MVMRUG Meeting - Columbus OH - Oct. 27
(Cross posted to MVMRUG, IBMVM and Linux-390 lists) Details of the next Midwest VM Regional User Group meeting have been posted to our web site at http://www.mvmrug.org/nextmtg..html. This is our 20th anniversary meeting. Terry This message and any attachments are intended for the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not forward, copy, print, use or disclose this communication to others; also please notify the sender by replying to this message, and then delete it from your system. The Timken Company / The Timken Corporation
Re: Diag A8 R15 RC of 3
What CC on the DIAG A8 ? Whats in the CSW (Channel Status Word at int) ? What's in the sense ? Ken Vance wrote: Hi, We are using DIAG A8, and we are getting a RC of 3. This does not appear to be documented. We can see a condition code of 3, but not the R15 RC of 3. Has anyone seen documentation for this RC? Table 17. DIAGNOSE Code X'A8' Return Codes in the Guest's Register 15 with CC=1 *Condition* *Code* *Return* *Code* *in* *Register* *15* *Status* 1 1 (X'01') Device not attached. *Note:* This indicates that either the device has not been logically attached, or that the physical path to the device has been lost. If the physical path to the device has been lost, then some portion of the channel program may have been executed. This is because CP may have used multiple real channel programs to perform the I/O operation. 1 2 (X'02') Device is not supported. 1 5 (X'05') Device is busy, or has an interrupt pending. If you receive a *condition code of 3*, this indicates that an unrecoverable I/O error occurred or the I/O was terminated at the user's request by entering an exigent command. If the I/O error resulted in a unit check, then sense data is stored in the sense data field and the amount of sense data stored is in the sense data count field. Return code 13 is set in the guest's register 15, indicating that a permanent I/O error occurred. Thanks, Ken Vance Amadeus -- Chris Langford, Cestrian Software: Consulting services for: VM, VSE, MVS, z/VM, z/OS, OS/2, P/3x0 etc. z/FM - A toolbox for VM MVS at http://zfm.cestrian.com Deva Woodcrafting: Furniture creation, House remodeling, Wagon restoration etc.
RSCS LPD Spooled to RDR
I want to set up an RSCS LPD that receives print and spools it to my RDR. Is this possible? Could someone send me an example of the statement for the RSCSLPD CONFIG and the PRINTERS CONFIG files? Thanks /Fran Hensler at Slippery Rock University of Pennsylvania USA for 43 years [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1.724.738.2153 Yes, Virginia, there is a Slippery Rock
Rumors of the next z/VM?
Due to some precarious applications, a customer is anxious to know now what release/version of z/VM we're migrating them to in 2007. We'll migrate them before their VM5.1 is unsupported in 9/2007. Does anyone have any good rumors about whether a new release or version of z/VM beyond VM5.2 will become available in 2007? This e-mail, including any attachments, may be confidential, privileged or otherwise legally protected. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this e-mail in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, do not disseminate, copy or otherwise use this e-mail or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail from your system.
Re: Rumors of the next z/VM?
Good luck with that as I cannot get IBM to say when RSU0602 might be available for z/VM 5.2.0! -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Romanowski, John (OFT) Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 1:47 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Rumors of the next z/VM? Due to some precarious applications, a customer is anxious to know now what release/version of z/VM we're migrating them to in 2007. We'll migrate them before their VM5.1 is unsupported in 9/2007. Does anyone have any good rumors about whether a new release or version of z/VM beyond VM5.2 will become available in 2007? This e-mail, including any attachments, may be confidential, privileged or otherwise legally protected. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this e-mail in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, do not disseminate, copy or otherwise use this e-mail or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail from your system. If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, please notify the sender, delete it and do not read, act upon, print, disclose, copy, retain or redistribute it. Click here for important additional terms relating to this e-mail. http://www.ml.com/email_terms/
Re: Rumors of the next z/VM?
You might want to take s look at Steve Wilkins' SHARE presentation: z/VM Platform Update (Session 9100) from the SHARE in Baltimore. DJ Romanowski, John (OFT) wrote: Due to some precarious applications, a customer is anxious to know now what release/version of z/VM we're migrating them to in 2007. We'll migrate them before their VM5.1 is unsupported in 9/2007. Does anyone have any good rumors about whether a new release or version of z/VM beyond VM5.2 will become available in 2007? This e-mail, including any attachments, may be confidential, privileged or otherwise legally protected. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this e-mail in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, do not disseminate, copy or otherwise use this e-mail or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail from your system.
Re: Rumors of the next z/VM?
I hear rumors that there is a significant bug in z/VM 5.2 that will be fixed in z/VM 5.3. It is another 2G line constraint having to do with page and segment tables having to be located in the underworld. Regards, Richard Schuh -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Stracka, James (GTI) Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 10:50 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Rumors of the next z/VM? Good luck with that as I cannot get IBM to say when RSU0602 might be available for z/VM 5.2.0! -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Romanowski, John (OFT) Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 1:47 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Rumors of the next z/VM? Due to some precarious applications, a customer is anxious to know now what release/version of z/VM we're migrating them to in 2007. We'll migrate them before their VM5.1 is unsupported in 9/2007. Does anyone have any good rumors about whether a new release or version of z/VM beyond VM5.2 will become available in 2007? This e-mail, including any attachments, may be confidential, privileged or otherwise legally protected. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this e-mail in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, do not disseminate, copy or otherwise use this e-mail or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail from your system. If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, please notify the sender, delete it and do not read, act upon, print, disclose, copy, retain or redistribute it. Click here for important additional terms relating to this e-mail. http://www.ml.com/email_terms/
RSCS LPD Spooled to RDR
I want to set up an RSCS LPD that receives print and spools it to my RDR. Is this possible? Could someone send me an example of the statement for the RSCSLPD CONFIG and the PRINTERS CONFIG files? Sure, you can have the print file spooled anywhere in an RSCS network, whether a user or another link. It is based on the printer queue name either specifying an entry in the LPDXMANY configuration file, or specifying a name of [EMAIL PROTECTED] or userid%nodeid with RSCS LPD would parse to the user and node to spool the file to. Best Regards, Les Geer IBM z/VM and Linux Development
Re: Rumors of the next z/VM?
On Tuesday, 09/26/2006 at 10:54 MST, Schuh, Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I hear rumors that there is a significant bug in z/VM 5.2 that will be fixed in z/VM 5.3. It is another 2G line constraint having to do with page and segment tables having to be located in the underworld. What bug? That's simply the design of CP. (Constraint Bug) Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: MIPS vs. Virtual CPUs
Do you have a real CPU to back up the 2nd virtual CPU? If not, then you are not gaining anything. The 2nd virtual CPU is being scheduled to work on the only real CPU just like every other task waiting on CPU. I believe that the overhead on VM of scheduling the 2nd CPU and the additional work done by the Turbo Dispatcher to dispatch work on multiple CPUs would cause you to see less performance. If your a UNI processor, keep the VSE at 1 cpu and raise it's share value if your trying to give it more CPU time. Mark D Pace Senior Systems Engineer Mainline Information Systems 1700 Summit Lake Drive Tallahassee, FL. 32317 Office: 850.219.5184 Fax: 888.221.9862 http://www.mainline.com This e-mail and files transmitted with it are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not one of the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you received this message in error, please immediately notify sender by e-mail, and destroy the original message. Thank You.
Re: MIPS vs. Virtual CPUs
Hey Scully, There may be a lot of confusion, but there's only one correct answer: It depends. :-) Seriously, the SHARE value in the directory (or set by command) is a function of the virtual machine, not the virtual processor. A four way with a SHARE of Relative 100 gets a relative 25 assigned to each vCPU. Thus, adding vCPUs without increasing the SHARE value will only dilute the processing power of the user. Any benefit of adding vCPUs -- as opposed to just increasing SHARE value -- occurs only if your existing vCPU is max'ing out a real CPU. Of course, adding vCPUs and increasing SHARE will only be effective if the user can actually take advantage of more than one processor simultaneously (i.e., not CMS). Marty Martin Zimelis Principal maz/Consultancy -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scully, William P Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 3:00 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: MIPS vs. Virtual CPUs All things being equal, does giving a user a second (or third) virtual CPU give them more MIPS, over time, than a user with a single virtual CPU? When I speak with experienced VMers there seems to be a distinct difference in opinion on this. Some think, yes, give me a second virtual CPU and I'll get twice the work done. Others think you'll only get twice the CPU if your CP SHARE is twice as large as the other guy. What's the REAL answer?
Can't copy a spool pack?
While the host is running I copied the host VM5.2's single SPOOL pack to the single spool pack of my guest VM5.2 system, wanting to give the guest a copy of the host's NSS's and other System Data Files (SDF). When I IPL-ed the guest it reported no spool files; it had no NSS's. I did the copy 3 times, IPL-ing after each copy, and got the same result each time: VM comes up and says no spool files; CP Q NSS reported NO NSS's each time. I used CP FLASHCOPY to do a fullpack copy the first 2 times and DDR to do the fullpack copy the third time. From past experience I expect to be able to copy the system's single spool pack and get the SDF's and lose some STD open spool files (RDR, PRT, PUNCH) that don't matter to me. Can anyone explain why the copied spool pack doesn't have usable SDF's on it? I've verified my source and destination addresses and volids, etc. I eventually gave up and moved the spool files using SPXTAPE. This e-mail, including any attachments, may be confidential, privileged or otherwise legally protected. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this e-mail in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, do not disseminate, copy or otherwise use this e-mail or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail from your system.
Re: MIPS vs. Virtual CPUs
Let me refine this question. - Two users. Similar workload. A real processor with multiple CPUs. The underlying CP has no resource constraints. CP SHARE the same for both users. The only difference is user A has one virtual processor and user B has two virtual processors. I'm not really trying to solve a problem by asking this question. Just trying to understand how CP tries to give everyone their share. I think we all expect that two users, over time, doing the same work, with the same virtual machine settings, get about the same resources from CP. I'm asking, does giving a user an extra virtual CPU imply that that user is going to get more CPU cycles, merely because of the second virtual CPU? I see Marty thinks the answer is no. That's my feeling too. Did this change at z/VM vs. VM/ESA? Or was it always this way? -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scully, William P Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 3:00 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: MIPS vs. Virtual CPUs All things being equal, does giving a user a second (or third) virtual CPU give them more MIPS, over time, than a user with a single virtual CPU? When I speak with experienced VMers there seems to be a distinct difference in opinion on this. Some think, yes, give me a second virtual CPU and I'll get twice the work done. Others think you'll only get twice the CPU if your CP SHARE is twice as large as the other guy. What's the REAL answer?
Re: Can't copy a spool pack?
You need to copy the CHECKPOINT and/or the WARM START areas too. You will more than likely have to do a FORCE start on the new system. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Romanowski, John (OFT) Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 3:23 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Can't copy a spool pack? While the host is running I copied the host VM5.2's single SPOOL pack to the single spool pack of my guest VM5.2 system, wanting to give the guest a copy of the host's NSS's and other System Data Files (SDF). When I IPL-ed the guest it reported no spool files; it had no NSS's. I did the copy 3 times, IPL-ing after each copy, and got the same result each time: VM comes up and says no spool files; CP Q NSS reported NO NSS's each time. I used CP FLASHCOPY to do a fullpack copy the first 2 times and DDR to do the fullpack copy the third time. From past experience I expect to be able to copy the system's single spool pack and get the SDF's and lose some STD open spool files (RDR, PRT, PUNCH) that don't matter to me. Can anyone explain why the copied spool pack doesn't have usable SDF's on it? I've verified my source and destination addresses and volids, etc. I eventually gave up and moved the spool files using SPXTAPE. This e-mail, including any attachments, may be confidential, privileged or otherwise legally protected. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this e-mail in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, do not disseminate, copy or otherwise use this e-mail or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail from your system. If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, please notify the sender, delete it and do not read, act upon, print, disclose, copy, retain or redistribute it. Click here for important additional terms relating to this e-mail. http://www.ml.com/email_terms/
Re: MIPS vs. Virtual CPUs
-Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scully, William P Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 3:25 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: MIPS vs. Virtual CPUs Let me refine this question. - Two users. Similar workload. A real processor with multiple CPUs. The underlying CP has no resource constraints. CP SHARE the same for both users. The only difference is user A has one virtual processor and user B has two virtual processors. I'm not really trying to solve a problem by asking this question. Just trying to understand how CP tries to give everyone their share. I think we all expect that two users, over time, doing the same work, with the same virtual machine settings, get about the same resources from CP. I'm asking, does giving a user an extra virtual CPU imply that that user is going to get more CPU cycles, merely because of the second virtual CPU? I see Marty thinks the answer is no. That's my feeling too. Did this change at z/VM vs. VM/ESA? Or was it always this way? It has been this way since VM/XA. There have been many changes around the edges (e.g., Limit Shares), but the basic scheduling algorithm remains unchanged. And this is not a feeling. This comes from reading the code. Marty
Re: Can't copy a spool pack?
Ahh, that's' what I'm forgetting. In the past I've copied the sysres and spool pack close in time and got the warmstart and checkpoint area too; not this time. Thanks. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stracka, James (GTI) Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 3:28 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Can't copy a spool pack? You need to copy the CHECKPOINT and/or the WARM START areas too. You will more than likely have to do a FORCE start on the new system. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Romanowski, John (OFT) Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 3:23 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Can't copy a spool pack? While the host is running I copied the host VM5.2's single SPOOL pack to the single spool pack of my guest VM5.2 system, wanting to give the guest a copy of the host's NSS's and other System Data Files (SDF). When I IPL-ed the guest it reported no spool files; it had no NSS's. I did the copy 3 times, IPL-ing after each copy, and got the same result each time: VM comes up and says no spool files; CP Q NSS reported NO NSS's each time. I used CP FLASHCOPY to do a fullpack copy the first 2 times and DDR to do the fullpack copy the third time. From past experience I expect to be able to copy the system's single spool pack and get the SDF's and lose some STD open spool files (RDR, PRT, PUNCH) that don't matter to me. Can anyone explain why the copied spool pack doesn't have usable SDF's on it? I've verified my source and destination addresses and volids, etc. I eventually gave up and moved the spool files using SPXTAPE. This e-mail, including any attachments, may be confidential, privileged or otherwise legally protected. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this e-mail in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, do not disseminate, copy or otherwise use this e-mail or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail from your system. If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, please notify the sender, delete it and do not read, act upon, print, disclose, copy, retain or redistribute it. Click here for important additional terms relating to this e-mail. http://www.ml.com/email_terms/
Re: Can't copy a spool pack?
As stated you'll need the WARM cylinders. Each page of warm points at up 1,022 spool files. I think it is a BAD IDEA to attempt to copy spool from a running system. Maybe it'll work if the stars are aligned ... serialization ... no updates to warm ... virtual machine not purging or creating a file ... for the NSSes why not use primitive yet effective DCSSBKUP/DCSSRSAV with a wrapper of Q NSS ALL MAP? Recreating CMS and GCS no big deal. David Stracka, James (GTI) wrote: You need to copy the CHECKPOINT and/or the WARM START areas too. You will more than likely have to do a FORCE start on the new system. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Romanowski, John (OFT) Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 3:23 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Can't copy a spool pack? While the host is running I copied the host VM5.2's single SPOOL pack to the single spool pack of my guest VM5.2 system, wanting to give the guest a copy of the host's NSS's and other System Data Files (SDF). When I IPL-ed the guest it reported no spool files; it had no NSS's. I did the copy 3 times, IPL-ing after each copy, and got the same result each time: VM comes up and says no spool files; CP Q NSS reported NO NSS's each time. I used CP FLASHCOPY to do a fullpack copy the first 2 times and DDR to do the fullpack copy the third time. From past experience I expect to be able to copy the system's single spool pack and get the SDF's and lose some STD open spool files (RDR, PRT, PUNCH) that don't matter to me. Can anyone explain why the copied spool pack doesn't have usable SDF's on it? I've verified my source and destination addresses and volids, etc. I eventually gave up and moved the spool files using SPXTAPE. This e-mail, including any attachments, may be confidential, privileged or otherwise legally protected. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this e-mail in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, do not disseminate, copy or otherwise use this e-mail or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail from your system. If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, please notify the sender, delete it and do not read, act upon, print, disclose, copy, retain or redistribute it. Click here for important additional terms relating to this e-mail. http://www.ml.com/email_terms/
VM63952 / UM31784 - z/VM v5.2 New Function PTF
Has anyone installed VM63952 and its z/VM v5.2 PTF UM31784? Does it seem reliable? Has it caused any problems? What type of processor are you running? I'm installing z/VM v5.2 and considering whether to install UM31784 because I'm interested in the PAV support and because a z9 may be in the picture next year. However, it seems to be a pretty significant (and relatively new) PTF and I'm wondering if anyone has made the leap yet? On a related subject, has anyone made use of the PAV minidisk support (w/ Linux) yet? Did it help? Any feedback? Thanks in advance, Dennis Schaffer Mutual of Omaha
Re: MIPS vs. Virtual CPUs
On 9/26/06, Marty Zimelis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Any benefit of adding vCPUs -- as opposed to just increasing SHARE value -- occurs only if your existing vCPU is max'ing out a real CPU. Unless you have a poorly designed application that can be fooled to let it think it has two CPU's and thus can afford to service users in addition to doing its background work ;-) -- Rob van der Heij Velocity Software, Inc http://velocitysoftware.com/
Re: MIPS vs. Virtual CPUs
On Tuesday, 09/26/2006 at 03:25 AST, Scully, William P [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let me refine this question. - Two users. Similar workload. A real processor with multiple CPUs. The underlying CP has no resource constraints. CP SHARE the same for both users. The only difference is user A has one virtual processor and user B has two virtual processors. I'm not really trying to solve a problem by asking this question. Just trying to understand how CP tries to give everyone their share. I think we all expect that two users, over time, doing the same work, with the same virtual machine settings, get about the same resources from CP. I'm asking, does giving a user an extra virtual CPU imply that that user is going to get more CPU cycles, merely because of the second virtual CPU? No. If the virtual machine cannot make use of the 2nd CPU it will, in fact, only get up to *half* of the CPU resources you allocated to it. When you add virtual CPUs, you enable the virtual machine to overlap more operations and run multiple threads concurrently. This can give the *appearance* of more horsepower but is really just loosening the bottleneck of access to a CPU. The virtual machine gets more done in the same unit of wall clock time. If the virtual machine spends most of its time waiting for humans or devices, then nothing will help since the CPU instructions aren't the limiting resource. I see Marty thinks the answer is no. That's my feeling too. Did this change at z/VM vs. VM/ESA? Or was it always this way? It's been this way forever. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: Diag A8 R15 RC of 3
Ken, Can you tell us the level of CP where this happens, and the associated condition code? I've just spent an hour or so poring over the 5.2 source code for diag A8, and I can't see any way return code 3 can happen. Ray Mansell Ken Vance wrote: Hi, We are using DIAG A8, and we are getting a RC of 3. This does not appear to be documented. We can see a condition code of 3, but not the R15 RC of 3.
Re: Rumors of the next z/VM?
On Tuesday, 09/26/2006 at 01:26 EST, Dennis Schaffer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I attended that session and Steve's presentation didn't address anything beyond v5.2 and follow-on new function APARs. However, I did ask Steve at the end of the session, without requesting details, whether a new release of z/VM would be announced by the end of 2006 and I believe he said yes. The problem with unannounced products is that they are ... uh ... unannounced. That means anything we say or imply, or that you infer, is, by definition, a forward-looking statement and subject to change. If you want to prognosticate about the timing of the next z/VM release, start by looking at history and go from there. http://www.vm.ibm.com/techinfo/lpmigr/vmleos.html is a nice place to start. It says that the typical interval between releases is 12-24 months, with 15-18 months being the mean, and that the life of a release is nominally 3 years. There's enough deviation in the pattern, however, to make your crystal ball hazy. Oh, and before I forget, z/VM 4.4 goes end-of-service in 4 more days! Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Multiple HOSTS LOCAL files to match multiple TCPIP files?
I'm trying to configure my TCP/IP virtual machines so that when they're restored to our DR environment they will work correctly without any changes. I have multiple TCPIP files, one for each CPU, because the selection of the filename to be used is based on the nodeid from the SYSTEM NETID file, with PROFILE TCPIP being used if there is no match. However, that leaves the HOSTS LOCAL file. I can't find a similar way to automate the selection of this file (as well as its two generated files). Perhaps a better question to ask is this: Do I really need to worry about the HOSTS LOCAL file? We only use VM TCP/IP for TN3270 and FTP, and both seem to work perfectly well even if the HOSTS LOCAL file is for the wrong IP stack. Our HOSTS LOCAL files contain only a single HOST and a single GATEWAY statement. When I restore my production system to my DR system, TN3270 and FTP work fine on the DR system even though the HOSTS LOCAL file contains entries for the production system. - Tom. Tom Cluster County of Sonoma Santa Rosa, CA (707) 565-3384 (Tuesdays and Wednesdays only)
Re: Can't copy a spool pack?
David--That's exactly what you cannot do with DCSSBKUP/.RSAV is copy NSS's. That's one of the two major short comings with those utilities with the other being, IMHO, the fact that the restored DCSS's do not retain the original spool file time/date stamp. I suspect, tho, that you really just meant your posting as, what my brother would say, a gullibility test. David Kreuter wrote: As stated you'll need the WARM cylinders. Each page of warm points at up 1,022 spool files. I think it is a BAD IDEA to attempt to copy spool from a running system. Maybe it'll work if the stars are aligned ... serialization ... no updates to warm ... virtual machine not purging or creating a file ... for the NSSes why not use primitive yet effective DCSSBKUP/DCSSRSAV with a wrapper of Q NSS ALL MAP? Recreating CMS and GCS no big deal. David -- Jim Bohnsack Cornell University (607) 255-1760 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Diag A8 R15 RC of 3
Hi, We are using DIAG A8, and we are getting a RC of 3. This does not appear to be documented. We can see a condition code of 3, but not the R15 RC of 3. Has anyone seen documentation for this RC? Table 17. DIAGNOSE Code X'A8' Return Codes in the Guest's Register 15 with CC=1 Condition Code Return Code in Register 15 Status 1 1 (X'01') Device not attached. Note: This indicates that either the device has not been logically attached, or that the physical path to the device has been lost. If the physical path to the device has been lost, then some portion of the channel program may have been executed. This is because CP may have used multiple real channel programs to perform the I/O operation. 1 2 (X'02') Device is not supported. 1 5 (X'05') Device is busy, or has an interrupt pending. If you receive a condition code of 3, this indicates that an unrecoverable I/O error occurred or the I/O was terminated at the user's request by entering an exigent command. If the I/O error resulted in a unit check, then sense data is stored in the sense data field and the amount of sense data stored is in the sense data count field. Return code 13 is set in the guest's register 15, indicating that a permanent I/O error occurred. Thanks, Ken Vance Amadeus
MIPS vs. Virtual CPUs
All things being equal, does giving a user a second (or third) virtual CPU give them more MIPS, over time, than a user with a single virtual CPU? When I speak with experienced VMers there seems to be a distinct difference in opinion on this. Some think, yes, give me a second virtual CPU and I'll get twice the work done. Others think you'll only get twice the CPU if your CP SHARE is twice as large as the other guy. What's the REAL answer?
Re: Multiple HOSTS LOCAL files to match multiple TCPIP files?
Hey, Tom, hope all is well. We don't use one - if that helps. Everything points to DNS server that is defined in TCPIP DATA file. Marcy Cortes This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Cluster Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 6:37 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: [IBMVM] Multiple HOSTS LOCAL files to match multiple TCPIP files? I'm trying to configure my TCP/IP virtual machines so that when they're restored to our DR environment they will work correctly without any changes. I have multiple TCPIP files, one for each CPU, because the selection of the filename to be used is based on the nodeid from the SYSTEM NETID file, with PROFILE TCPIP being used if there is no match. However, that leaves the HOSTS LOCAL file. I can't find a similar way to automate the selection of this file (as well as its two generated files). Perhaps a better question to ask is this: Do I really need to worry about the HOSTS LOCAL file? We only use VM TCP/IP for TN3270 and FTP, and both seem to work perfectly well even if the HOSTS LOCAL file is for the wrong IP stack. Our HOSTS LOCAL files contain only a single HOST and a single GATEWAY statement. When I restore my production system to my DR system, TN3270 and FTP work fine on the DR system even though the HOSTS LOCAL file contains entries for the production system. - Tom. Tom Cluster County of Sonoma Santa Rosa, CA (707) 565-3384 (Tuesdays and Wednesdays only)
Re: Multiple HOSTS LOCAL files to match multiple TCPIP files?
On Tuesday, 09/26/2006 at 06:36 MST, Tom Cluster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do I really need to worry about the HOSTS LOCAL file? HOSTS LOCAL Company are deprecated and have been replaced by ETC HOSTS which - supports both IPv4 and IPv6 - doesn't require compiling with MAKESITE Name resolution is performed according to the DOMAINLOOKUP statement in TCPIP DATA. The default is DNS only; the host files are ignored. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
