[no subject]
UNREGISTER [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lee Pretorius IT Specialist IBM S.A. (Pty) Ltd Private Bag X9907 Sandton 2146 (W) 011-302-8020 (C) 082-570-4204 E-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: CSE and VMSERVx
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 6:42 PM, Marcy Cortes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Please check out apar VM6 if you are diving deep into ISFC. I'd > feel better if you did :) In a recent conversation I claimed that ISFC has always had stability problems when building a mesh network. We've always been very careful to design active links such that only one new path is found when a system goes down. Operating procedures should cover activation of additional links depending on the duration of the outage. Alan denied all knowledge and asked for a PMR; good to see work is already done here... Rob -- Rob van der Heij Velocity Software http://velocitysoftware.com/
Re: SPOOL/PAGE and cylinder zero
On Wednesday, 08/27/2008 at 10:34 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I have always thought that CP handles properly SPOOL and PAGE areas starting on > cylinder zero. It would be a shot on its own foot if CP would destroy the VOLID > and the allocation map. However, someone is stating that SPOOL and PAGE MUST > NOT be allocated on cylinder zero, I wonder if someone can positively answer > this question and point to any documentation that may exist about this. Look in the archives of this listserver and you will find z/VM Development stating that the volume label is safe from CP, even if cyl zero is allocated as page or spool. >From a system management point of view, however, and for your sanity's sake, however, I suggest that cylinder zero SHOULD always be allocated as PERM. Adding one additional cylinder will not help the system in any meaningful way and only serves to create controversy and risk. So, "someone" is wrong from a technology perspective, but right in terms of Best Practice. BTW, CP will happily hand out cylinder 0 to a guest if it is marked as T-disk. Dumb, perhaps, but true. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: IUCV - What's wrong with this picture?
On Wednesday, 08/27/2008 at 10:04 EDT, "John P. Baker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For example, let's say that we create an *NOTIFY system service. > > A virtual machine, appropriately authorized is allowed to connect to the > *NOTIFY service, and by sending properly constructed messages, register its > desire to begin receiving, or to discontinue receiving, specific types of > event notifications. Certainly, LOGON and LOGOFF notifications should be > available. Other event types come to mind, such as varying a central > processor online or offline, or varying a device online or offline. I feel > certain that others here can recommend other event types that should be > monitorable. > > Then, whenever an event of the requested type occurs, all registered > listeners would receive the notification on the *NOTIFY path. > > This would at least provide a mechanism by which one of your requirements > could be addressed. Gary's requirement to know when a guest has logged off, re-IPLed or otherwise has been reset is handled by IUCV itself. BTW, z/VM already has a *VMEVENT system service that will tell you about all virtual machines (in general) and their state changes. Over time, more system-level events will be added. In the meantime, CPU changes would be in *MONITOR. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
SPOOL/PAGE and cylinder zero
I have always thought that CP handles properly SPOOL and PAGE areas starting on cylinder zero. It would be a shot on its own foot if CP would destroy the VOLID and the allocation map. However, someone is stating that SPOOL and PAGE MUST NOT be allocated on cylinder zero, I wonder if someone can positively answer this question and point to any documentation that may exist about this. Francisco A. S. Grossi
Re: IUCV - What's wrong with this picture?
Gary, I suggest that your point about the server needing to know immediately about a client logoff is a good argument for a system-supplied notification service, similar to ENF on z/OS. For example, let's say that we create an *NOTIFY system service. A virtual machine, appropriately authorized is allowed to connect to the *NOTIFY service, and by sending properly constructed messages, register its desire to begin receiving, or to discontinue receiving, specific types of event notifications. Certainly, LOGON and LOGOFF notifications should be available. Other event types come to mind, such as varying a central processor online or offline, or varying a device online or offline. I feel certain that others here can recommend other event types that should be monitorable. Then, whenever an event of the requested type occurs, all registered listeners would receive the notification on the *NOTIFY path. This would at least provide a mechanism by which one of your requirements could be addressed. John P. Baker -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gary M. Dennis Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 11:59 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: IUCV - What's wrong with this picture? Thanks for the response on the IUCV questions. I have included below item 6 from the thread origin and a snippet from John Baker's response. Maybe I should have placed more emphasis on item 6. The server machine is going to be updating the buffer areas in all the connected client machines. Therefore, he server machine needs to know immediately when one of the guests is quiescent or logged off. IUCV will inform the server when a connection is severed. The guest machines can set in indicator in an area monitored by the server to indicate that they have begun a normal closedown *but* the "fall-off_the page" case is when a machine is logged off and the server attempts to access the buffers in a machine that no longer exists. John made a good argument for temporary IUCV connections. In that case the best way to make a determination on the active state a diagnose that issues a query command for the user in question? --. .- .-. -.-- Gary Dennis
Re: Lpar Vs VM
If the LPARS are not all on one box, it is the case that there is one charge based on the total number of engines. The same applies to running as guests of VM. As long as you stay within the footprint of the machine for which you bought the license, you can run multiple copies because you have licensed according too the total capacity. One point mentioned by Peter Webb, but maybe not emphasized enough, is that the hardware costs may be considerably lower if you can virtualized resources. For example, if you need to connect the guests using CTCAs,. you can define VCTCAs. Similarly, you may be able to save on OSA cards by using VSWITCH. Then there are things like minidisks and the ability to use the same memory for more than one guest. With LPARs, the storage needed for the z/OS or other system has to sit idle if the LPAR is not up and running. Even with z/VM 5.4 on a z10, you cannot take storage away from a running guest. You have do deactivate the LPAR and reconfigure its image to do that. (Alan, If Reed doesn't monitor the list, please tell him I brought it up again. Try to embarrass me, will he?) Boy does VM/BSEPP churn up memories. Today, the CP overhead is way smaller than it was in those days, so look at more modern systems before making any decision based on overhead. Running lots of LPARs has its overhead, too. The difference might not be as bad as you think. Regards, Richard Schuh From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ward, Mike S Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 3:08 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Lpar Vs VM Thanks for the reply. Yours seems to be the best so far. I wanted to try and figure the cost of setting up multiple z/OS machines in a fairly quick manner. As I remember the old VM/BSEPP you could run as many operating systems as you wanted under VM and be charged for only 1 copy of the operating system. That doesn't seem to be the case using LPAR's . It seems that we get billed for running z/os on Lpar 1 and Lpar 2. They gather the amount from the SMF records that are produced. That's why I was wondering if I would get billed for multiple z/os virtual machines under z/VM. From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 12:49 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Lpar Vs VM I can't speak to z/OS software charges, but for VSE, we pay for only one license for multiple instances running under z/VM. And we pay the VSE license for the total capacity of the machine. I don't think you can say that VM is better than LPAR as a general statement. In some cases VM definitely is better, and in others, LPAR is the winner. Do you need to create new z/OS instances on short notice for a brief testing period? z/VM is a clear winner. Do you need every last CPU cycle for your production z/OS? LPAR is better here. Do you need to frequently shift resources around between your LPARs? z/VM might make your life easier. Is your hardware environment fairly static? Could be better to stay with LPARs. Are you thinking of running Linux on your mainframe? You will almost certainly want to run z/VM then. z/VM brings you unmatched flexibility, but at a cost of some CPU cycles and money. If you have large numbers of LPARs though, it can reduce the complexity of your configuration, and allow better sharing of your resources. Perhaps if you expand on what you hope to achieve, we can provide more targeted responses. Peter -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ward, Mike S Sent: August 27, 2008 11:31 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Lpar Vs VM Hello all, I have a question. When we set up and lpar with an operating environment such as MVS, we get software charges for both lpars from IBM. Third party vendors don't seem to care if it's on the same machine (Most don't) since they charge for the full mip rate of the machine regardless of whether it's utilized or not. Long ago, about 30 years I had a VM shop and we ran multiple instances of OS/VS1, MVS, etc, but were only charged for on license of software product. Is this still the case? Is it better to use VM instead of LPAR? All comments appreciated. Thanks. == This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system
Re: DDR'ing 3390 DASD To Remote Location
If the VM stack and the linux stack were both connected to a VSWITCH, would monitoring function in the physical switch see that clear text data is being transfered from VM to linux? /Tom Kern Alan Altmark wrote: > On Wednesday, 08/27/2008 at 06:20 EDT, Michael Coffin > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Oh Drat. :( >> >> We have a mandate that ALL FTP must be secure FTP, and it's going to be >> enforced very (VERY) soon. We may have to continue doing the darned >> intermediate file method in order to use the CMS FTP client. :( > > I would use a Linux FTP proxy running next door to TCPIP that can connect > with ftps. Think of the proxy as 1/2 of the FTP client. Taken together > they constitute the "originating host". The network interface on Linux > and the network interface on VM TCP/IP could be thought of as two > interfaces on the same IP stack. The phrase "FTP proxy" need not come up > in any conversation. > > Alan Altmark > z/VM Development > IBM Endicott >
Re: DDR'ing 3390 DASD To Remote Location
On Wednesday, 08/27/2008 at 06:20 EDT, Michael Coffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Oh Drat. :( > > We have a mandate that ALL FTP must be secure FTP, and it's going to be > enforced very (VERY) soon. We may have to continue doing the darned > intermediate file method in order to use the CMS FTP client. :( I would use a Linux FTP proxy running next door to TCPIP that can connect with ftps. Think of the proxy as 1/2 of the FTP client. Taken together they constitute the "originating host". The network interface on Linux and the network interface on VM TCP/IP could be thought of as two interfaces on the same IP stack. The phrase "FTP proxy" need not come up in any conversation. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: Lpar Vs VM
On Wednesday, 08/27/2008 at 06:11 EDT, Jack Woehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Mark Post wrote: > > He's already been appointed, but with the far more pedestrian title of Sir > Alan, Lord of the Protocols. > > > I thought it was Lord VOLDmort. Oh, now THAT is going to cost you. One of us is a Druid with knowledge of the Old Ways and the Autumnal Equinox is just around the corner Alan & Co.
Re: DDR'ing 3390 DASD To Remote Location
Oh Drat. :( We have a mandate that ALL FTP must be secure FTP, and it's going to be enforced very (VERY) soon. We may have to continue doing the darned intermediate file method in order to use the CMS FTP client. :( -Mike -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 5:10 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: DDR'ing 3390 DASD To Remote Location On Wednesday, 08/20/2008 at 03:20 EDT, Michael Coffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm not in front of a VM terminal, so forgive me is this is documented > - but is secure FTP supported? I don't recall seeing a parm for it > (doesn't mean it's not there and I didn't see it). :) Not in the FTPPUT and FTPGET stages directly, no, as they don't use the CMS FTP client to do their work. The APIs that provide secure ftp are not available to REXX and C sockets. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: Lpar Vs VM
Thanks for the reply. Yours seems to be the best so far. I wanted to try and figure the cost of setting up multiple z/OS machines in a fairly quick manner. As I remember the old VM/BSEPP you could run as many operating systems as you wanted under VM and be charged for only 1 copy of the operating system. That doesn’t seem to be the case using LPAR’s . It seems that we get billed for running z/os on Lpar 1 and Lpar 2. They gather the amount from the SMF records that are produced. That’s why I was wondering if I would get billed for multiple z/os virtual machines under z/VM. From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 12:49 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Lpar Vs VM I can’t speak to z/OS software charges, but for VSE, we pay for only one license for multiple instances running under z/VM. And we pay the VSE license for the total capacity of the machine. I don’t think you can say that VM is better than LPAR as a general statement. In some cases VM definitely is better, and in others, LPAR is the winner. Do you need to create new z/OS instances on short notice for a brief testing period? z/VM is a clear winner. Do you need every last CPU cycle for your production z/OS? LPAR is better here. Do you need to frequently shift resources around between your LPARs? z/VM might make your life easier. Is your hardware environment fairly static? Could be better to stay with LPARs. Are you thinking of running Linux on your mainframe? You will almost certainly want to run z/VM then. z/VM brings you unmatched flexibility, but at a cost of some CPU cycles and money. If you have large numbers of LPARs though, it can reduce the complexity of your configuration, and allow better sharing of your resources. Perhaps if you expand on what you hope to achieve, we can provide more targeted responses. Peter -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ward, Mike S Sent: August 27, 2008 11:31 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Lpar Vs VM Hello all, I have a question. When we set up and lpar with an operating environment such as MVS, we get software charges for both lpars from IBM. Third party vendors don’t seem to care if it’s on the same machine (Most don’t) since they charge for the full mip rate of the machine regardless of whether it’s utilized or not. Long ago, about 30 years I had a VM shop and we ran multiple instances of OS/VS1, MVS, etc, but were only charged for on license of software product. Is this still the case? Is it better to use VM instead of LPAR? All comments appreciated. Thanks. == This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review retransmission dissemination or other use of or taking any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient or delegate is strictly prohibited. If you received this in error please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. The integrity and security of this message cannot be guaranteed on the Internet. The sender accepts no liability for the content of this e-mail or for the consequences of any actions taken on the basis of information provided. The recipient should check this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses. The sender accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail. This disclaimer is property of the TTC and must not be altered or circumvented in any manner. == This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notif
Re: Lpar Vs VM
Mark Post wrote: He's already been appointed, but with the far more pedestrian title of Sir Alan, Lord of the Protocols. I thought it was Lord VOLDmort. -- Jack J. Woehr# "Self-delusion is http://www.well.com/~jax # half the battle!" http://www.softwoehr.com # - Zippy the Pinhead
Re: Lpar Vs VM
Well, you could bestow a different title on Chuckie or one of the other alter egos. Just think, he would be able to accumulate 8 titles. Regards, Richard Schuh From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Walter Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 2:54 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Lpar Vs VM Raymond, Were it not for the fact that Sir Alan, Lord of the Protocols was benighted on 21 Aug 2002, that would be an excellent suggestion. Yet given the alternate, and apparently growing, list of personalities perhaps one or more additional titles may be considered on z/VM's 40th birthday in 2012 (the next knighting date). Mike Walter Sir Mike the Prestidigitator (also of 2002) Hewitt Associates "Raymond Noal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "The IBM z/VM Operating System" 08/27/2008 04:45 PM Please respond to "The IBM z/VM Operating System" To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Re: Lpar Vs VM Fellow Listers, Based on the accurate and authoritative evidence provided in this forwarded e-mail, I would like to recommend that Alan Altmark be granted the most honorable and austere membership to the Knights of the z/VM Roundtable and from this day forward be recognized as "Sir MVP" (Multiple Virtual Personalities). All Ye in favour say AYE !!! ;-) HITACHI DATA SYSTEMS Raymond E. Noal Senior Technical Engineer Office: (408) 970 - 7978 -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 2:25 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Lpar Vs VM On Wednesday, 08/27/2008 at 03:43 EDT, "Schuh, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alan, > > How many alter egos do you have. First Chuckie, and now Br'er Rabbit. Seven, S!!! but we have a funny feeling that the only way we know there are seven is because there are actually eight of us. We feel like we're being WHAT WAS THAT? watched I DON'T KNOW. We could be wrong, DID YOU SEE IT? of course, but NO we have a strong system of checks SHUT UP - HE'S TYPING and balances. They're usually quiet, but I seem restless UH OH today for some reason. DAMN, HE HEARD US! HE KNOWS WE'RE HERE! EVERYBODY RUN!! The Usual Suspects 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. All messages sent to and from this e-mail address may be monitored as permitted by applicable law and regulations to ensure compliance with our internal policies and to protect our business. E-mails are not secure and cannot be guaranteed to be error free as they can be intercepted, amended, lost or destroyed, or contain viruses. You are deemed to have accepted these risks if you communicate with us by e-mail.
Re: Lpar Vs VM
Too bad Token Rings died. Sir Alan, Lord of the Rings has a certain ring to it. (sorry for the repeated puns, but not too much). Mike Walter "Mark Post" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "The IBM z/VM Operating System" 08/27/2008 04:50 PM Please respond to "The IBM z/VM Operating System" To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Re: Lpar Vs VM >>> On 8/27/2008 at 5:45 PM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Raymond Noal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Fellow Listers, > > Based on the accurate and authoritative evidence provided in this forwarded > e-mail, I would like to recommend that Alan Altmark be granted the most > honorable and austere membership to the Knights of the z/VM Roundtable and > from this day forward be recognized as "Sir MVP" (Multiple Virtual > Personalities). He's already been appointed, but with the far more pedestrian title of Sir Alan, Lord of the Protocols. Mark Post 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. All messages sent to and from this e-mail address may be monitored as permitted by applicable law and regulations to ensure compliance with our internal policies and to protect our business. E-mails are not secure and cannot be guaranteed to be error free as they can be intercepted, amended, lost or destroyed, or contain viruses. You are deemed to have accepted these risks if you communicate with us by e-mail.
Re: Lpar Vs VM
...although he likes to throw his subtitle 'security weenie' at us once in a while... :) Mark Post wrote: He's already been appointed, but with the far more pedestrian title of Sir Alan, Lord of the Protocols. Mark Post -- Rich Smrcina VM Assist, Inc. Phone: 414-491-6001 Ans Service: 360-715-2467 rich.smrcina at vmassist.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/richsmrcina Catch the WAVV! http://www.wavv.org WAVV 2009 - Orlando, FL - May 15-19, 2009
Re: Lpar Vs VM
Raymond, Were it not for the fact that Sir Alan, Lord of the Protocols was benighted on 21 Aug 2002, that would be an excellent suggestion. Yet given the alternate, and apparently growing, list of personalities perhaps one or more additional titles may be considered on z/VM's 40th birthday in 2012 (the next knighting date). Mike Walter Sir Mike the Prestidigitator (also of 2002) Hewitt Associates "Raymond Noal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "The IBM z/VM Operating System" 08/27/2008 04:45 PM Please respond to "The IBM z/VM Operating System" To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Re: Lpar Vs VM Fellow Listers, Based on the accurate and authoritative evidence provided in this forwarded e-mail, I would like to recommend that Alan Altmark be granted the most honorable and austere membership to the Knights of the z/VM Roundtable and from this day forward be recognized as "Sir MVP" (Multiple Virtual Personalities). All Ye in favour say AYE !!! ;-) HITACHI DATA SYSTEMS Raymond E. Noal Senior Technical Engineer Office: (408) 970 - 7978 -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 2:25 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Lpar Vs VM On Wednesday, 08/27/2008 at 03:43 EDT, "Schuh, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alan, > > How many alter egos do you have. First Chuckie, and now Br'er Rabbit. Seven, S!!! but we have a funny feeling that the only way we know there are seven is because there are actually eight of us. We feel like we're being WHAT WAS THAT? watched I DON'T KNOW. We could be wrong, DID YOU SEE IT? of course, but NO we have a strong system of checks SHUT UP - HE'S TYPING and balances. They're usually quiet, but I seem restless UH OH today for some reason. DAMN, HE HEARD US! HE KNOWS WE'RE HERE! EVERYBODY RUN!! The Usual Suspects 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. All messages sent to and from this e-mail address may be monitored as permitted by applicable law and regulations to ensure compliance with our internal policies and to protect our business. E-mails are not secure and cannot be guaranteed to be error free as they can be intercepted, amended, lost or destroyed, or contain viruses. You are deemed to have accepted these risks if you communicate with us by e-mail.
Re: Lpar Vs VM
>>> On 8/27/2008 at 5:45 PM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Raymond Noal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Fellow Listers, > > Based on the accurate and authoritative evidence provided in this forwarded > e-mail, I would like to recommend that Alan Altmark be granted the most > honorable and austere membership to the Knights of the z/VM Roundtable and > from this day forward be recognized as "Sir MVP" (Multiple Virtual > Personalities). He's already been appointed, but with the far more pedestrian title of Sir Alan, Lord of the Protocols. Mark Post
Re: Lpar Vs VM
Fellow Listers, Based on the accurate and authoritative evidence provided in this forwarded e-mail, I would like to recommend that Alan Altmark be granted the most honorable and austere membership to the Knights of the z/VM Roundtable and from this day forward be recognized as "Sir MVP" (Multiple Virtual Personalities). All Ye in favour say AYE !!! ;-) HITACHI DATA SYSTEMS Raymond E. Noal Senior Technical Engineer Office: (408) 970 - 7978 -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 2:25 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Lpar Vs VM On Wednesday, 08/27/2008 at 03:43 EDT, "Schuh, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alan, > > How many alter egos do you have. First Chuckie, and now Br'er Rabbit. Seven, S!!! but we have a funny feeling that the only way we know there are seven is because there are actually eight of us. We feel like we're being WHAT WAS THAT? watched I DON'T KNOW. We could be wrong, DID YOU SEE IT? of course, but NO we have a strong system of checks SHUT UP - HE'S TYPING and balances. They're usually quiet, but I seem restless UH OH today for some reason. DAMN, HE HEARD US! HE KNOWS WE'RE HERE! EVERYBODY RUN!! The Usual Suspects z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: Lpar Vs VM
I was going to make a comment about Sybil, it seems you're all well on your way... :) Alan Altmark wrote: On Wednesday, 08/27/2008 at 03:43 EDT, "Schuh, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Alan, How many alter egos do you have. First Chuckie, and now Br'er Rabbit. Seven, S!!! but we have a funny feeling that the only way we know there are seven is because there are actually eight of us. We feel like we're being WHAT WAS THAT? watched I DON'T KNOW. We could be wrong, DID YOU SEE IT? of course, but NO we have a strong system of checks SHUT UP - HE'S TYPING and balances. They're usually quiet, but I seem restless UH OH today for some reason. DAMN, HE HEARD US! HE KNOWS WE'RE HERE! EVERYBODY RUN!! The Usual Suspects z/VM Development IBM Endicott -- Rich Smrcina VM Assist, Inc. Phone: 414-491-6001 Ans Service: 360-715-2467 rich.smrcina at vmassist.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/richsmrcina Catch the WAVV! http://www.wavv.org WAVV 2009 - Orlando, FL - May 15-19, 2009
Re: Lpar Vs VM
On Wednesday, 08/27/2008 at 03:43 EDT, "Schuh, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alan, > > How many alter egos do you have. First Chuckie, and now Br'er Rabbit. Seven, S!!! but we have a funny feeling that the only way we know there are seven is because there are actually eight of us. We feel like we're being WHAT WAS THAT? watched I DON'T KNOW. We could be wrong, DID YOU SEE IT? of course, but NO we have a strong system of checks SHUT UP - HE'S TYPING and balances. They're usually quiet, but I seem restless UH OH today for some reason. DAMN, HE HEARD US! HE KNOWS WE'RE HERE! EVERYBODY RUN!! The Usual Suspects z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: CMS file list date
Thanks Bill. I had already found the SYSTEM CONFIG file but they wanted it changed without an IPL. I didn't know you could add it to the user directory. Kris Buelens also gave me a command that partially worked from MAINT; SET DATEFORMAT ISODATE SYSTEM. I had to issue SET DATEFORMAT ISODATE, then SET DATEFORMAT SYSDEFAULT from MAINT to get it to change. I also changed the SYSTEM CONFIG to be ready for the next IPL. Thanks. Jim Dodds Systems Programmer Kentucky State University 400 East Main Street Frankfort, Ky 40601 502 597 6114 From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Munson Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 10:58 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: CMS file list date Jim, This can be changed system wide in the SYSTEM CONFIG file - (SYSTEM_DATEFORMAT) or per user in the USER DIRECT file - (DATEFORMAT) enter q dateformat User Dateformat = SHORTDATE (SYSDEFAULT) Bill Munson Brown Brothers Harriman z/VM System Programmer 201-418-7588 President MVMUA http://www2.marist.edu/~mvmua/ "Dodds, Jim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System 08/27/2008 10:45 AM Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject CMS file list date I have a customer that is on z/VM 4.4 and the CMS file dates shown in a filelist have only 2 digit years. They would like to see the 4 digit years. I am on VM 2.4 and ours displays a 4 digit year. I know both of these products are out of service. Would anyone know how to correct this? Jim Dodds Systems Programmer Kentucky State University 400 East Main Street Frankfort, Ky 40601 502 597 6114 *** IMPORTANT NOTE * The opinions expressed in this message and/or any attachments are those of the author and not necessarily those of Brown Brothers Harriman & Co., its subsidiaries and affiliates BBH. There is no guarantee that this message is either private or confidential, and it may have been altered by unauthorized sources without your or our knowledge. Nothing in the message is capable or intended to create any legally binding obligations on either party and it is not intended to provide legal advice. BBH accepts no responsibility for loss or damage from its use, including damage from virus. ***
Re: Lpar Vs VM
Alan, How many alter egos do you have. First Chuckie, and now Br'er Rabbit. Regards, Richard Schuh > -Original Message- > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark > Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 10:37 AM > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > Subject: Re: Lpar Vs VM > > On Wednesday, 08/27/2008 at 01:12 EDT, "Huegel, Thomas" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > When I was looking at the announcement letter for z/VM 5.4 I seem to > remember > > something about (on a z10) being able to mix CP's and IFL's in the > > same > LPAR > > and have z/VM dispatch LINUX machines on the IFL's Or > maybe that > > was > > > 'wishfull interpretation' on my part. Anyway (if true) I wonder if > > there > is > > some type of new pricing to handle that senerio. > > There is no new pricing model. If you mix IFLs and CPs into > a single z10 z/VM-mode LPAR, your z/VM license fee will be > based on the sum of all active IFLs and CPs on the box, > whether all the CPs are in the z/VM LPAR or not. > > At least, that's what the MSRP would be if IBM had MSRPs. > But we don't, so you would need to talk to your IBM rep or > BP. Don't even THINK about taking them to a nice restaurant > and plying them with fine wines. No - don't even consider > it. Perish the thought. Inappropriate. Highly. > > Alan Altmark > z/VM Development > IBM Endicott >
Re: IUCV - What's wrong with this picture?
Alan, Thanks. Especially for 5 through 9. On 8/27/08 12:37 PM, "Alan Altmark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't understand why you want to use temporary connections. I don't. The original idea was to have connections for each guest active all the time **so long as the associated overhead would not be excessive**. > > You mention an "area" that is monitored by the server. That sounds like > shared memory. I'm not sure the area is shared in the sense you mean shared. The guest machines will each have code fragment table(s) in primary address space. The service machine will maintain the tables for each guest after it has been has granted write access. > > IUCV can handle hundreds of connections with no problem. We think the high-end number of virtual machines could be in the thousands but if the overhead is low and the message incidence is low, it's a go. --. .- .-. -.-- Gary Dennis Mantissa Corporation
Re: CMS file list date
Jim,
This can be changed system wide in the SYSTEM CONFIG file -
(SYSTEM_DATEFORMAT)
or per user in the USER DIRECT file - (DATEFORMAT)
enter
q dateformat
User Dateformat = SHORTDATE (SYSDEFAULT)
Bill Munson
Brown Brothers Harriman
z/VM System Programmer
201-418-7588
President MVMUA
http://www2.marist.edu/~mvmua/
"Dodds, Jim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System
08/27/2008 10:45 AM
Please respond to
The IBM z/VM Operating System
To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc
Subject
CMS file list date
I have a customer that is on z/VM 4.4 and the CMS file dates shown in a
filelist have only 2 digit years. They would like to see the 4 digit
years. I am on VM 2.4 and ours displays a 4 digit year. I know both of
these products are out of service. Would anyone know how to correct this?
Jim Dodds
Systems Programmer
Kentucky State University
400 East Main Street
Frankfort, Ky 40601
502 597 6114
*** IMPORTANT
NOTE* The opinions expressed in this
message and/or any attachments are those of the author and not
necessarily those of Brown Brothers Harriman & Co., its
subsidiaries and affiliates ("BBH"). There is no guarantee that
this message is either private or confidential, and it may have
been altered by unauthorized sources without your or our knowledge.
Nothing in the message is capable or intended to create any legally
binding obligations on either party and it is not intended to
provide legal advice. BBH accepts no responsibility for loss or
damage from its use, including damage from virus.
Re: Lpar Vs VM
I can't speak to z/OS software charges, but for VSE, we pay for only one license for multiple instances running under z/VM. And we pay the VSE license for the total capacity of the machine. I don't think you can say that VM is better than LPAR as a general statement. In some cases VM definitely is better, and in others, LPAR is the winner. Do you need to create new z/OS instances on short notice for a brief testing period? z/VM is a clear winner. Do you need every last CPU cycle for your production z/OS? LPAR is better here. Do you need to frequently shift resources around between your LPARs? z/VM might make your life easier. Is your hardware environment fairly static? Could be better to stay with LPARs. Are you thinking of running Linux on your mainframe? You will almost certainly want to run z/VM then. z/VM brings you unmatched flexibility, but at a cost of some CPU cycles and money. If you have large numbers of LPARs though, it can reduce the complexity of your configuration, and allow better sharing of your resources. Perhaps if you expand on what you hope to achieve, we can provide more targeted responses. Peter -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ward, Mike S Sent: August 27, 2008 11:31 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Lpar Vs VM Hello all, I have a question. When we set up and lpar with an operating environment such as MVS, we get software charges for both lpars from IBM. Third party vendors don't seem to care if it's on the same machine (Most don't) since they charge for the full mip rate of the machine regardless of whether it's utilized or not. Long ago, about 30 years I had a VM shop and we ran multiple instances of OS/VS1, MVS, etc, but were only charged for on license of software product. Is this still the case? Is it better to use VM instead of LPAR? All comments appreciated. Thanks. == This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review retransmission dissemination or other use of or taking any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient or delegate is strictly prohibited. If you received this in error please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. The integrity and security of this message cannot be guaranteed on the Internet. The sender accepts no liability for the content of this e-mail or for the consequences of any actions taken on the basis of information provided. The recipient should check this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses. The sender accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail. This disclaimer is property of the TTC and must not be altered or circumvented in any manner.
Re: Lpar Vs VM
On Wednesday, 08/27/2008 at 01:32 EDT, Mark Post <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You'll have to go back and look, but I believe that was a statement of > direction, not something that will actually be delivered with the GA of z/VM > 5.4. z/VM 5.4 will enable you to use the z/VM-mode LPARs that you can create today on a z10. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: Lpar Vs VM
Save the nice restaurants and fine wines for when someone from z/VM development comes to town! :) -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: August 27, 2008 13:37 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Lpar Vs VM On Wednesday, 08/27/2008 at 01:12 EDT, "Huegel, Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > When I was looking at the announcement letter for z/VM 5.4 I seem to remember > something about (on a z10) being able to mix CP's and IFL's in the same LPAR > and have z/VM dispatch LINUX machines on the IFL's Or maybe that was > 'wishfull interpretation' on my part. Anyway (if true) I wonder if there is > some type of new pricing to handle that senerio. There is no new pricing model. If you mix IFLs and CPs into a single z10 z/VM-mode LPAR, your z/VM license fee will be based on the sum of all active IFLs and CPs on the box, whether all the CPs are in the z/VM LPAR or not. At least, that's what the MSRP would be if IBM had MSRPs. But we don't, so you would need to talk to your IBM rep or BP. Don't even THINK about taking them to a nice restaurant and plying them with fine wines. No - don't even consider it. Perish the thought. Inappropriate. Highly. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review retransmission dissemination or other use of or taking any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient or delegate is strictly prohibited. If you received this in error please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. The integrity and security of this message cannot be guaranteed on the Internet. The sender accepts no liability for the content of this e-mail or for the consequences of any actions taken on the basis of information provided. The recipient should check this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses. The sender accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail. This disclaimer is property of the TTC and must not be altered or circumvented in any manner.
Re: IUCV - What's wrong with this picture?
On Wednesday, 08/27/2008 at 12:09 EDT, "Gary M. Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have included below item 6 from the thread origin and a snippet from John > Baker's response. > > Maybe I should have placed more emphasis on item 6. The server machine is > going to be updating the buffer areas in all the connected client machines. > > Therefore, he server machine needs to know immediately when one of the > guests is quiescent or logged off. IUCV will inform the server when a > connection is severed. The guest machines can set in indicator in an area > monitored by the server to indicate that they have begun a normal closedown > *but* the "fall-off_the page" case is when a machine is logged off and the > server attempts to access the buffers in a machine that no longer exists. > > John made a good argument for temporary IUCV connections. In that case the > best way to make a determination on the active state a diagnose that issues > a query command for the user in question? I don't understand why you want to use temporary connections. 1. Guest logs on and CMSIUCV CONNECTs to the server 2. The server is aware of the guest's existence. 3. Messages pass back and forth. 4. If the server goes down, the guest will be informed and can periodically try to re-establish communications with the server. 5. If the guest is terminating, it can CMSIUCV SEVER with USERDTA= filled in to indicate a "normal" termination. 6. If the guest just logs off, the sever will be done by CP with no data in the IPUSER field. 7. If you're in the middle of an IUCV SEND or RECEIVE when an IUCV connection is terminated, the issuer will get an error response. 8. If the server goes to sleep, there is a limit on the number of messages that can be queued by each guest. It is called the Message Limit (MSGLIM) and can be set in the directory and/or the applications themselves. 9. If one of the communications partners doesn't want to receive messages, it can issue IUCV QUIESCE and then RESUME when ready. You mention an "area" that is monitored by the server. That sounds like shared memory. When we wrote GCS back in 1983 (wow - was it really that long ago?!?), we used a combination of IUCV (*SIGNAL system service) and shared memory. Your server will need to clean up any trash left by one of the guests if it logs off at "just the wrong time". IUCV can handle hundreds of connections with no problem. APPC/VM (APPCVM macro) is a variant of IUCV and is used by DB2 and SFS. These applications handle thousands of connections. You do not want to issue DIAGNOSE instructions unnecessarily as they serialize the entire virtual machine. That is, the virutal CPUs stop for the duration of the command or diagnose. IUCV instructions, however, are handled at the virtual CPU level. If you have a multithreaded application with multiple virtual CPUs, each CPU can handle IUCV instructions separately. An individual CPU runs the IUCV "instruction", and the other CPUs continue to do whatever they want. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: Lpar Vs VM
On Wednesday, 08/27/2008 at 01:12 EDT, "Huegel, Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > When I was looking at the announcement letter for z/VM 5.4 I seem to remember > something about (on a z10) being able to mix CP's and IFL's in the same LPAR > and have z/VM dispatch LINUX machines on the IFL's Or maybe that was > 'wishfull interpretation' on my part. Anyway (if true) I wonder if there is > some type of new pricing to handle that senerio. There is no new pricing model. If you mix IFLs and CPs into a single z10 z/VM-mode LPAR, your z/VM license fee will be based on the sum of all active IFLs and CPs on the box, whether all the CPs are in the z/VM LPAR or not. At least, that's what the MSRP would be if IBM had MSRPs. But we don't, so you would need to talk to your IBM rep or BP. Don't even THINK about taking them to a nice restaurant and plying them with fine wines. No - don't even consider it. Perish the thought. Inappropriate. Highly. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: Lpar Vs VM
>>> On 8/27/2008 at 12:23 PM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Huegel, Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > When I was looking at the announcement letter for z/VM 5.4 I seem to remember > something about (on a z10) being able to mix CP's and IFL's in the same LPAR > and have z/VM dispatch LINUX machines on the IFL's Or maybe that was > 'wishfull interpretation' on my part. Anyway (if true) I wonder if there is > some type of new pricing to handle that senerio. You'll have to go back and look, but I believe that was a statement of direction, not something that will actually be delivered with the GA of z/VM 5.4. (I'm not at all sure about that, so do check.) From presentations given at SHARE, the pricing really hasn't changed. z/VM licenses will have to be purchased for the total number of processors, CP or IFL, that it runs on. z/OS licenses will be needed for all the CPs in that LPAR, and Linux subscriptions will be needed for all IFLs in that LPAR. So, the net effect is that the licensing costs should be the same, but you'll need fewer LPARs running z/VM to be able to handle the different types of guests that can only run on one type of processor. Mark Post
Re: CMS file list date
Thanks John. I tried the SET DATEFORMAT ISODATE SYSTEM from the userid MAINT. It took the command but didn't change the values when I did a QUERY DATEFORMAT. I was able to change it by doing the following on MAINT: SET DATEFORMAT ISODATE SET DATEFORMAT SYSDEFAULT They now have the correct format for the date on z/VM 4.4. Thanks to all of you that responded for your assistance and information. Jim Dodds Systems Programmer Kentucky State University 400 East Main Street Frankfort, Ky 40601 502 597 6114 -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Franciscovich Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 11:55 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: CMS file list date >Thanks Steve that will work as a temp solution. I found where I need to >put this in the VM system config file SYSTEM_DATEformat ISOdate > >But to get this to work system wide I will need to do an IPL or is can I >enter a command to make system wide? A user with Class B privilege can issue SET DATEFORMAT ISODATE/etc SYSTEM to change the default date format system-wide without an IPL.As always, if you do this, you also want to add the system config file statement so the same date format is in effect the next time you IPL. SET DATEFORMAT has been in the system since VM/ESA 2.2.0 John Franciscovich z/VM Development
Re: Lpar Vs VM
It's not wishful interpretation, but you need a z10 for the capability. Huegel, Thomas wrote: When I was looking at the announcement letter for z/VM 5.4 I seem to remember something about (on a z10) being able to mix CP's and IFL's in the same LPAR and have z/VM dispatch LINUX machines on the IFL's Or maybe that was 'wishfull interpretation' on my part. Anyway (if true) I wonder if there is some type of new pricing to handle that senerio. -- Rich Smrcina VM Assist, Inc. Phone: 414-491-6001 Ans Service: 360-715-2467 rich.smrcina at vmassist.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/richsmrcina Catch the WAVV! http://www.wavv.org WAVV 2009 - Orlando, FL - May 15-19, 2009
Re: Lpar Vs VM
When I was looking at the announcement letter for z/VM 5.4 I seem to remember something about (on a z10) being able to mix CP's and IFL's in the same LPAR and have z/VM dispatch LINUX machines on the IFL's Or maybe that was 'wishfull interpretation' on my part. Anyway (if true) I wonder if there is some type of new pricing to handle that senerio. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Mark Post Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 10:56 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Lpar Vs VM >>> On 8/27/2008 at 11:30 AM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Ward, Mike S" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello all, I have a question. When we set up and lpar with an operating > environment such as MVS, we get software charges for both lpars from > IBM. Third party vendors don't seem to care if it's on the same machine > (Most don't) since they charge for the full mip rate of the machine > regardless of whether it's utilized or not. Long ago, about 30 years I > had a VM shop and we ran multiple instances of OS/VS1, MVS, etc, but > were only charged for on license of software product. Is this still the > case? Is it better to use VM instead of LPAR? All comments appreciated. That's going to be determined by what you intend to run. z/VM, Linux, and a bunch of IBM middleware is licensed per-processor. If you create an LPAR with standard CPs in it (whether running z/VM or not), you'll be paying license charges for all the CPs in the CEC. If you create an LPAR with IFLs, you'll be paying license charges for all the IFLs in the CEC. The same will be true of z/VM. Most of the new workload being run on z/VM these days is Linux, so typically it makes sense to run z/VM and Linux on IFLs, to avoid having to pay for licenses on the standard CPs. If you add IFLs to handle more z/VM or Linux workload, that means you don't have to pay more for you z/OS license charges, whereas if you add standard CPs to handle more z/VM or Linux workload, your z/OS license charges will go up. Over and above that, if you think you might be running more than a small handful of systems, z/VM is by far the better way to go. It will save you tons of people time, and provide more manageability and flexibility. Mark Post
Re: CSE and VMSERVx
Please check out apar VM6 if you are diving deep into ISFC. I'd feel better if you did :) Marcy "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 Florian Bilek Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 2:53 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: [IBMVM] CSE and VMSERVx Dear all, Last month I was asking to establish a ISCF connection between two z/VM systems. I got the information that the resources of the SFS have to be unique and that VMSYSx filepools are local. I have now the necessary CTCs and wanted to activate the IS-links. Howeve= r I saw with "q resources" that a name called .RECOVER coming from VMSERVR is= global. Resource: .RECOVER Type: Global Owning Userid: VMSERVR What should I do now? I am a little bit lost. Can you please advise me in this subject? Best regards, Florian On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 12:46:31 +0200, Kris Buelens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>= wrote: >The VMSERVx servers can be started on one VM only at a time. > >But, they can be reached by users on other VM systems: you'd make a CTC >connection between the VM systems and use ACTIVATE ISLINK to make the >CP's talk to eachother. "Global" resources are then available >throughout the ISFC collection. > >To make an SFS server available globally: >- the filepool ID must be unique (the userid is of no importance) >- the filepool ID must not start with VMSYS >- the GLOBAL parameter must be coded in the server's DMSPARMS file > >2008/7/22 Florian Bilek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> Dear all, >> >> What is the right approach to define VMSERVx machines to work in CSE? >> >> When the directory is shared and the names of those machines MUST be >> t= he >> same on all the z/VM instances there is a conflict since they use all >> = the >> same minidisks. I couldn't find too much information about this. >> >> Thank you in advance. >> >> Best regards, >> Florian > > > >-- >Kris Buelens, >IBM Belgium, VM customer support >= ==
Re: CMS file list date
Thanks Kris, I will keep that in mind, they only have a few in-house execs and only use the VM system for multiple VSEs and storing JCL and source code in CMS. Jim Dodds Systems Programmer Kentucky State University 400 East Main Street Frankfort, Ky 40601 502 597 6114 -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kris Buelens Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 11:37 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: CMS file list date Beware for a global, system wide, change: if you have execs that issue commands that return a date, they will get a new layout. To name some: - LISTFILE - CP Q TIME - CP Q RDR ALL (distribution code is no returned anymore with FULL- or ISODATE) - CP Q CPLEVEL Results of affected execs become unpredictable. Wisdom: each an every exec that is written these days should specify the wanted date format on the commands issued, then and only then one is sure of the response. End-users may always decide they don't like the selected system default date format and set their own choice. 2008/8/27 Dodds, Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Thanks Steve that will work as a temp solution. I found where I need to put > this in the VM system config file SYSTEM_DATEformat ISOdate > > But to get this to work system wide I will need to do an IPL or is can I > enter a command to make system wide? > > > > > > Jim Dodds > > Systems Programmer > > Kentucky State University > > 400 East Main Street > > Frankfort, Ky 40601 > > 502 597 6114 > > > > > > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Imler, Steven J > Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 10:52 AM > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > Subject: Re: CMS file list date > > > > Issue ... SET DATEFORMAT ISO > > > > > > JR (Steven) Imler > > CA > > Senior Sustaining Engineer > > Tel: +1 703 708 3479 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Dodds, Jim > Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 10:46 AM > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > Subject: CMS file list date > > > > I have a customer that is on z/VM 4.4 and the CMS file dates shown in a > filelist have only 2 digit years. They would like to see the 4 digit years. > I am on VM 2.4 and ours displays a 4 digit year. I know both of these > products are out of service. Would anyone know how to correct this? > > > > Jim Dodds > > Systems Programmer > > Kentucky State University > > 400 East Main Street > > Frankfort, Ky 40601 > > 502 597 6114 > > -- Kris Buelens, IBM Belgium, VM customer support
Re: CMS file list date
>Thanks Steve that will work as a temp solution. I found where I need to >put this in the VM system config file SYSTEM_DATEformat ISOdate > >But to get this to work system wide I will need to do an IPL or is can I >enter a command to make system wide? A user with Class B privilege can issue SET DATEFORMAT ISODATE/etc SYSTEM to change the default date format system-wide without an IPL.As always, if you do this, you also want to add the system config file statement so the same date format is in effect the next time you IPL. SET DATEFORMAT has been in the system since VM/ESA 2.2.0 John Franciscovich z/VM Development
Re: IUCV - What's wrong with this picture?
Thanks for the response on the IUCV questions. I have included below item 6 from the thread origin and a snippet from John Baker's response. Maybe I should have placed more emphasis on item 6. The server machine is going to be updating the buffer areas in all the connected client machines. Therefore, he server machine needs to know immediately when one of the guests is quiescent or logged off. IUCV will inform the server when a connection is severed. The guest machines can set in indicator in an area monitored by the server to indicate that they have begun a normal closedown *but* the "fall-off_the page" case is when a machine is logged off and the server attempts to access the buffers in a machine that no longer exists. John made a good argument for temporary IUCV connections. In that case the best way to make a determination on the active state a diagnose that issues a query command for the user in question? On a clear day in the not too distant past, "Gary Dennis", <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote > 6. After the initial call, the server virtual machine will maintain the > buffer table entries in each client virtual machine without additional IUCV > interaction. On 8/25/08 9:32 PM, "John P. Baker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Maintaining thousands of IUCV connections may not have a significant impact > on real storage considering the vast amounts of memory now available on > zSeries processors. However, searching through all of those linked lists > WILL have a performance impact, and is totally unnecessary. --. .- .-. -.-- Gary Dennis
Re: CMS file list date
Which is why I use the CMS DEFAULTS command to change the date format in RDRLIST and FILELIST. defaults set filelist isodate defaults set rdrlist isodate -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kris Buelens Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 9:37 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: CMS file list date Beware for a global, system wide, change: if you have execs that issue commands that return a date, they will get a new layout. To name some: - LISTFILE - CP Q TIME - CP Q RDR ALL (distribution code is no returned anymore with FULL- or ISODATE) - CP Q CPLEVEL Results of affected execs become unpredictable. Wisdom: each an every exec that is written these days should specify the wanted date format on the commands issued, then and only then one is sure of the response. End-users may always decide they don't like the selected system default date format and set their own choice. 2008/8/27 Dodds, Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Thanks Steve that will work as a temp solution. I found where I need > to put this in the VM system config file SYSTEM_DATEformat ISOdate > > But to get this to work system wide I will need to do an IPL or is can > I enter a command to make system wide? > > > > > > Jim Dodds > > Systems Programmer > > Kentucky State University > > 400 East Main Street > > Frankfort, Ky 40601 > > 502 597 6114 > > > > > > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of Imler, Steven J > Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 10:52 AM > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > Subject: Re: CMS file list date > > > > Issue ... SET DATEFORMAT ISO > > > > > > JR (Steven) Imler > > CA > > Senior Sustaining Engineer > > Tel: +1 703 708 3479 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of Dodds, Jim > Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 10:46 AM > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > Subject: CMS file list date > > > > I have a customer that is on z/VM 4.4 and the CMS file dates shown in > a filelist have only 2 digit years. They would like to see the 4 digit years. > I am on VM 2.4 and ours displays a 4 digit year. I know both of these > products are out of service. Would anyone know how to correct this? > > > > Jim Dodds > > Systems Programmer > > Kentucky State University > > 400 East Main Street > > Frankfort, Ky 40601 > > 502 597 6114 > > -- Kris Buelens, IBM Belgium, VM customer support
Re: Lpar Vs VM
>>> On 8/27/2008 at 11:30 AM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Ward, Mike S" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello all, I have a question. When we set up and lpar with an operating > environment such as MVS, we get software charges for both lpars from > IBM. Third party vendors don't seem to care if it's on the same machine > (Most don't) since they charge for the full mip rate of the machine > regardless of whether it's utilized or not. Long ago, about 30 years I > had a VM shop and we ran multiple instances of OS/VS1, MVS, etc, but > were only charged for on license of software product. Is this still the > case? Is it better to use VM instead of LPAR? All comments appreciated. That's going to be determined by what you intend to run. z/VM, Linux, and a bunch of IBM middleware is licensed per-processor. If you create an LPAR with standard CPs in it (whether running z/VM or not), you'll be paying license charges for all the CPs in the CEC. If you create an LPAR with IFLs, you'll be paying license charges for all the IFLs in the CEC. The same will be true of z/VM. Most of the new workload being run on z/VM these days is Linux, so typically it makes sense to run z/VM and Linux on IFLs, to avoid having to pay for licenses on the standard CPs. If you add IFLs to handle more z/VM or Linux workload, that means you don't have to pay more for you z/OS license charges, whereas if you add standard CPs to handle more z/VM or Linux workload, your z/OS license charges will go up. Over and above that, if you think you might be running more than a small handful of systems, z/VM is by far the better way to go. It will save you tons of people time, and provide more manageability and flexibility. Mark Post
Re: CMS file list date
Beware for a global, system wide, change: if you have execs that issue commands that return a date, they will get a new layout. To name some: - LISTFILE - CP Q TIME - CP Q RDR ALL (distribution code is no returned anymore with FULL- or ISODATE) - CP Q CPLEVEL Results of affected execs become unpredictable. Wisdom: each an every exec that is written these days should specify the wanted date format on the commands issued, then and only then one is sure of the response. End-users may always decide they don't like the selected system default date format and set their own choice. 2008/8/27 Dodds, Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Thanks Steve that will work as a temp solution. I found where I need to put > this in the VM system config file SYSTEM_DATEformat ISOdate > > But to get this to work system wide I will need to do an IPL or is can I > enter a command to make system wide? > > > > > > Jim Dodds > > Systems Programmer > > Kentucky State University > > 400 East Main Street > > Frankfort, Ky 40601 > > 502 597 6114 > > > > > > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Imler, Steven J > Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 10:52 AM > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > Subject: Re: CMS file list date > > > > Issue … SET DATEFORMAT ISO > > > > > > JR (Steven) Imler > > CA > > Senior Sustaining Engineer > > Tel: +1 703 708 3479 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Dodds, Jim > Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 10:46 AM > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > Subject: CMS file list date > > > > I have a customer that is on z/VM 4.4 and the CMS file dates shown in a > filelist have only 2 digit years. They would like to see the 4 digit years. > I am on VM 2.4 and ours displays a 4 digit year. I know both of these > products are out of service. Would anyone know how to correct this? > > > > Jim Dodds > > Systems Programmer > > Kentucky State University > > 400 East Main Street > > Frankfort, Ky 40601 > > 502 597 6114 > > -- Kris Buelens, IBM Belgium, VM customer support
Lpar Vs VM
Hello all, I have a question. When we set up and lpar with an operating environment such as MVS, we get software charges for both lpars from IBM. Third party vendors don't seem to care if it's on the same machine (Most don't) since they charge for the full mip rate of the machine regardless of whether it's utilized or not. Long ago, about 30 years I had a VM shop and we ran multiple instances of OS/VS1, MVS, etc, but were only charged for on license of software product. Is this still the case? Is it better to use VM instead of LPAR? All comments appreciated. Thanks. == This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.
Re: CMS file list date
I'm pretty sure that SET DATEFORMAT whatever was valid back in ESA 2.4. Check the HELP file for the various options. Jim Doug Breneman wrote: --1__=0ABBFE21DFC18D638f9e8a93df938690918c0ABBFE21DFC18D63 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable You can use SET DATEFORMAT to specify what date format you want to use = for a userid or you can specify which date format you want to use for just LISTFILE. This will set a date format for your virtual machine. SET DATEFORMAT .-USER--. --Set--DATEFormat--.-SHOrtdate--.--+---+-= ->< |-FULldate---| |(1)| |-ISOdate| '-SYSTEM' '-SYSdefault-' Note: (1) SYSTEM is valid only for class B Listfile date format options from HELP LISTFILE will just force a date format for the LISTFILE command: (3) .--. >--+--+- | (4)| |-SHOrtdate| | (4) | |-FULldate-| | (4) | '-ISOdate--' You can also look at SET DEFAULTS to set defaults for some VM commands = like FILELIST and RDRLIST. Try HELP DEFAULTS (ALL. Four character years can be obtained using FULLDATE or ISODATE dependin= g on which format you want, mm/dd/ or -mm-dd respectively. Doug Breneman z/VM Development IBM Endicott, NY = From: "Dodds, Jim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>= = To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU = = Date: 08/27/2008 10:45 AM = = Subject:CMS file list date = = I have a customer that is on z/VM 4.4 and the CMS file dates shown in a= filelist have only 2 digit years. They would like to see the 4 digit ye= ars. I am on VM 2.4 and ours displays a 4 digit year. I know both of these products are out of service. Would anyone know how to correct this? Jim Dodds Systems Programmer Kentucky State University 400 East Main Street Frankfort, Ky 40601 502 597 6114 = --1__=0ABBFE21DFC18D638f9e8a93df938690918c0ABBFE21DFC18D63 Content-type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-Disposition: inline Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable You can use SET DATEFORMAT to specify what date format you want to u= se for a userid or you can specify which date format you want to use fo= r just LISTFILE. This will set a date format for your virtual machine. SET DATEFORMAT = = .-USER-= -. >>--Set--DATEFormat--.-SHOrtdate--.--+= ---+-->< |-FULldate---| |(1= )| |-ISOdate| '-SYSTEM---= -' '-SYSdefault-' = = Note: = (1) SYSTEM is valid only for class B = Listfile date format options from HELP LISTFILE will just force a date = format for the LISTFILE command: (3) .--. >--+--+- | (4)| |-SHOrtdate| | (4) | |-FULldate-| | (4) | '-ISOdate--' You can also look at SET DEFAULTS to set defaults for some VM commands = like FILELIST and RDRLIST. Try HELP DEFAULTS (ALL. Four character years can be obtained using FULLDATE or ISODATE dependin= g on which format you want, mm/dd/ or -mm-dd respectively. Doug Breneman z/VM Development IBM Endicott, NY "Dodd= s, Jim" ---08/27/2008 10:45:35 AM---I have a customer that is on z= /VM 4.4 and the CMS file dates shown in a filelist have only 2 digit y<= /font> = From:= "Dodds, Jim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Date:= 08/27
Re: CMS file list date
Thanks Steve that will work as a temp solution. I found where I need to put this in the VM system config file SYSTEM_DATEformat ISOdate But to get this to work system wide I will need to do an IPL or is can I enter a command to make system wide? Jim Dodds Systems Programmer Kentucky State University 400 East Main Street Frankfort, Ky 40601 502 597 6114 From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Imler, Steven J Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 10:52 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: CMS file list date Issue ... SET DATEFORMAT ISO JR (Steven) Imler CA Senior Sustaining Engineer Tel: +1 703 708 3479 [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dodds, Jim Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 10:46 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: CMS file list date I have a customer that is on z/VM 4.4 and the CMS file dates shown in a filelist have only 2 digit years. They would like to see the 4 digit years. I am on VM 2.4 and ours displays a 4 digit year. I know both of these products are out of service. Would anyone know how to correct this? Jim Dodds Systems Programmer Kentucky State University 400 East Main Street Frankfort, Ky 40601 502 597 6114
Re: CMS file list date
Better yetset dateformat FULLdate
munson
"Imler, Steven J" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System
08/27/2008 10:51 AM
Please respond to
The IBM z/VM Operating System
To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc
Subject
Re: CMS file list date
Issue ? SET DATEFORMAT ISO
JR (Steven) Imler
CA
Senior Sustaining Engineer
Tel: +1 703 708 3479
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dodds, Jim
Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 10:46 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: CMS file list date
I have a customer that is on z/VM 4.4 and the CMS file dates shown in a
filelist have only 2 digit years. They would like to see the 4 digit
years. I am on VM 2.4 and ours displays a 4 digit year. I know both of
these products are out of service. Would anyone know how to correct this?
Jim Dodds
Systems Programmer
Kentucky State University
400 East Main Street
Frankfort, Ky 40601
502 597 6114
*** IMPORTANT
NOTE* The opinions expressed in this
message and/or any attachments are those of the author and not
necessarily those of Brown Brothers Harriman & Co., its
subsidiaries and affiliates ("BBH"). There is no guarantee that
this message is either private or confidential, and it may have
been altered by unauthorized sources without your or our knowledge.
Nothing in the message is capable or intended to create any legally
binding obligations on either party and it is not intended to
provide legal advice. BBH accepts no responsibility for loss or
damage from its use, including damage from virus.
Re: CMS file list date
FILELIST (FULLDATE (or ISODATE) should work on 4.4 LISTFILE (FULLDATE (or ISODATE) as well... Scott Rohling On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 8:45 AM, Dodds, Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have a customer that is on z/VM 4.4 and the CMS file dates shown in a > filelist have only 2 digit years. They would like to see the 4 digit years. > I am on VM 2.4 and ours displays a 4 digit year. I know both of these > products are out of service. Would anyone know how to correct this? > > > > Jim Dodds > > Systems Programmer > > Kentucky State University > > 400 East Main Street > > Frankfort, Ky 40601 > > 502 597 6114 > > >
Re: CMS file list date
Have they tried the filelist option fulldate or isodate? I'm not sure if they were valid on 4.4. Mike Atkison From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dodds, Jim Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 9:46 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: CMS file list date I have a customer that is on z/VM 4.4 and the CMS file dates shown in a filelist have only 2 digit years. They would like to see the 4 digit years. I am on VM 2.4 and ours displays a 4 digit year. I know both of these products are out of service. Would anyone know how to correct this? Jim Dodds Systems Programmer Kentucky State University 400 East Main Street Frankfort, Ky 40601 502 597 6114
Re: CMS file list date
Issue ... SET DATEFORMAT ISO JR (Steven) Imler CA Senior Sustaining Engineer Tel: +1 703 708 3479 [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dodds, Jim Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 10:46 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: CMS file list date I have a customer that is on z/VM 4.4 and the CMS file dates shown in a filelist have only 2 digit years. They would like to see the 4 digit years. I am on VM 2.4 and ours displays a 4 digit year. I know both of these products are out of service. Would anyone know how to correct this? Jim Dodds Systems Programmer Kentucky State University 400 East Main Street Frankfort, Ky 40601 502 597 6114
Re: CMS file list date
You can use SET DATEFORMAT to specify what date format you want to use for a userid or you can specify which date format you want to use for just LISTFILE. This will set a date format for your virtual machine. SET DATEFORMAT .-USER--. >>--Set--DATEFormat--.-SHOrtdate--.--+---+-->< |-FULldate---| |(1)| |-ISOdate| '-SYSTEM' '-SYSdefault-' Note: (1) SYSTEM is valid only for class B Listfile date format options from HELP LISTFILE will just force a date format for the LISTFILE command: (3) .--. >--+--+- | (4)| |-SHOrtdate| | (4) | |-FULldate-| | (4) | '-ISOdate--' You can also look at SET DEFAULTS to set defaults for some VM commands like FILELIST and RDRLIST. Try HELP DEFAULTS (ALL. Four character years can be obtained using FULLDATE or ISODATE depending on which format you want, mm/dd/ or -mm-dd respectively. Doug Breneman z/VM Development IBM Endicott, NY From: "Dodds, Jim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Date: 08/27/2008 10:45 AM Subject:CMS file list date I have a customer that is on z/VM 4.4 and the CMS file dates shown in a filelist have only 2 digit years. They would like to see the 4 digit years. I am on VM 2.4 and ours displays a 4 digit year. I know both of these products are out of service. Would anyone know how to correct this? Jim Dodds Systems Programmer Kentucky State University 400 East Main Street Frankfort, Ky 40601 502 597 6114
CMS file list date
I have a customer that is on z/VM 4.4 and the CMS file dates shown in a filelist have only 2 digit years. They would like to see the 4 digit years. I am on VM 2.4 and ours displays a 4 digit year. I know both of these products are out of service. Would anyone know how to correct this? Jim Dodds Systems Programmer Kentucky State University 400 East Main Street Frankfort, Ky 40601 502 597 6114
Re: CMS file list date
> I have a customer that is on z/VM 4.4 and the CMS file dates shown > in a filelist have only 2 digit years. They would like to see the > 4 digit years. I am on VM 2.4 and ours displays a 4 digit year. I > know both of these products are out of service. Would anyone know > how to correct this? If you are using FILELEST, you can choose an option of FULLDATE FILELIST * * A (FULLDATE Some of the other choices are ISODATE and SHORTDATE. Just do a HELP on FILELIST and you should see everything that is supported for your release. I am on 4.4 also and it works OK there. Ed Zell Illinois Mutual Life (309) 636-0107 . CONFIDENTIALITY: This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain confidential, proprietary and privileged information, and unauthorized disclosure or use is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, notify the sender and delete this e-mail from your system.
Re: CSE and VMSERVx
Hi Kris, Thank you very much. This helped me a lot. Best regards, Florian On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 14:08:52 +0200, Kris Buelens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >A CRR declares many resources: > q resource user vmservr > Resource: VMSYSRType: Local Owning Userid: VMSERVR > Service: 30F0F2F9 Type: Local Owning Userid: VMSERVR > Service: 06F2 Type: System Owning Userid: VMSERVR > Service: 30F0F2F7 Type: Local Owning Userid: VMSERVR > Resource: .L720001 Type: Global Owning Userid: VMSERVR > Ready KRIS at VMKBBR01 ; T=0.01/0.01 14:00:18 > >And -per the SFS manual- the global resource (.L720001 above) must be >unique amongst all VM systems, it is derived from the CRR's LUNAME, >which is defined in the DMSPARMS file: > VMSERVR DMSPARMS B1 F 80 > > > * * * Top of File * * * > ADMIN MAINT VMBACKUP VMOPER > NOBACKUP > SAVESEGID CMS23FA > FILEPOOLID VMSYSR > CRR > LUNAME BEKB0072.GL720001 > USERS 120 > FULLDUMP > * * * End of File * * * >Changing a CRR LUNAME must be done using the procedure described in >the SFS manual, not by simply XEDITing the DMSPARMS file, the command >FILESERV CRRLOG is part of it I think. > >Beware too if CRR would have in its log transactions that must still >be commited/rolled back. > >You should not activate the IS-link before the resources are made >unique, otherwise some things may stop working. But, as far as I >know, SFS and DB2/VM are the only users of CRR, so only their users >could get in trouble. > >2008/8/27 Florian Bilek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> Dear all, >> >> Last month I was asking to establish a ISCF connection between two z/V M >> systems. I got the information that the resources of the SFS have to b e >> unique and that VMSYSx filepools are local. >> >> I have now the necessary CTCs and wanted to activate the IS-links. How ever I >> saw with "q resources" that a name called .RECOVER coming from VMSERVR is >> global. >> >> Resource: .RECOVER Type: Global Owning Userid: VMSERVR >> >> What should I do now? I am a little bit lost. >> Can you please advise me in this subject? >> >> Best regards, >> >> Florian >> >> >> >> On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 12:46:31 +0200, Kris Buelens <[EMAIL PROTECTED] om> wrote: >> >> >The VMSERVx servers can be started on one VM only at a time. >> > >> >But, they can be reached by users on other VM systems: you'd make a >> >CTC connection between the VM systems and use ACTIVATE ISLINK to make >> >the CP's talk to eachother. "Global" resources are then available >> >throughout the ISFC collection. >> > >> >To make an SFS server available globally: >> >- the filepool ID must be unique (the userid is of no importance) >> >- the filepool ID must not start with VMSYS >> >- the GLOBAL parameter must be coded in the server's DMSPARMS file >> > >> >2008/7/22 Florian Bilek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> >> >> Dear all, >> >> >> >> What is the right approach to define VMSERVx machines to work in CS E? >> >> >> >> When the directory is shared and the names of those machines MUST b e the >> >> same on all the z/VM instances there is a conflict since they use a ll the >> >> same minidisks. I couldn't find too much information about this. >> >> >> >> Thank you in advance. >> >> >> >> Best regards, >> >> Florian >> > >> > >> > >> >-- >> >Kris Buelens, >> >IBM Belgium, VM customer support >> >=== = = > > > >-- >Kris Buelens, >IBM Belgium, VM customer support > =
OT Mike Cowlishaw's Birthday
This morning when I reconnected to the system, an old exec that gets run at reconnect time, announced : It's Mike Cowlishaw's Birthday! The old exec is a sample exec written in the very early days of REXX while it was still IBM IUO by Mike Cowlishaw to demo what REXX could do. It was called QDAY and is a prime example of really cryptic, non-intuitive REXX programming without comments. I don't have the original, unaltered QDAY anymore. Jim -- Jim Bohnsack Cornell University (972) 596-6377 home/office (972) 342-5823 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: CSE and VMSERVx
A CRR declares many resources: q resource user vmservr Resource: VMSYSRType: Local Owning Userid: VMSERVR Service: 30F0F2F9 Type: Local Owning Userid: VMSERVR Service: 06F2 Type: System Owning Userid: VMSERVR Service: 30F0F2F7 Type: Local Owning Userid: VMSERVR Resource: .L720001 Type: Global Owning Userid: VMSERVR Ready KRIS at VMKBBR01 ; T=0.01/0.01 14:00:18 And -per the SFS manual- the global resource (.L720001 above) must be unique amongst all VM systems, it is derived from the CRR's LUNAME, which is defined in the DMSPARMS file: VMSERVR DMSPARMS B1 F 80 > * * * Top of File * * * ADMIN MAINT VMBACKUP VMOPER NOBACKUP SAVESEGID CMS23FA FILEPOOLID VMSYSR CRR LUNAME BEKB0072.GL720001 USERS 120 FULLDUMP * * * End of File * * * Changing a CRR LUNAME must be done using the procedure described in the SFS manual, not by simply XEDITing the DMSPARMS file, the command FILESERV CRRLOG is part of it I think. Beware too if CRR would have in its log transactions that must still be commited/rolled back. You should not activate the IS-link before the resources are made unique, otherwise some things may stop working. But, as far as I know, SFS and DB2/VM are the only users of CRR, so only their users could get in trouble. 2008/8/27 Florian Bilek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Dear all, > > Last month I was asking to establish a ISCF connection between two z/VM > systems. I got the information that the resources of the SFS have to be > unique and that VMSYSx filepools are local. > > I have now the necessary CTCs and wanted to activate the IS-links. However I > saw with "q resources" that a name called .RECOVER coming from VMSERVR is > global. > > Resource: .RECOVER Type: Global Owning Userid: VMSERVR > > What should I do now? I am a little bit lost. > Can you please advise me in this subject? > > Best regards, > > Florian > > > > On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 12:46:31 +0200, Kris Buelens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >The VMSERVx servers can be started on one VM only at a time. > > > >But, they can be reached by users on other VM systems: you'd make a > >CTC connection between the VM systems and use ACTIVATE ISLINK to make > >the CP's talk to eachother. "Global" resources are then available > >throughout the ISFC collection. > > > >To make an SFS server available globally: > >- the filepool ID must be unique (the userid is of no importance) > >- the filepool ID must not start with VMSYS > >- the GLOBAL parameter must be coded in the server's DMSPARMS file > > > >2008/7/22 Florian Bilek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> > >> Dear all, > >> > >> What is the right approach to define VMSERVx machines to work in CSE? > >> > >> When the directory is shared and the names of those machines MUST be the > >> same on all the z/VM instances there is a conflict since they use all the > >> same minidisks. I couldn't find too much information about this. > >> > >> Thank you in advance. > >> > >> Best regards, > >> Florian > > > > > > > >-- > >Kris Buelens, > >IBM Belgium, VM customer support > >= -- Kris Buelens, IBM Belgium, VM customer support
Re: CSE and VMSERVx
Dear all, Last month I was asking to establish a ISCF connection between two z/VM systems. I got the information that the resources of the SFS have to be unique and that VMSYSx filepools are local. I have now the necessary CTCs and wanted to activate the IS-links. Howeve r I saw with "q resources" that a name called .RECOVER coming from VMSERVR is global. Resource: .RECOVER Type: Global Owning Userid: VMSERVR What should I do now? I am a little bit lost. Can you please advise me in this subject? Best regards, Florian On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 12:46:31 +0200, Kris Buelens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >The VMSERVx servers can be started on one VM only at a time. > >But, they can be reached by users on other VM systems: you'd make a >CTC connection between the VM systems and use ACTIVATE ISLINK to make >the CP's talk to eachother. "Global" resources are then available >throughout the ISFC collection. > >To make an SFS server available globally: >- the filepool ID must be unique (the userid is of no importance) >- the filepool ID must not start with VMSYS >- the GLOBAL parameter must be coded in the server's DMSPARMS file > >2008/7/22 Florian Bilek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> Dear all, >> >> What is the right approach to define VMSERVx machines to work in CSE? >> >> When the directory is shared and the names of those machines MUST be t he >> same on all the z/VM instances there is a conflict since they use all the >> same minidisks. I couldn't find too much information about this. >> >> Thank you in advance. >> >> Best regards, >> Florian > > > >-- >Kris Buelens, >IBM Belgium, VM customer support > =
