least) to discuss it. It is not clear, however, than large numbers of customers would benefit from it. Would you write programmable devices? [rehetorical question..just think about it.] Certainly ISVs who want to provide new capabilities would benefit, and the IBM customers who use those products are benefitting. But that darned business case keeps coming up. I *do* recognize that a nice *RDEVICE system service is not the same thing as IBM providing SCSI tape solutions. And it's even different from changing SPXTAPE to work with V/Tape. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: This may interest some.
Leland, Could you post the corrected code somewhere? Dave. So, tell me...should I worry about this or not? Aside from this being eval software, anything in here that IBM will complain about if I put a copy on my site? (I really doubt it, but they have scary suits...) International License Agreement for Early Release of Programs Part 1 - General Terms BY DOWNLOADING, INSTALLING, COPYING, ACCESSING, OR USING THE PROGRAM YOU AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT. IF YOU ARE ACCEPTING THESE TERMS ON BEHALF OF ANOTHER PERSON OR A COMPANY OR OTHER LEGAL ENTITY, YOU REPRESENT AND WARRANT THAT YOU HAVE FULL AUTHORITY TO BIND THAT PERSON, COMPANY, OR LEGAL ENTITY TO THESE TERMS. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THESE TERMS, - DO NOT DOWNLOAD, INSTALL, COPY, ACCESS, OR USE THE PROGRAM; AND - PROMPTLY RETURN THE PROGRAM TO THE PARTY FROM WHOM YOU ACQUIRED IT. IF YOU DOWNLOADED THE PROGRAM, CONTACT THE PARTY FROM WHOM YOU ACQUIRED IT. Early Release means that the Program is not formally released or commercially available. The term does not imply that the Program will be formally released or made commercially available. IBM does not warrant that should a Program be formally released or made commercially available that it will be similar to, or compatible with, Early Release versions. IBM is International Business Machines Corporation or one of its subsidiaries. License Information (LI) is a document that provides information specific to a Program. The Program's LI is available in a file in the Program's directory, by the use of a system command, or as a booklet which accompanies the Program. The LI may also be found at http://www.ibm.com/software/sla/ . Program is the following, including the original and all whole or partial copies: 1) machine-readable instructions and data, 2) components, 3) audio-visual content (such as images, text, recordings, or pictures), 4) related licensed materials, and 5) license use documents or keys, and documentation. You and Your refer either to an individual person or to a single legal entity. This Agreement includes Part 1 - General Terms, Part 2 - Country-unique Terms (if any), and License Information and is the complete agreement between You and IBM regarding the use of the Program. It replaces any prior oral or written communications between You and IBM concerning Your use of the Program. The terms of Part 2 and License Information may replace or modify those of Part 1. 1. Entitlement License The Program is owned by IBM or an IBM supplier, and is copyrighted and licensed, not sold. IBM grants You a nonexclusive license to use the Program when You lawfully acquire it. You may 1) use the Program only for internal evaluation or testing purposes, and 2) make and install a reasonable number of copies, including a backup copy, of the Program to support such use. The terms of this license apply to each copy You make. You will reproduce all copyright notices and all other legends of ownership on each copy, or partial copy, of the Program. THE PROGRAM MAY CONTAIN A DISABLING DEVICE THAT WILL PREVENT IT FROM BEING USED AFTER THE EVALUATION PERIOD ENDS. YOU WILL NOT TAMPER WITH THIS DISABLING DEVICE OR THE PROGRAM. YOU SHOULD TAKE PRECAUTIONS TO AVOID ANY LOSS OF DATA THAT MIGHT RESULT WHEN THE PROGRAM CAN NO LONGER BE USED. You will 1) maintain a record of all copies of the Program and 2) ensure that anyone who uses the Program (accessed either locally or remotely) does so only for Your authorized use and complies with the terms of this Agreement. You may not 1) use, copy, modify or distribute the Program except as provided in this Agreement; 2) reverse assemble, reverse compile, or otherwise translate the Program except as specifically permitted by law without the possibility of contractual waiver; or 3) sublicense, rent, or lease the Program. The evaluation period begins when You agree to the terms of this Agreement and ends 1) as of the duration or date specified in the License Information, 2) when the Program automatically disables itself, or 3) when IBM makes the program commercially available. You will destroy the Program and all copies made of it within ten days of the end of the evaluation period. There is no charge for the use of Program for the duration of the evaluation period. IBM may terminate Your license if You fail to comply with the terms of this Agreement. If IBM does so, You must destroy all copies of the Program. 2. Rights In Data You assign to IBM all right, title, and interest (including ownership of copyright) in any data, suggestions, and written materials that 1) is related to Your use of the Program and 2) You provide to IBM. If IBM requires it, You will sign an appropriate document to assign such rights. Neither party will charge the other for rights in data or any work performed as a result of this Agreement. 3. No Warranty SUBJECT TO ANY STATUTORY WARRANTIES WHICH CANNOT BE EXCLUDED, IBM MAKES NO WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS EITHER EXPRESS
Re: This may interest some.
Leland, Could you post the corrected code somewhere? Dave. Get the fixed jar files at: http://www.homerow.net/files/lXimple.jar http://www.homerow.net/files/lXimpleSrc.jar But, if I'm asked to remove them, I will do so and post a patch of what needs to be changed. Really, it was nothing much. Just a missing class when you hit F12. To try it: Java -cp lXimple.jar com.ibm.ximple.XFrame Don't forget to go over to alphaworks to get the doc. Leland
Re: This may interest some.
Leland Lucious wrote: Leland, Could you post the corrected code somewhere? Dave. So, tell me...should I worry about this or not? Aside from this being eval software, anything in here that IBM will complain about if I put a copy on my site? (I really doubt it, but they have scary suits...). Leland, that license seems crystal clear to me: You may 1) use the Program only for internal evaluation or testing purposes, and 2) make and install a reasonable number of copies, including a backup copy, of the Program to support such use. The terms of this license apply to each copy You make. You will reproduce all copyright notices and all other legends of ownership on each copy, or partial copy, of the Program. You will 1) maintain a record of all copies of the Program and 2) ensure that anyone who uses the Program (accessed either locally or remotely) does so only for Your authorized use and complies with the terms of this Agreement. You may not 1) use, copy, modify or distribute the Program except as provided in this Agreement; Please post only your patches. Thanks. Regards, Alan Alan Altmark Sr. Software Engineer IBM z/VM Development
