Re: Maximum virtual storage
Alan Altmark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote : Could you change to use: XAUTOLOG user STORAGE requested amount ? If it exceeds the maximum, the command will fail and the user doesn't start. Sorry, I wasn't very clear. In our case this wouldn't work. What we are actually doing is setting up a test TPF system (guest OS) to work. All the userids have a relatively small default but large maximum storage. The guy or gal setting up the TPF system logs on (into CMS) and runs an EXEC that allows them to specify the resources (including memory) that they require to run this specific instance of TPF. Once everything is validated the EXEC then defines the resources and RE-IPL's into TPF. If an invalid storage was specified at the wrong time then the user could just IPL CMS and start over - but they would have to fill in the panel again, and it is not very user friendly. I guess our case maybe a bit specific but it is an example of where a QUERY VIRTUAL STORAGE MAXIMUM might be of help. Colin Allinson Amadeus Data Processing
Re: Maximum virtual storage
On 2/2/07, Colin Allinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I guess our case maybe a bit specific but it is an example of where a QUERY VIRTUAL STORAGE MAXIMUM might be of help. Colin, I think you missed the point that was made. If you issue the DEFINE STORAGE with a outrageous silly large number that will never work, the error message tells what the maximum in the directory is. I think it's cheating and if it were me that message should not show it, but you can take advantage of it. Rob -- Rob van der Heij Velocity Software, Inc http://velocitysoftware.com/
Re: LPR printing problem
I did not use ANY filter. But I will try p. There are not very many options on the LPR command, and I don't see any one which will make a difference. Thanks for the suggestion. However, the REAL question is: why would LPR output from VSE act differently than LPR output from VM? Aren't there supposed to be standards? David Wakser -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Les Geer (607-429-3580) Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 9:09 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: LPR printing problem No, I am NOT using the RSCS command - I am using the TCP LPR command. Is there such an option for TCP? Also, since this is supposed to be controlled by the LPD, why would VM's TCPIP cause it to work differently? Well I don't know the TCP/IP LPR command as I do RSCS. I assume the problem is caused by the lack of a form-feed at the start of the print data. What filter are you using? Did you try P? Best Regards, Les Geer IBM z/VM and Linux Development
Re: SSL Server for z/VM
Chocolates!! What Chocolates? Comes with the paid support option. You have to settle for cinnamon rolls if you just mooch the free version... -- db
Re: LPR printing problem
Les: BTW, as originally posted, the LPD is set up to provide a forms-feed after the banner page - which is happening correctly when the output comes from VSE but is NOT happening when the output comes from VM! David Wakser -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Les Geer (607-429-3580) Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 9:09 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: LPR printing problem No, I am NOT using the RSCS command - I am using the TCP LPR command. Is there such an option for TCP? Also, since this is supposed to be controlled by the LPD, why would VM's TCPIP cause it to work differently? Well I don't know the TCP/IP LPR command as I do RSCS. I assume the problem is caused by the lack of a form-feed at the start of the print data. What filter are you using? Did you try P? Best Regards, Les Geer IBM z/VM and Linux Development
Re: LPR printing problem
BTW, as originally posted, the LPD is set up to provide a forms-feed after the banner page - which is happening correctly when the output comes from VSE but is NOT happening when the output comes from VM! I did see that; if you can trace I would recommend doing that to see what the difference is. Best Regards, Les Geer IBM z/VM and Linux Development
Re: LPR printing problem
How do I trace this? At the LPD or on VM? David Wakser -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Les Geer (607-429-3580) Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 8:35 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: LPR printing problem BTW, as originally posted, the LPD is set up to provide a forms-feed after the banner page - which is happening correctly when the output comes from VSE but is NOT happening when the output comes from VM! I did see that; if you can trace I would recommend doing that to see what the difference is. Best Regards, Les Geer IBM z/VM and Linux Development
Re: LPR printing problem
How do I trace this? At the LPD or on VM? If you can at the LPD to see what the difference is between VSE and VM TCP/IP LPR. Also try RSCS Best Regards, Les Geer IBM z/VM and Linux Development
Re: LPR printing problem
On Friday, 02/02/2007 at 06:38 MST, Wakser, David [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How do I trace this? At the LPD or on VM? Add the TRACE option to LPR to see what it is sending. You should see something like Queuing control line HGDLVM7 Queuing control line PALTMARKA Queuing control line JPROFILE.EXEC Queuing control line CGDLVM7.ENDICOTT.IBM.COM Queuing control line LALTMARKA Queuing control line fdfA412GDLVM7 Queuing control line UdfA412GDLVM7 Queuing control line NPROFILE.EXEC Sending command 2 argument: 109 cfA412GDLVM7 Command successfully sent You can compare this to a VSE trace. Try filter l (lowercase L). Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: LPR printing problem
Thanks, Alan. I'll try this on Sunday (I'm remote today, so it's hard to see the printout). David Wakser -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 9:24 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: LPR printing problem On Friday, 02/02/2007 at 06:38 MST, Wakser, David [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How do I trace this? At the LPD or on VM? Add the TRACE option to LPR to see what it is sending. You should see something like Queuing control line HGDLVM7 Queuing control line PALTMARKA Queuing control line JPROFILE.EXEC Queuing control line CGDLVM7.ENDICOTT.IBM.COM Queuing control line LALTMARKA Queuing control line fdfA412GDLVM7 Queuing control line UdfA412GDLVM7 Queuing control line NPROFILE.EXEC Sending command 2 argument: 109 cfA412GDLVM7 Command successfully sent You can compare this to a VSE trace. Try filter l (lowercase L). Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: Maximum virtual storage
To Rob's point, here's a console cut/paste... ---snip--- cp q v stor STORAGE = 999M M2WALTER HALINVA1; T=0.01/0.01 08:37:07 cp def stor 16e HCPDST093E Storage size requested (16E) exceeds maximum allowed on this processo r (256G). Size set to maximum allowed. --- Not sure why is says Size set to maximum allowed; nothing changed! HCPDST094E Storage exceeds allowed maximum of 16G--- this is the CP msg from which you could get the maxM2WALTER HALINVA1(00094); T=0.01/0.01 08:37:15 * vmsecure inquire storage --- this is the Hewitt-developed VM:Secure INQUIRE command STORAGE: Default= 999M Maximum= 16G --- info directly from the source directory entry.M2WALTER HALINVA1; T=0.01/0.01 08:37:23 ---snip--- Mike Walter Hewitt Associates Any opinions expressed herein are mine alone and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of Hewitt Associates. Rob van der Heij [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU 02/02/2007 02:48 AM Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Re: Maximum virtual storage On 2/2/07, Colin Allinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I guess our case maybe a bit specific but it is an example of where a QUERY VIRTUAL STORAGE MAXIMUM might be of help. Colin, I think you missed the point that was made. If you issue the DEFINE STORAGE with a outrageous silly large number that will never work, the error message tells what the maximum in the directory is. I think it's cheating and if it were me that message should not show it, but you can take advantage of it. Rob -- Rob van der Heij Velocity Software, Inc http://velocitysoftware.com/ The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents may contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited.
Re: Maximum virtual storage
On Friday, 02/02/2007 at 08:45 CST, Mike Walter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: cp def stor 16e HCPDST093E Storage size requested (16E) exceeds maximum allowed on this processo r (256G). Size set to maximum allowed. --- Not sure why is says Size set to maximum allowed; nothing changed! I suppose that should be an I or W, not an E. The request continues as though you had issued DEFINE STORAGE 256G. If your directory maximum was 256G, your DEFINE STORAGE 16E would have worked. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: Maximum virtual storage
I did try setting my max to 256G, and as you advised it did work. But it seems as if there should be two separate messages (or text variations)... If it does nothing, as it did in the case when I asked for more storage than permitted, it should say something like (with red below showing the changes): HCPDST093E Storage size requested (16E) exceeds maximum allowed on this processor (256G). Size remains unchanged. If it actually made a change (although different from the requested size: HCPDST093W Storage size requested (16E) exceeds maximum allowed on this processor (256G). Size set to maximum allowed. Is that worth my opening a PMR? I would not ask for the red coloring in the messages. (Gee, that makes me think of the old command CMS command SET REDTYPE ON!) ;-) Mike Walter Hewitt Associates Any opinions expressed herein are mine alone and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of Hewitt Associates. Alan Altmark [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU 02/02/2007 08:55 AM Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Re: Maximum virtual storage On Friday, 02/02/2007 at 08:45 CST, Mike Walter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: cp def stor 16e HCPDST093E Storage size requested (16E) exceeds maximum allowed on this processo r (256G). Size set to maximum allowed. --- Not sure why is says Size set to maximum allowed; nothing changed! I suppose that should be an I or W, not an E. The request continues as though you had issued DEFINE STORAGE 256G. If your directory maximum was 256G, your DEFINE STORAGE 16E would have worked. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents may contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited.
Re: Maximum virtual storage
On Friday, 02/02/2007 at 09:13 CST, Mike Walter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is that worth my opening a PMR? I would not ask for the red coloring in the messages. (Gee, that makes me think of the old command CMS command SET REDTYPE ON!) ;-) :-) The help for HCP093E is also a bit misleading in this cont (Pardon me. No.) (Move over. No.) (MOVE YOUR BLINKIN' ARSE! Fine!) (Thank you.) How does one measure the worth of a PMR? Good question. Have you ever noticed that there's never a good philosopher around when you need one? Opinionated IT professionals (yes, that includes sysprogs, too!) are a dime a dozen, but a good philosopher is as rare as hen's teeth. I imagine The Bard would have something to say about PMRs. As would Scott Adams. Ah, but would they say the same thing? I think not (poof!) -- C
Re: LPR printing problem
I've heard that the LPR/LPD RFC leaves a lot to be desired in terms of specificity on how things should work, so that different implementations often have inconsistencies. - Tom. At 03:40 AM 2/2/2007, you wrote: However, the REAL question is: why would LPR output from VSE act differently than LPR output from VM? Aren't there supposed to be standards? David Wakser Tom Cluster County of Sonoma Santa Rosa, CA (707) 565-3384 (Tuesdays and Wednesdays only)
Re: LPR printing problem
On Friday, 02/02/2007 at 07:36 PST, Tom Cluster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've heard that the LPR/LPD RFC leaves a lot to be desired in terms of specificity on how things should work, so that different implementations often have inconsistencies. Draw your own conclusions: ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc1179.txt Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
