Re: Using LBYONLY
There's no inconsistency. AUTOLOG and LOGON and two separate commands. The rules covering them are independent of each other. There is no LOGONBY command. The command is LOGON, and a LOGONBY rule just allows a special case of providing the password. If there were a CP LOGONBY command, something like "LOGONBY target byuser", then you'd have a point. Dennis O'Brien 39,556 From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Schuh, Richard Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 14:47 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: [IBMVM] Using LBYONLY It seems like there are some inconsistencies: REJECT * LOGON ACCEPT userid LOGONBY Logonby is rejected. REJECT * LOGON ACCEPT userid AUTOLOG (NOPASS An autolog is accepted. It would seem to me that all are rules governing how a logon attempt is to be treated. If it makes sense to reject the LOGONBY, then it also makes sense to reject the AUTOLOG. That is especially true since there is AUTOONLY as a password that can be used to prevent someone from logging on to the id. Since they all attempt to control some aspect of the decision whether to accept or reject a log on, they all ought to be considered when evaluating the rules. It would have been more consistent to also say, "If you want to keep that user from being logged on unless it is by AUTOLOG, use AUTOONLY." Of course, I prefer the other road to consistency. Regards, Richard Schuh From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Demeritt, Yvonne Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 11:29 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Using LBYONLY Yep, Dennis is correct. The documentation shows a REJECT LINK and ACCEPT LINK, same command. LOGON and LOGONBY are evaluated separately. What would work is: REJECT * LOGONBY ACCEPT someuser LOGONBY If you want to keep that user from being logged on to unless it is a logonby, use LBYONLY. Yvonne Yvonne DeMeritt CA yvonne.demer...@ca.com From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of O'Brien, Dennis L Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 1:25 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Using LBYONLY Shimon, What release of VM:Secure are you running? In r2.8 G0808, it definitely doesn't work. I tested before I posted. You're assuming that LOGON and LOGONBY rules are evaluated together to determine the most specific rule. That's not how it works. LOGON rules are evaluated first. If the userid cannot be logged onto, LOGONBY rules are irrelevant. Dennis O'Brien 39,556 From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Shimon Lebowitz Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 02:14 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: [IBMVM] Using LBYONLY I am sorry, but that set of rules WILL work in VM:Secure. To quote the Rules Manual: When two or more rules in a file govern a particular access request, VM:Secure establishes an order of preference based on how precisely the requester is specified. In order of preference, a rule is chosen that indicates: 1.A specific user ID as requester 2.A specific group as requester 3.An asterisk (*) as requester; this indicates all user IDs So, when someone NOT mentioned in the specific ACCEPT rule tries to logonby, the REJECT * LOGON catches them. But if the user specified in the accept attempts it, the ACCEPT rule is more specific and will allow the logonby. In fact, the manual gives an example just like Richard's rules, except that it is dealing with LINK requests: REJECT * LINK 191 RR ACCEPT FRAISERC LINK 191 RR Shimon > Richard Schuh wrote: > >And with VM:Secure, you can accomplish the same effect by using the > Rules Facility. With >the following rules, the actual password is > immaterial: > > > > REJECT * LOGON > > ACCEPT userx LOGONBY > > That doesn't work. The REJECT * LOGON rule takes precedence, and you > don't even get a chance to enter your password for LOGONBY. Set the > password to LBYONLY and create ACCEPT xxx LOGONBY rules for the userids
VSWITCH and OSPF setup
Hi All, I'm looking for advice on converting from static IP on my VM stack to OSPF. I think I will need to go to two VSWITCHes rather than just the one I use for static IP. I've created a simple PowerPoint to illustrate. <> All advice welcomed. Betsie
Re: Using LBYONLY
It seems like there are some inconsistencies: REJECT * LOGON ACCEPT userid LOGONBY Logonby is rejected. REJECT * LOGON ACCEPT userid AUTOLOG (NOPASS An autolog is accepted. It would seem to me that all are rules governing how a logon attempt is to be treated. If it makes sense to reject the LOGONBY, then it also makes sense to reject the AUTOLOG. That is especially true since there is AUTOONLY as a password that can be used to prevent someone from logging on to the id. Since they all attempt to control some aspect of the decision whether to accept or reject a log on, they all ought to be considered when evaluating the rules. It would have been more consistent to also say, "If you want to keep that user from being logged on unless it is by AUTOLOG, use AUTOONLY." Of course, I prefer the other road to consistency. Regards, Richard Schuh From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Demeritt, Yvonne Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 11:29 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Using LBYONLY Yep, Dennis is correct. The documentation shows a REJECT LINK and ACCEPT LINK, same command. LOGON and LOGONBY are evaluated separately. What would work is: REJECT * LOGONBY ACCEPT someuser LOGONBY If you want to keep that user from being logged on to unless it is a logonby, use LBYONLY. Yvonne Yvonne DeMeritt CA yvonne.demer...@ca.com From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of O'Brien, Dennis L Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 1:25 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Using LBYONLY Shimon, What release of VM:Secure are you running? In r2.8 G0808, it definitely doesn't work. I tested before I posted. You're assuming that LOGON and LOGONBY rules are evaluated together to determine the most specific rule. That's not how it works. LOGON rules are evaluated first. If the userid cannot be logged onto, LOGONBY rules are irrelevant. Dennis O'Brien 39,556 From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Shimon Lebowitz Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 02:14 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: [IBMVM] Using LBYONLY I am sorry, but that set of rules WILL work in VM:Secure. To quote the Rules Manual: When two or more rules in a file govern a particular access request, VM:Secure establishes an order of preference based on how precisely the requester is specified. In order of preference, a rule is chosen that indicates: 1.A specific user ID as requester 2.A specific group as requester 3.An asterisk (*) as requester; this indicates all user IDs So, when someone NOT mentioned in the specific ACCEPT rule tries to logonby, the REJECT * LOGON catches them. But if the user specified in the accept attempts it, the ACCEPT rule is more specific and will allow the logonby. In fact, the manual gives an example just like Richard's rules, except that it is dealing with LINK requests: REJECT * LINK 191 RR ACCEPT FRAISERC LINK 191 RR Shimon > Richard Schuh wrote: > >And with VM:Secure, you can accomplish the same effect by using the > Rules Facility. With >the following rules, the actual password is > immaterial: > > > > REJECT * LOGON > > ACCEPT userx LOGONBY > > That doesn't work. The REJECT * LOGON rule takes precedence, and you > don't even get a chance to enter your password for LOGONBY. Set the > password to LBYONLY and create ACCEPT xxx LOGONBY rules for the userids > you want to log on. That's all you need. If you don't have VM:Secure > or another external security manager, then set the password to LBYONLY > and add LOGONBY statements to the directory. > >Dennis O'Brien > > 39,556 -- Shimon Lebowitzmailto:shim...@iname.com VM System Programmer . Israel Police National HQ. Jerusalem, Israel phone: +972 2
Re: EXECIO PROBLEM
Peter, Thanks you hit it right on the head. >>> 3/5/2009 4:50 PM >>> For your first EXECIO execution, try adding FINIS as an option as in: 'EXECIO 1 DISKR WORK FILE A (FINIS VAR WINT’ -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Howard Rifkind Sent: March 5, 2009 16:46 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: EXECIO PROBLEM In an exec I'm running I issue the EXECIO command as shown below...in exactly that format. It works just fine and returns the information I'm looking for in the work file. It's before the following. SELECT; When task_to_do="BACKUP" then call backup_mdisk_files; When task_to_do="SDF" then call backup_sdf_files; When task_to_do="OPERLOG" then EXEC MAKLOG; When task_to_do="DAILYACT" then EXEC DSKACNT; When task_to_do="EREPRECS" then EXEC EREPX3; When task_to_do="PERFSVM" then EXEC PERFSV; The last 'when' executes the PERFSV exec and in that exec I issue the EXECIO command again as indicated below and get an RC(2). The work file never gets deleted anywhere between the two exec and is on the 'A' disk. Any thought about why an error is coming up would be appreciated. Thanks. 11 *-* 'EXECIO 1 DISKR WORK FILE A (VAR WINT' >>> "EXECIO 1 DISKR WORK FILE A (VAR WINT" +++ RC(2) +++ 12 *-* PARSE VAR WINT TASK_TO_DO ADSTUFF . >>> "WINT" >>> "" >.> "" _ LEGAL NOTICE Unless expressly stated otherwise, this message is confidential and may be privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. Access to this E-mail by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not an addressee, any disclosure or copying of the contents of this E-mail or any action taken (or not taken) in reliance on it is unauthorized and may be unlawful. If you are not an addressee, please inform the sender immediately, then delete this message and empty from your trash. 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. _ LEGAL NOTICE Unless expressly stated otherwise, this message is confidential and may be privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. Access to this E-mail by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not an addressee, any disclosure or copying of the contents of this E-mail or any action taken (or not taken) in reliance on it is unauthorized and may be unlawful. If you are not an addressee, please inform the sender immediately, then delete this message and empty from your trash.
Re: EXECIO PROBLEM
For your first EXECIO execution, try adding FINIS as an option as in: 'EXECIO 1 DISKR WORK FILE A (FINIS VAR WINT' -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Howard Rifkind Sent: March 5, 2009 16:46 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: EXECIO PROBLEM In an exec I'm running I issue the EXECIO command as shown below...in exactly that format. It works just fine and returns the information I'm looking for in the work file. It's before the following. SELECT; When task_to_do="BACKUP" then call backup_mdisk_files; When task_to_do="SDF" then call backup_sdf_files; When task_to_do="OPERLOG" then EXEC MAKLOG; When task_to_do="DAILYACT" then EXEC DSKACNT; When task_to_do="EREPRECS" then EXEC EREPX3; When task_to_do="PERFSVM" then EXEC PERFSV; The last 'when' executes the PERFSV exec and in that exec I issue the EXECIO command again as indicated below and get an RC(2). The work file never gets deleted anywhere between the two exec and is on the 'A' disk. Any thought about why an error is coming up would be appreciated. Thanks. 11 *-* 'EXECIO 1 DISKR WORK FILE A (VAR WINT' >>> "EXECIO 1 DISKR WORK FILE A (VAR WINT" +++ RC(2) +++ 12 *-* PARSE VAR WINT TASK_TO_DO ADSTUFF . >>> "WINT" >>> "" >.> "" _ LEGAL NOTICE Unless expressly stated otherwise, this message is confidential and may be privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. Access to this E-mail by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not an addressee, any disclosure or copying of the contents of this E-mail or any action taken (or not taken) in reliance on it is unauthorized and may be unlawful. If you are not an addressee, please inform the sender immediately, then delete this message and empty from your trash. 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.
EXECIO PROBLEM
In an exec I'm running I issue the EXECIO command as shown below...in exactly that format. It works just fine and returns the information I'm looking for in the work file. It's before the following. SELECT; When task_to_do="BACKUP" then call backup_mdisk_files; When task_to_do="SDF" then call backup_sdf_files; When task_to_do="OPERLOG" then EXEC MAKLOG; When task_to_do="DAILYACT" then EXEC DSKACNT; When task_to_do="EREPRECS" then EXEC EREPX3; When task_to_do="PERFSVM" then EXEC PERFSV; The last 'when' executes the PERFSV exec and in that exec I issue the EXECIO command again as indicated below and get an RC(2). The work file never gets deleted anywhere between the two exec and is on the 'A' disk. Any thought about why an error is coming up would be appreciated. Thanks. 11 *-* 'EXECIO 1 DISKR WORK FILE A (VAR WINT' >>> "EXECIO 1 DISKR WORK FILE A (VAR WINT" +++ RC(2) +++ 12 *-* PARSE VAR WINT TASK_TO_DO ADSTUFF . >>> "WINT" >>> "" >.> "" _ LEGAL NOTICE Unless expressly stated otherwise, this message is confidential and may be privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. Access to this E-mail by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not an addressee, any disclosure or copying of the contents of this E-mail or any action taken (or not taken) in reliance on it is unauthorized and may be unlawful. If you are not an addressee, please inform the sender immediately, then delete this message and empty from your trash.
SHARE attendees - Any Update on the Live Guest Migration?
Has there been any update on the status of Live Guest Migration? thx Lionel B. Dyck, Consultant/Specialist Enterprise Platform Services, Mainframe Engineering KP-IT Enterprise Engineering 925-926-5332 (8-473-5332) | E-Mail: lionel.b.d...@kp.org AIM: lbdyck | Yahoo IM: lbdyck Kaiser Service Credo: "Our cause is health. Our passion is service. We?re here to make lives better.? ?Never attribute to malice what can be caused by miscommunication.? NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are prohibited from sharing, copying, or otherwise using or disclosing its contents. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments without reading, forwarding or saving them. Thank you.
Re: XSTORE
Thanks for all the excellent discussion on this guys. It pretty much confirms what I already believed. I am from the "old school" when RAM was expensive (and limited) and disk was slow, I remember the "good old days of HPO" defining SWAP, Preferred Page (was it PPAG?) and regular PAGE based primarily on putting your fastest devices highest in the pecking order. Now RAM is cheap, and even DASD is mighty fast (you are normally reading/writing to a cache anyhow) so it seems less important - but I wanted to bounce this around a bit for feedback. -Mike -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Jim Bohnsack Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 1:32 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: XSTORE We should remember that there is no one right answer to the allocation (or not) of XSTORE and whether it's used solely, partially, or not at all for MDCACHE. It's all an "it depends" (Wonder if Bill Bitner has copyrighted that). We should just be thankful that it's one of the tuning knobs that we have available. Things that muddy up the water are paging rate or demand, user I/O rate as well as locality of reference of user data, the availability of control unit cache and how much cache is there. Add onto that "little" things such as how much main memory does the processor even have to divvy up for DPA and XSTORE. The only way to come up with the your "right" answer is to have a pretty good idea of the tuning knobs that are available as well as using a good performance monitor. I remember an experiment or test that I made about 20 years ago on a 3090 that had some 3880-J21's for paging. By putting a load on the system such that all paging could be contained in XSTORE or expanding that paging demand such that paging was going out to the J21's but being contained in the J21 cache or expanding such that paging had to also go out to the 3350 backing storage on the J21, I saw paging capability to main memory only that was about 10 times the amount that could be handled in the J21 cache. When paging had to go out the backing storage, page rate was cut again to a tenth. Jim Ron Schmiedge wrote: > Hi Mike, > > Many experts have talked about XSTORE and VM using it for paging. All > our defined XSTORE is being used for MDCACHE. It made a noticable > difference to I/O performance for our VSE production guest. We could > have done it all in regular storage but until a recent processor > change, we didn't have much real storage that I wanted to give away. A > new-to-us z800 came with a lot more memory than we used to have, so we > configured some as XSTORE and MDC took it all. I wish I could claim > good planning on our part. > > Ron > > -- Jim Bohnsack Cornell University (972) 596-6377 home/office (972) 342-5823 cell jab...@cornell.edu
Re: XSTORE
On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 5:54 PM, Schuh, Richard wrote: > That may not be a good thing. The most frequent advice I have heard/seen in > that area is to do all MDC to main and only use XSTORE for paging. It is correct that you should not define XSTORE to be used for MDC. It does not make sense. However, if you currently have a lot of XSTORE defined and your memory requirements are so low that you don't page at all, then there is (since z/VM 5.2) nothing against using that unused XSTORE for MDC if it otherwise would be wasted. Since your storage requirements are low, there is little need to schedule an LPAR config change to convert it to main memory. If you do a change, then it would probably be to give some of your main memory to another LPAR that needs it. Rob -- Rob van der Heij Velocity Software http://www.velocitysoftware.com/
Re: Using LBYONLY
Yep, Dennis is correct. The documentation shows a REJECT LINK and ACCEPT LINK, same command. LOGON and LOGONBY are evaluated separately. What would work is: REJECT * LOGONBY ACCEPT someuser LOGONBY If you want to keep that user from being logged on to unless it is a logonby, use LBYONLY. Yvonne Yvonne DeMeritt CA yvonne.demer...@ca.com From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of O'Brien, Dennis L Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 1:25 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Using LBYONLY Shimon, What release of VM:Secure are you running? In r2.8 G0808, it definitely doesn't work. I tested before I posted. You're assuming that LOGON and LOGONBY rules are evaluated together to determine the most specific rule. That's not how it works. LOGON rules are evaluated first. If the userid cannot be logged onto, LOGONBY rules are irrelevant. Dennis O'Brien 39,556 From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Shimon Lebowitz Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 02:14 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: [IBMVM] Using LBYONLY I am sorry, but that set of rules WILL work in VM:Secure. To quote the Rules Manual: When two or more rules in a file govern a particular access request, VM:Secure establishes an order of preference based on how precisely the requester is specified. In order of preference, a rule is chosen that indicates: 1.A specific user ID as requester 2.A specific group as requester 3.An asterisk (*) as requester; this indicates all user IDs So, when someone NOT mentioned in the specific ACCEPT rule tries to logonby, the REJECT * LOGON catches them. But if the user specified in the accept attempts it, the ACCEPT rule is more specific and will allow the logonby. In fact, the manual gives an example just like Richard's rules, except that it is dealing with LINK requests: REJECT * LINK 191 RR ACCEPT FRAISERC LINK 191 RR Shimon > Richard Schuh wrote: > >And with VM:Secure, you can accomplish the same effect by using the > Rules Facility. With >the following rules, the actual password is > immaterial: > > > > REJECT * LOGON > > ACCEPT userx LOGONBY > > That doesn't work. The REJECT * LOGON rule takes precedence, and you > don't even get a chance to enter your password for LOGONBY. Set the > password to LBYONLY and create ACCEPT xxx LOGONBY rules for the userids > you want to log on. That's all you need. If you don't have VM:Secure > or another external security manager, then set the password to LBYONLY > and add LOGONBY statements to the directory. > >Dennis O'Brien > > 39,556 -- Shimon Lebowitzmailto:shim...@iname.com VM System Programmer . Israel Police National HQ. Jerusalem, Israel phone: +972 2 542-9877 fax: 542-9308
Re: XSTORE
We should remember that there is no one right answer to the allocation (or not) of XSTORE and whether it's used solely, partially, or not at all for MDCACHE. It's all an "it depends" (Wonder if Bill Bitner has copyrighted that). We should just be thankful that it's one of the tuning knobs that we have available. Things that muddy up the water are paging rate or demand, user I/O rate as well as locality of reference of user data, the availability of control unit cache and how much cache is there. Add onto that "little" things such as how much main memory does the processor even have to divvy up for DPA and XSTORE. The only way to come up with the your "right" answer is to have a pretty good idea of the tuning knobs that are available as well as using a good performance monitor. I remember an experiment or test that I made about 20 years ago on a 3090 that had some 3880-J21's for paging. By putting a load on the system such that all paging could be contained in XSTORE or expanding that paging demand such that paging was going out to the J21's but being contained in the J21 cache or expanding such that paging had to also go out to the 3350 backing storage on the J21, I saw paging capability to main memory only that was about 10 times the amount that could be handled in the J21 cache. When paging had to go out the backing storage, page rate was cut again to a tenth. Jim Ron Schmiedge wrote: Hi Mike, Many experts have talked about XSTORE and VM using it for paging. All our defined XSTORE is being used for MDCACHE. It made a noticable difference to I/O performance for our VSE production guest. We could have done it all in regular storage but until a recent processor change, we didn't have much real storage that I wanted to give away. A new-to-us z800 came with a lot more memory than we used to have, so we configured some as XSTORE and MDC took it all. I wish I could claim good planning on our part. Ron -- Jim Bohnsack Cornell University (972) 596-6377 home/office (972) 342-5823 cell jab...@cornell.edu
Re: XSTORE
On 3/5/09 12:02 PM, "Huegel, Thomas" wrote: > If it was dynamic to configure XSTORE one could experiment a bit. > Or if the Z11 comes with a USB port that one could plug a thumb drive into and > be back to what XSTORE used to be .. I digress we really don't need USB ports > on the mainframe. They'd be real handy for setting up stuff like certificates and encryption keys.
Re: XSTORE
If it was dynamic to configure XSTORE one could experiment a bit. Or if the Z11 comes with a USB port that one could plug a thumb drive into and be back to what XSTORE used to be .. I digress we really don't need USB ports on the mainframe. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu]on Behalf Of Schuh, Richard Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 10:55 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: XSTORE That may not be a good thing. The most frequent advice I have heard/seen in that area is to do all MDC to main and only use XSTORE for paging. Regards, Richard Schuh > -Original Message- > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Ron Schmiedge > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 8:03 AM > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > Subject: Re: XSTORE > > Hi Mike, > > Many experts have talked about XSTORE and VM using it for > paging. All our defined XSTORE is being used for MDCACHE. It > made a noticable difference to I/O performance for our VSE > production guest. We could have done it all in regular > storage but until a recent processor change, we didn't have > much real storage that I wanted to give away. A new-to-us > z800 came with a lot more memory than we used to have, so we > configured some as XSTORE and MDC took it all. I wish I could > claim good planning on our part. > > Ron > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Michael Coffin > wrote: > > Hi Folks, > > > > What value is there in defining XSTORE these days? Aside from the > > ability to attach XSTORE to specific virtual machines, > wouldn't it be > > best to just make it all DPA and let CP manage it? > > > > Also, assuming you aren't paging much - is attaching XSTORE to a > > userid going to provide a VERY noticable improvement in performance > > (at the expense of taking it away from all other virtual > machines, of course)? > > > > -Mike >
Re: XSTORE
That would be a useful capability, especially for those of us who cannot spend the resources (LPAR Profile changes, deactivation/activation of LPAR, etc.) to fine tune the ratio of main to expanded storage. Being able to tweak a value in the SYSTEM CONFIG or, better yet, dynamically at IPL time would be nice. I presume that making all memory main storage and setting aside some amount to use as the intermediate buffer would not be too onerous a task. One benefit that would accrue from doing so would be that pages could be written directly from the buffer. There would be no need to move them to main storage before writing them. This could be a good thing, lessening the time and overhead to perform the page-out. Regards, Richard Schuh From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of James Stracka (DHL US) Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 6:58 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: XSTORE I agree. Then we would not have to reconfigure LPAR storage definitions when testing OS/390 and z/VM. From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Huegel, Thomas Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 4:05 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: XSTORE Understanding that CP uses an algorithm that handles XSTORE as a preferred paging area the question arises as to why? Since XSTORE is just a piece of main memory the reason for it's existence is no longer that it is some cheaper slower memory that can be used for paging. I think we all look at setting up the hardware and defining XSTORE as a permanent definition. Is it time to change CP, perhaps adding a parm to SYSTEM CONFIG that says OK CP use 500 meg of main storage for paging etc.? In other words instead of making a hard configuration change lets just tell CP how much memory to 'treat' as XSTORE. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu]on Behalf Of Kris Buelens Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 1:43 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: XSTORE Attaching XSTORE to a user: you can, but it is up to the user to do something with it, CMS doesn't use it at all, z/OS no longer supports it, and I don't know about Linux. To define some XSTORE fo CP is still a good thing if VM starts paging: XSTORE is managed differently than central storage. With some XSTORE CP has a better chance to select the best pages to page out. 2009/3/4, Michael Coffin : Hi Folks, What value is there in defining XSTORE these days? Aside from the ability to attach XSTORE to specific virtual machines, wouldn't it be best to just make it all DPA and let CP manage it? Also, assuming you aren't paging much - is attaching XSTORE to a userid going to provide a VERY noticable improvement in performance (at the expense of taking it away from all other virtual machines, of course)? -Mike -- Kris Buelens, IBM Belgium, VM customer support
Re: XSTORE
That may not be a good thing. The most frequent advice I have heard/seen in that area is to do all MDC to main and only use XSTORE for paging. Regards, Richard Schuh > -Original Message- > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Ron Schmiedge > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 8:03 AM > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > Subject: Re: XSTORE > > Hi Mike, > > Many experts have talked about XSTORE and VM using it for > paging. All our defined XSTORE is being used for MDCACHE. It > made a noticable difference to I/O performance for our VSE > production guest. We could have done it all in regular > storage but until a recent processor change, we didn't have > much real storage that I wanted to give away. A new-to-us > z800 came with a lot more memory than we used to have, so we > configured some as XSTORE and MDC took it all. I wish I could > claim good planning on our part. > > Ron > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Michael Coffin > wrote: > > Hi Folks, > > > > What value is there in defining XSTORE these days? Aside from the > > ability to attach XSTORE to specific virtual machines, > wouldn't it be > > best to just make it all DPA and let CP manage it? > > > > Also, assuming you aren't paging much - is attaching XSTORE to a > > userid going to provide a VERY noticable improvement in performance > > (at the expense of taking it away from all other virtual > machines, of course)? > > > > -Mike >
Re: Utility Question
thanks to all I will add it to the profile exec as well so I don't suffer another can't remember (you know what) moment Augie
Re: DEF MDISK
Any Class A with DEVMAINT can also DEF MDISK. Regards, Richard Schuh > -Original Message- > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Rob van der Heij > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 5:35 AM > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > Subject: Re: DEF MDISK > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 8:51 AM, Shimon Lebowitz > wrote: > > Hi, > > I was surprised to discover that there is apparently no way to do a > > DEFINE MDISK without getting read/write access to the mdisk. > > > Does anyone have a way around this? > > IIRC the DEF MDISK also is limited to the system operator, > which I am not on most systems. > > For this purpose I carry a DIAG84 MODULE that does an update > of the active CP directory to re-define one of my mini disks > so that I can issue the LINK to get it. Don't have the syntax > handy, but goes something like this: > DIAG84 RVDHEIJ MDISK 191 3390 17 20 VMA130 > LINK * 191 22 RR > I used to have an exec that saved and restored the old extent > around the link, but as long as you don't logoff/logon before > next directxa there is no need. > > Rob >
Re: Utility Question
Did you do: ACCESS 193 ? Original message >Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 11:02:20 -0500 >From: August Carideo >Subject: Utility Question >To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > >I am trying to run > >utility utiltape all > >from maint's ID , it comes back w/ unknown command >is there a particular disk that needs to be assessed that maint is not >already ? >thanks, >Augie
Re: Utility Question
As Ron said, MAINT's 193 disk. Added suggestion: since the 193 disk, and other disks have useful utilities, I updated MAINT's PROFILE EXEC to add some extra "ACCESS"es: 'ACCESS 5E5 B' /* VMSES/E */ /*'ACCESS 5E6 B'*/ /* One or the other, 5E6 after VMSES/E serviced */ 'ACCESS 2CC C' /* "USER DIRECT" when no External Security Mgr */ 'ACCESS 51D D' /* VMSES/E Software Inventory Management disk */ 'ACCESS 299 E' /* Rstuff (our local mods on a non_IBM disk) */ 'ACCESS 193 U' /* VM Utilities and loadmaps*/ 'ACCESS 3B2 V' /* VM Sample utilities */ 'ACCESS 500 R' /* IBM-provided service disk (SERVLINK files) */ 'ACCESSM0 ON'/* See filemode0 files */ Alter those as you see fit. Works for me. YMMV. Mike Walter Hewitt Associates Any opinions expressed herein are mine alone and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of Hewitt Associates. "August Carideo" Sent by: "The IBM z/VM Operating System" 03/05/2009 10:02 AM Please respond to "The IBM z/VM Operating System" To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Utility Question I am trying to run utility utiltape all from maint's ID , it comes back w/ unknown command is there a particular disk that needs to be assessed that maint is not already ? thanks, Augie 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: Utility Question
UTILITY exec is on MAINT 193 Ron On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 10:02 AM, August Carideo wrote: > I am trying to run > > utility utiltape all > > from maint's ID , it comes back w/ unknown command > is there a particular disk that needs to be assessed that maint is not > already ? > thanks, > Augie >
Re: VM FTP Question
What are the error messages on the server end? Jim Hughes 603-271-5586 "It is fun to do the impossible." From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Tracy, David Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 10:31 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: VM FTP Question All, We had a server interruption while an FTP transfer was in progress. Source files from VM; target AIX. It appears a non 0 return code was not set when this occurred. Has anyone experienced this? Here is a portion of the console log. 382345214 bytes transferred. Connection with P3ELM terminated No additional error information can be seen in the console. Thank you... ...Dave
Utility Question
I am trying to run utility utiltape all from maint's ID , it comes back w/ unknown command is there a particular disk that needs to be assessed that maint is not already ? thanks, Augie
Re: XSTORE
Hi Mike, Many experts have talked about XSTORE and VM using it for paging. All our defined XSTORE is being used for MDCACHE. It made a noticable difference to I/O performance for our VSE production guest. We could have done it all in regular storage but until a recent processor change, we didn't have much real storage that I wanted to give away. A new-to-us z800 came with a lot more memory than we used to have, so we configured some as XSTORE and MDC took it all. I wish I could claim good planning on our part. Ron On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Michael Coffin wrote: > Hi Folks, > > What value is there in defining XSTORE these days? Aside from the ability > to attach XSTORE to specific virtual machines, wouldn't it be best to just > make it all DPA and let CP manage it? > > Also, assuming you aren't paging much - is attaching XSTORE to a userid > going to provide a VERY noticable improvement in performance (at the expense > of taking it away from all other virtual machines, of course)? > > -Mike
Re: VM FTP Question
Ah, well... to reply to myself (is that a sign of insanity?), and to save you searching for it, here's the Fran's Slippery Rock web site from which you can download VMFTP and many other excellent, free z/VM software tools. http://zvm.sru.edu/~DOWNLOAD/ Mike Walter Hewitt Associates Any opinions expressed herein are mine alone and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of Hewitt Associates. Mike Walter/National/Hewitt associa...@hewitt Associates NA Sent by: "The IBM z/VM Operating System" 03/05/2009 09:43 AM Please respond to "The IBM z/VM Operating System" To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Re: VM FTP Question Were you in interactive FTP at the time, or trying to script it from rexx (wherein perhaps something else changed the rc after FTP ended)? If you have not tried it, VMFTP is a terrific free tool for repeated, scripted FTPs: http://ukcc.uky.edu/~tools.1997/ And perhaps even more current, from Fran Hensler's Slippery Rock FTP site. Mike Walter Hewitt Associates Any opinions expressed herein are mine alone and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of Hewitt Associates. "Tracy, David" Sent by: "The IBM z/VM Operating System" 03/05/2009 09:30 AM Please respond to "The IBM z/VM Operating System" To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject VM FTP Question All, We had a server interruption while an FTP transfer was in progress. Source files from VM; target AIX. It appears a non 0 return code was not set when this occurred. Has anyone experienced this? Here is a portion of the console log. 382345214 bytes transferred. Connection with P3ELM terminated No additional error information can be seen in the console. Thank you? ?Dave 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. 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. 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: VM FTP Question
David, If you are allowed, get VMFTP. It has good macro support and support for return codes. Normal FTP almost always give RC=0 Jim From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Tracy, David Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 8:31 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: VM FTP Question All, We had a server interruption while an FTP transfer was in progress. Source files from VM; target AIX. It appears a non 0 return code was not set when this occurred. Has anyone experienced this? Here is a portion of the console log. 382345214 bytes transferred. Connection with P3ELM terminated No additional error information can be seen in the console. Thank you... ...Dave
Re: VM FTP Question
Were you in interactive FTP at the time, or trying to script it from rexx (wherein perhaps something else changed the rc after FTP ended)? If you have not tried it, VMFTP is a terrific free tool for repeated, scripted FTPs: http://ukcc.uky.edu/~tools.1997/ And perhaps even more current, from Fran Hensler's Slippery Rock FTP site. Mike Walter Hewitt Associates Any opinions expressed herein are mine alone and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of Hewitt Associates. "Tracy, David" Sent by: "The IBM z/VM Operating System" 03/05/2009 09:30 AM Please respond to "The IBM z/VM Operating System" To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject VM FTP Question All, We had a server interruption while an FTP transfer was in progress. Source files from VM; target AIX. It appears a non 0 return code was not set when this occurred. Has anyone experienced this? Here is a portion of the console log. 382345214 bytes transferred. Connection with P3ELM terminated No additional error information can be seen in the console. Thank you? ?Dave 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.
VM FTP Question
All, We had a server interruption while an FTP transfer was in progress. Source files from VM; target AIX. It appears a non 0 return code was not set when this occurred. Has anyone experienced this? Here is a portion of the console log. 382345214 bytes transferred. Connection with P3ELM terminated No additional error information can be seen in the console. Thank you... ...Dave
Re: XSTORE
I agree. Then we would not have to reconfigure LPAR storage definitions when testing OS/390 and z/VM. From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Huegel, Thomas Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 4:05 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: XSTORE Understanding that CP uses an algorithm that handles XSTORE as a preferred paging area the question arises as to why? Since XSTORE is just a piece of main memory the reason for it's existence is no longer that it is some cheaper slower memory that can be used for paging. I think we all look at setting up the hardware and defining XSTORE as a permanent definition. Is it time to change CP, perhaps adding a parm to SYSTEM CONFIG that says OK CP use 500 meg of main storage for paging etc.? In other words instead of making a hard configuration change lets just tell CP how much memory to 'treat' as XSTORE. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu]on Behalf Of Kris Buelens Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 1:43 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: XSTORE Attaching XSTORE to a user: you can, but it is up to the user to do something with it, CMS doesn't use it at all, z/OS no longer supports it, and I don't know about Linux. To define some XSTORE fo CP is still a good thing if VM starts paging: XSTORE is managed differently than central storage. With some XSTORE CP has a better chance to select the best pages to page out. 2009/3/4, Michael Coffin : Hi Folks, What value is there in defining XSTORE these days? Aside from the ability to attach XSTORE to specific virtual machines, wouldn't it be best to just make it all DPA and let CP manage it? Also, assuming you aren't paging much - is attaching XSTORE to a userid going to provide a VERY noticable improvement in performance (at the expense of taking it away from all other virtual machines, of course)? -Mike -- Kris Buelens, IBM Belgium, VM customer support
Re: XSTORE
One minor correction David... Since OS/390 became z/OS it has not used XSTORE in any way. If you give XSTORE to z/OS it spits out a message at IPL time that it has detected some XSTORE but will not use it. Mike C. M. (Mike) Hammock Sr. Technical Advisor IBM System Z Solutions Mainline Information Systems (404) 643-3258 mike.hamm...@mainline.com "David Boyes" To Sent by: The IBM "IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU" z/VM Operating System cc Subject Re: XSTORE 03/04/2009 05:06 PM Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System Paging hierarchy. Think of XSTORE as a really highspeed buffer between main storage and real disk. If you hit a spike in paging activity (like when all your Linux guests wake up near the same time to do something cron-related), you dramatically increase the probability that the pages you want/need are in XSTOR rather than having to wait for them to come in from physical I/O. I don’t really bother to attach XSTORE to a userid unless it’s z/OS or maybe VSE. In most cases I’ve seen, those are the only guest systems that really know what to do with it, and they’re doing so much of their own thing that the impact on the floor system isn’t usually their big issue. On 3/4/09 1:55 PM, "Michael Coffin" wrote: Hi Folks, What value is there in defining XSTORE these days? Aside from the ability to attach XSTORE to specific virtual machines, wouldn't it be best to just make it all DPA and let CP manage it? Also, assuming you aren't paging much - is attaching XSTORE to a userid going to provide a VERY noticable improvement in performance (at the expense of taking it away from all other virtual machines, of course)? -Mike This e-mail and files transmitted with it are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not one of the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you received this message in error, please immediately notify sender by e-mail, and destroy the original message. Thank You.
Re: Determining the mac address of the TCP/IP connection
Hello Ray, Thank you. That is exactly what I wanted. Ed Martin Aultman Health Foundation 330-588-4723 ext 40441 From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Raymond Noal Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 7:35 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Determining the mac address of the TCP/IP connection NETSTAT ARP ALL - OR - If you have a vswitch installed and running - Q VSWITCH vswitch-name DETAILS HITACHI DATA SYSTEMS Raymond E. Noal Senior Technical Engineer Office: (408) 970 - 7978 From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Edward M Martin Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:08 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Determining the mac address of the TCP/IP connection Hello Everyone, Is there a netstat command to see the mac address a QDIO card on a z890 running TCP/IP? Ed Martin Aultman Health Foundation 330-588-4723 ext 40441
Re: DEF MDISK
On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 8:51 AM, Shimon Lebowitz wrote: > Hi, > I was surprised to discover that there is apparently no way to do > a DEFINE MDISK without getting read/write access to the mdisk. > Does anyone have a way around this? IIRC the DEF MDISK also is limited to the system operator, which I am not on most systems. For this purpose I carry a DIAG84 MODULE that does an update of the active CP directory to re-define one of my mini disks so that I can issue the LINK to get it. Don't have the syntax handy, but goes something like this: DIAG84 RVDHEIJ MDISK 191 3390 17 20 VMA130 LINK * 191 22 RR I used to have an exec that saved and restored the old extent around the link, but as long as you don't logoff/logon before next directxa there is no need. Rob
Re: XSTORE
On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 12:04 AM, Huegel, Thomas wrote: > Is it time to change CP, perhaps adding a parm to SYSTEM CONFIG that says OK > CP use 500 meg of main storage for paging etc.? In other words instead of > making a hard configuration change lets just tell CP how much memory > to 'treat' as XSTORE. Mostly right. It's made out of the same bits. Typically you take xstore as 20% of the total. There is little penalty if you have a bit too much, so I don't expect a need in real life to tinker with the ratio. So in theory CP could at IPL just draw a dotted line and do it like that. It's a matter of where you want to invest your development resources. Do we want new and exiting function like Live Guest Migration? Or do we want IBM to re-implement something we already had for 20 years, that has worked fine and has been tested and is well understood? Just to get rid of something trivial as defining the storage for the LPAR ? When they put the paging stuff upside down there a hole lot of things to be measured and tested. Rob -- Rob van der Heij Velocity Software http://www.velocitysoftware.com/
Re: DEF MDISK
You get in R/W by definition, corresponding even to a LINK MW, with all dangers that implies. Therefore, use ACCESS vdev Z/Z to tell CMS to treat it as R/O My MDSK EXEC (on VM's download lib) will make that R/O access the default. 2009/3/5 Shimon Lebowitz > Hi, > I was surprised to discover that there is apparently no way to do > a DEFINE MDISK without getting read/write access to the mdisk. > > Did I miss something? > Am I the only one who wants to be able to LOOK at > a disk area, but do not want to risk WRITING on it? > (Especially when, iirc, EVERY time CMS does a RELEASE > of a R/W disk it writes the directory!!) > > I just assumed I could do > DEF MDISK cuu startcyl numcyls volser R/O > > Does anyone have a way around this? > > Thanks, > Shimon > > -- > > Shimon Lebowitzmailto:shim...@iname.com > VM System Programmer . > Israel Police National HQ. > Jerusalem, Israel phone: +972 2 542-9877 fax: 542-9308 > > -- Kris Buelens, IBM Belgium, VM customer support
DEF MDISK
Hi, I was surprised to discover that there is apparently no way to do a DEFINE MDISK without getting read/write access to the mdisk. Did I miss something? Am I the only one who wants to be able to LOOK at a disk area, but do not want to risk WRITING on it? (Especially when, iirc, EVERY time CMS does a RELEASE of a R/W disk it writes the directory!!) I just assumed I could do DEF MDISK cuu startcyl numcyls volser R/O Does anyone have a way around this? Thanks, Shimon -- Shimon Lebowitzmailto:shim...@iname.com VM System Programmer . Israel Police National HQ. Jerusalem, Israel phone: +972 2 542-9877 fax: 542-9308
