Copyfile with PACK on MVS ?

[Rob van der Heij]

Friends,

When a RECFM V file is transferred through download/upload with a PC,
we need to protect the record layout. And when it's non-text you can't
stick CRLF between the lines. On VM we normally have people use the
PACK option of COPYFILE, which puts enough info in the file to restore
the structure.

What do people do on MVS? I thought a simple IEBGENER to convert to VB
or whatever would do, but that does not seem to be common practice...
does TERSE maybe put stuff in to retain the record structure? And does
our DETERSE recover that?

Thanks, Rob

Re: General CMS minidisks and SFS on PAV DASD?

[Rob van der Heij]

On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 5:59 PM, George Henke/NYLIC
george_he...@newyorklife.com wrote:

 The IO Supervisor has not kept up with the hardware.

 It still thinks of a disk device as a spinning platter when in fact it is a 
 rank of RAID devices striped over numerous HDs and cached in a disk 
 controller from where it is actually being read thereby permitting multiple 
 IOs to the same device number..

The architecture guarantees that the I/O's to the device are
serialized, that is the 2nd queued I/O only starts when the first one
completes. This architecture is exploited by OS and applications to
ensure that data on disk is in a consistent state. Ever heard of shops
where 5000 PROFS users had to go through fsck on their CMS disk
after a power failure? ;-)

Sometimes that guarantee is not needed. Often when two completely
unrelated I/O's go for different data that happens to reside on the
the same real volume, you couldn't care less. Or when the OS does not
provide such a guarantee anyway (aka lazy write) you can't exploit
the hardware guarantee. When the channel program guarantees that they
are really unrelated (so not writing or reading the same data) we can
leave it to the I/O subsystem to change the order if it makes sense.

Whether it makes sense is not easy to tell. It make a lot of sense for
your hardware vendor. It makes sense when you do single-threaded lab
benchmarks that need to saturate the I/O subsystem. There's a lot of
cases where it does not make sense (like when SFS does its own smart
things to spread I/O).

If someone has relevant data, I'm always interested to see whether it
makes sense... Rob

Re: Copyfile with PACK on MVS ?

[Kris Buelens]

On VM at least TERSE creates a F 1024 file, wouldn't it do that on MVS too?


2010/12/21 Rob van der Heij rvdh...@gmail.com

 Friends,

 When a RECFM V file is transferred through download/upload with a PC,
 we need to protect the record layout. And when it's non-text you can't
 stick CRLF between the lines. On VM we normally have people use the
 PACK option of COPYFILE, which puts enough info in the file to restore
 the structure.

 What do people do on MVS? I thought a simple IEBGENER to convert to VB
 or whatever would do, but that does not seem to be common practice...
 does TERSE maybe put stuff in to retain the record structure? And does
 our DETERSE recover that?

 Thanks, Rob




-- 
Kris Buelens,
IBM Belgium, VM customer support

Re: Copyfile with PACK on MVS ?

[Rob van der Heij]

On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Kris Buelens kris.buel...@gmail.com wrote:
 On VM at least TERSE creates a F 1024 file, wouldn't it do that on MVS too?

Well, you can also talk IND$FILE into making F 1024 file, but that
does not help... ;-)

But since I think the service process uses tersed VMFPLC images, I
got more optimistic that the DETERSE should be able to rebuild the
record layout. I thought we only got DETERSE with z/VM, but that may
have changed.

| Rob

Re: Copyfile with PACK on MVS ?

[Richard Troth]

Maybe NETDATA?

-- R;   





On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 04:21, Rob van der Heij rvdh...@gmail.com wrote:
 Friends,

 When a RECFM V file is transferred through download/upload with a PC,
 we need to protect the record layout. And when it's non-text you can't
 stick CRLF between the lines. On VM we normally have people use the
 PACK option of COPYFILE, which puts enough info in the file to restore
 the structure.

 What do people do on MVS? I thought a simple IEBGENER to convert to VB
 or whatever would do, but that does not seem to be common practice...
 does TERSE maybe put stuff in to retain the record structure? And does
 our DETERSE recover that?

 Thanks, Rob

Re: Copyfile with PACK on MVS ?

[McKown, John]

 -Original Message-
 From: The IBM z/VM Operating System 
 [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Rob van der Heij
 Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 3:22 AM
 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
 Subject: Copyfile with PACK on MVS ?
 
 Friends,
 
 When a RECFM V file is transferred through download/upload with a PC,
 we need to protect the record layout. And when it's non-text you can't
 stick CRLF between the lines. On VM we normally have people use the
 PACK option of COPYFILE, which puts enough info in the file to restore
 the structure.
 
 What do people do on MVS? I thought a simple IEBGENER to convert to VB
 or whatever would do, but that does not seem to be common practice...
 does TERSE maybe put stuff in to retain the record structure? And does
 our DETERSE recover that?
 
 Thanks, Rob

You can use AMATERSE or TSO XMIT. AMATERSE only works for sequential datasets. 
XMIT works for both PDS and sequential. I use XMIT. There is something called 
XMITMANAGER for Winblows which can then manipulate that file if you need to on 
a Windows machine. I don't use it. 

In some cases, I just use z/OS UNIX files and pax.

--
John McKown 
Systems Engineer IV
IT

Administrative Services Group

HealthMarkets(r)

9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010
(817) 255-3225 phone * 
john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or 
proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact 
the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. 
HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the 
insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance 
Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The 
MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM

 

Re: Another teaser...

[Mark Pace]

On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Rich Smrcina r...@velocitysoftware.comwrote:

 Excellent!  On both counts!


What Rich said!


-- 
Mark D Pace
Senior Systems Engineer
Mainline Information Systems

lognauo in the result from Q NAMES

[Aisik Chang]

Good morning, Listers,

Q NAMES displays  some of
 lognauto - DSC , lognauto - DSC , AUTOPROC - DSC , lognauto - DSC.
Why is this happenning, the manual says:
 If a user has not completed AUTOLOG or XAUTOLOG processing, the
userid is displayed as lognauto.
There may be multiple instances of lognauto for different users.

What's the case XAUTOLOG is not completed. ?

Thanks,

Ann

Re: Copyfile with PACK on MVS ?

[Dave Jones]

A file TERSEd on MVS can be untersed on z/VM. Here's the JCL to do it on
MVS:

//TERSEEXEC PGM=TRSMAIN,PARM=PACK
//SYSPRINT DD SYSOUT=*
//INFILE   DD DISP=SHR,DSN=YOUR.INPUT.DATASET
//OUTFILE  DD DISP=(NEW,CATLG),UNIT=SYSDA,
//SPACE=(CYL,(10,5),RLSE),
//DSN=YOUR.TERSED.DATASET
//*

The output file will be in F 1024 format, so a binary transfer to a PC
and then back to VM will to be DETERSEd will yield the original file.

DJ

On 12/21/2010 06:29 AM, Rob van der Heij wrote:
 On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Kris Buelens kris.buel...@gmail.com wrote:
 On VM at least TERSE creates a F 1024 file, wouldn't it do that on MVS too?
 
 Well, you can also talk IND$FILE into making F 1024 file, but that
 does not help... ;-)
 
 But since I think the service process uses tersed VMFPLC images, I
 got more optimistic that the DETERSE should be able to rebuild the
 record layout. I thought we only got DETERSE with z/VM, but that may
 have changed.
 
 | Rob
 

-- 
Dave Jones
V/Soft Software
www.vsoft-software.com
Houston, TX
281.578.7544

Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

[Wakser, David]

All:

We are running 2 2.3 VSE systems under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800 CPU.
We are experiencing periods of time when VSEs do not respond at all
(e.g. cannot get in via FAQS from CMS, etc.), even though nothing is
running in the VSE system and the z/VM system is not very busy. At other
times, we have excellent response times, though conditions on either the
guests or the z/VM host didn't seem to change.

We do not have any z/VM monitors (except Explore, which is not
set up properly), and we have even tried QUICKDSP, without success.

Is anyone aware of any PTFs that address this strange behavior?
We believe it started when the system was upgraded to z/VM 5.4.

David Wakser



Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may contain 
material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or Protected Health 
Information, within the meaning of the regulations under the Health Insurance 
Portability  Accountability Act as amended.  If it is not clear that you are 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this 
transmittal in error, and any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of 
this e-mail, including any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you 
have received this e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender 
and delete it from your system. Thank you.

AUTO: Tracy Dean/Dallas/IBM is out of the office until 06/12/2001. (returning 01/04/2011)

[Tracy Dean]

I am out of the office until 01/04/2011.

I am out of the office on vacation.  I will be checking e-mail most
mornings.  For urgent matters, please contact my manager, Virgil Hein at
vh...@us.ibm.com or 919-254-5692.


Note: This is an automated response to your message  Strange response time
problems (also posted on VSE-L) sent on 12/21/2010 8:53:58 AM.

This is the only notification you will receive while this person is away.

Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

[Frank M. Ramaekers]

Are we sure it's VM?  Are there any partitions with a high priority than
FAQS (that could be dominating the CPU)?

 

 

Frank M. Ramaekers Jr.

 

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Wakser, David
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 8:54 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 

All:

We are running 2 2.3 VSE systems under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800 CPU.
We are experiencing periods of time when VSEs do not respond at all
(e.g. cannot get in via FAQS from CMS, etc.), even though nothing is
running in the VSE system and the z/VM system is not very busy. At other
times, we have excellent response times, though conditions on either the
guests or the z/VM host didn't seem to change.

We do not have any z/VM monitors (except Explore, which is not
set up properly), and we have even tried QUICKDSP, without success.

Is anyone aware of any PTFs that address this strange behavior?
We believe it started when the system was upgraded to z/VM 5.4.

David Wakser

Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may
contain material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or
Protected Health Information, within the meaning of the regulations
under the Health Insurance Portability  Accountability Act as amended.
If it is not clear that you are the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that you have received this transmittal in error, and any
review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, including
any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender and delete
it from your system. Thank you. 


_
This message contains information which is privileged and confidential and is 
solely for the use of the
intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any 
review, disclosure,
copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this message is strictly 
prohibited. If you have
received this in error, please destroy it immediately and notify us at 
privacy...@ailife.com.

Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

[Helmuth Teubl]

Hi,
maybe SRM-Settings not OK? You should overcommit LDUBUFs and STORBUFs
The defaults are:
CP Q SRM
IABIAS : INTENSITY=90%; DURATION=2
LDUBUF : Q1=100% Q2=75% Q3=60%
STORBUF: Q1=125% Q2=105% Q3=95%
DSPBUF : Q1=32767 Q2=32767 Q3=32767
DISPATCHING MINOR TIMESLICE = 5 MS
MAXWSS : LIMIT=%
.. : PAGES=99
XSTORE : 0%
LIMITHARD METHOD: DEADLINE

Have a look, maybe try following settings:
q srm
IABIAS : INTENSITY=90%; DURATION=2
LDUBUF : Q1=300% Q2=200% Q3=100%
STORBUF: Q1=300% Q2=275% Q3=250%
DSPBUF : Q1=32767 Q2=32767 Q3=32767
DISPATCHING MINOR TIMESLICE = 5 MS
MAXWSS : LIMIT=%
.. : PAGES=99
XSTORE : 0%
LIMITHARD METHOD: DEADLINE

kind regards
Helmuth




   
  Von:david.wak...@infocrossing.com 
   

   
  An: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU   
   

   
  Datum:  21.12.2010 15:54  
   

   
  Betreff:Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L) 
   

   
  GesendetIBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU   
   
  von:  
   

   





All:


We are running 2 2.3 VSE systems under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800 CPU. We
are experiencing periods of time when VSEs do not respond at all (e.g.
cannot get in via FAQS from CMS, etc.), even though nothing is running in
the VSE system and the z/VM system is not very busy. At other times, we
have excellent response times, though conditions on either the guests or
the z/VM host didn’t seem to change.


We do not have any z/VM monitors (except Explore, which is not set
up properly), and we have even tried QUICKDSP, without success.


Is anyone aware of any PTFs that address this strange behavior? We
believe it started when the system was upgraded to z/VM 5.4.


David Wakser


Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may
contain material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or
Protected Health Information, within the meaning of the regulations under
the Health Insurance Portability  Accountability Act as amended. If it is
not clear that you are the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
you have received this transmittal in error, and any review, dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail, including any attachment to it, is
strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please
immediately return it to the sender and delete it from your system. Thank
you.




Raiffeisen Informatik GmbH, Firmenbuchnr. 88239p, Handelsgericht Wien, DVR
0486809, UID ATU 16351908

Der Austausch von Nachrichten mit oben angefuehrtem Absender via E-Mail
dient ausschliesslich Informationszwecken. Rechtsgeschaeftliche
Erklaerungen duerfen ueber dieses Medium nicht ausgetauscht werden.
Correspondence with above mentioned sender via e-mail is only for
information purposes. This medium may not be used for exchange of
legally-binding communications.

Re: Copyfile with PACK on MVS ?

[George Henke/NYLIC]

You can use GIMZIP and GIMUNZIP on MVS, z/OS.




Rob van der Heij rvdh...@gmail.com 
Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
12/21/2010 07:29 AM
Please respond to
The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU


To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: Copyfile with PACK on MVS ?






On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Kris Buelens kris.buel...@gmail.com 
wrote:
 On VM at least TERSE creates a F 1024 file, wouldn't it do that on MVS 
too?

Well, you can also talk IND$FILE into making F 1024 file, but that
does not help... ;-)

But since I think the service process uses tersed VMFPLC images, I
got more optimistic that the DETERSE should be able to rebuild the
record layout. I thought we only got DETERSE with z/VM, but that may
have changed.

| Rob

Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

[Ron Schmiedge]

Is FAQS the problem? Are the VSE consoles responding when FAQS is not?

How many FAQS users do you have? I have a vague memory (and no books at
hand) of a limit to the number of FAQS users you can have.


On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 9:05 AM, Wakser, David 
david.wak...@infocrossing.com wrote:

 No, that is not the problem. This is a VERY low-usage system. Even when it
 seems to be asleep, its CPU usage is less than 2% (from both the VM and VSE
 perspectives).



 David Wakser



 *From:* The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] *On
 Behalf Of *Frank M. Ramaekers
 *Sent:* Tuesday, December 21, 2010 10:01 AM

 *To:* IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
 *Subject:* Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)



 Are we sure it’s VM?  Are there any partitions with a high priority than
 FAQS (that could be dominating the CPU)?





 Frank M. Ramaekers Jr.




 --

 *From:* The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] *On
 Behalf Of *Wakser, David
 *Sent:* Tuesday, December 21, 2010 8:54 AM
 *To:* IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
 *Subject:* Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)



 All:

 We are running 2 2.3 VSE systems under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800 CPU. We
 are experiencing periods of time when VSEs do not respond at all (e.g.
 cannot get in via FAQS from CMS, etc.), even though nothing is running in
 the VSE system and the z/VM system is not very busy. At other times, we have
 excellent response times, though conditions on either the guests or the z/VM
 host didn’t seem to change.

 We do not have any z/VM monitors (except Explore, which is not set
 up properly), and we have even tried QUICKDSP, without success.

 Is anyone aware of any PTFs that address this strange behavior? We
 believe it started when the system was upgraded to z/VM 5.4.

 David Wakser

Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

[Quay, Jonathan (IHG)]

Guest operating systems almost always live in Q3.  Try bumping up the Q3
STORBUF.  

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Wakser, David
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 10:21 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 

Already did that:

 

q srm  

IABIAS : INTENSITY=90%; DURATION=3 

LDUBUF : Q1=300% Q2=200% Q3=150%   

STORBUF: Q1=300% Q2=200% Q3=150%   

DSPBUF : Q1=32767 Q2=32767 Q3=32767

DISPATCHING MINOR TIMESLICE = 5 MS 

MAXWSS : LIMIT=%   

.. : PAGES=99  

XSTORE : 0%

 

From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Helmuth Teubl
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 10:06 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 

Hi,
maybe SRM-Settings not OK? You should overcommit LDUBUFs and STORBUFs
The defaults are:
CP Q SRM 
IABIAS : INTENSITY=90%; DURATION=2 
LDUBUF : Q1=100% Q2=75% Q3=60% 
STORBUF: Q1=125% Q2=105% Q3=95% 
DSPBUF : Q1=32767 Q2=32767 Q3=32767 
DISPATCHING MINOR TIMESLICE = 5 MS 
MAXWSS : LIMIT=% 
.. : PAGES=99 
XSTORE : 0% 
LIMITHARD METHOD: DEADLINE 

Have a look, maybe try following settings:
q srm 
IABIAS : INTENSITY=90%; DURATION=2 
LDUBUF : Q1=300% Q2=200% Q3=100% 
STORBUF: Q1=300% Q2=275% Q3=250% 
DSPBUF : Q1=32767 Q2=32767 Q3=32767 
DISPATCHING MINOR TIMESLICE = 5 MS 
MAXWSS : LIMIT=% 
.. : PAGES=99 
XSTORE : 0% 
LIMITHARD METHOD: DEADLINE 

kind regards
Helmuth 


Inactive hide details for David.Wakser---21.12.2010 15:54:15---All: We
are running 2 2.3 VSE systems under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800
David.Wakser---21.12.2010 15:54:15---All: We are running 2 2.3 VSE
systems under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800 CPU.



Von:


david.wak...@infocrossing.com



An:


IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU



Datum:


21.12.2010 15:54



Betreff:


Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)



Gesendet von:


IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU






All: 

We are running 2 2.3 VSE systems under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800 CPU. We are
experiencing periods of time when VSEs do not respond at all (e.g.
cannot get in via FAQS from CMS, etc.), even though nothing is running
in the VSE system and the z/VM system is not very busy. At other times,
we have excellent response times, though conditions on either the guests
or the z/VM host didn't seem to change. 

We do not have any z/VM monitors (except Explore, which is not set up
properly), and we have even tried QUICKDSP, without success. 

Is anyone aware of any PTFs that address this strange behavior? We
believe it started when the system was upgraded to z/VM 5.4. 

David Wakser 

Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may
contain material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or
Protected Health Information, within the meaning of the regulations
under the Health Insurance Portability  Accountability Act as amended.
If it is not clear that you are the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that you have received this transmittal in error, and any
review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, including
any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender and delete
it from your system. Thank you. 



Raiffeisen Informatik GmbH, Firmenbuchnr. 88239p, Handelsgericht Wien,
DVR 0486809, UID ATU 16351908

Der Austausch von Nachrichten mit oben angefuehrtem Absender via E-Mail
dient ausschliesslich Informationszwecken. Rechtsgeschaeftliche
Erklaerungen duerfen ueber dieses Medium nicht ausgetauscht werden. 
Correspondence with above mentioned sender via e-mail is only for
information purposes. This medium may not be used for exchange of
legally-binding communications.

Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

[Wakser, David]

No, FAQS is not the problem - we normally never have more than 1 or 2
FAQS users at a time, and most of the time there are NO users. CICS and
TCP/IP also seem to be asleep. I only brought up FAQS to attempt to
portray how the system fails to respond.

 

David Wakser

 

From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Ron Schmiedge
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 11:52 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 

Is FAQS the problem? Are the VSE consoles responding when FAQS is not?

How many FAQS users do you have? I have a vague memory (and no books at
hand) of a limit to the number of FAQS users you can have. 



On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 9:05 AM, Wakser, David
david.wak...@infocrossing.com wrote:

No, that is not the problem. This is a VERY low-usage system. Even when
it seems to be asleep, its CPU usage is less than 2% (from both the VM
and VSE perspectives).

 

David Wakser

 

From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Frank M. Ramaekers
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 10:01 AM


To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU

Subject: Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 

Are we sure it's VM?  Are there any partitions with a high priority than
FAQS (that could be dominating the CPU)?

 

 

Frank M. Ramaekers Jr.

 

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Wakser, David
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 8:54 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 

All:

We are running 2 2.3 VSE systems under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800 CPU.
We are experiencing periods of time when VSEs do not respond at all
(e.g. cannot get in via FAQS from CMS, etc.), even though nothing is
running in the VSE system and the z/VM system is not very busy. At other
times, we have excellent response times, though conditions on either the
guests or the z/VM host didn't seem to change.

We do not have any z/VM monitors (except Explore, which is not
set up properly), and we have even tried QUICKDSP, without success.

Is anyone aware of any PTFs that address this strange behavior?
We believe it started when the system was upgraded to z/VM 5.4.

David Wakser

 

 



Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may contain 
material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or Protected Health 
Information, within the meaning of the regulations under the Health Insurance 
Portability  Accountability Act as amended.  If it is not clear that you are 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this 
transmittal in error, and any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of 
this e-mail, including any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you 
have received this e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender 
and delete it from your system. Thank you.

Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

[Neale Ferguson]

Actually, what does #CP IND Q show when the problem is occuring?


On 12/21/10 12:17 PM, Quay, Jonathan (IHG) jonathan.q...@ihg.com wrote:

Guest operating systems almost always live in Q3.  Try bumping up the Q3 
STORBUF.




From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf 
Of Wakser, David
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 10:21 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

Already did that:

q srm
IABIAS : INTENSITY=90%; DURATION=3
LDUBUF : Q1=300% Q2=200% Q3=150%
STORBUF: Q1=300% Q2=200% Q3=150%
DSPBUF : Q1=32767 Q2=32767 Q3=32767
DISPATCHING MINOR TIMESLICE = 5 MS
MAXWSS : LIMIT=%
.. : PAGES=99
XSTORE : 0%


From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf 
Of Helmuth Teubl
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 10:06 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

Hi,
maybe SRM-Settings not OK? You should overcommit LDUBUFs and STORBUFs
The defaults are:
CP Q SRM
IABIAS : INTENSITY=90%; DURATION=2
LDUBUF : Q1=100% Q2=75% Q3=60%
STORBUF: Q1=125% Q2=105% Q3=95%
DSPBUF : Q1=32767 Q2=32767 Q3=32767
DISPATCHING MINOR TIMESLICE = 5 MS
MAXWSS : LIMIT=%
.. : PAGES=99
XSTORE : 0%
LIMITHARD METHOD: DEADLINE

Have a look, maybe try following settings:
q srm
IABIAS : INTENSITY=90%; DURATION=2
LDUBUF : Q1=300% Q2=200% Q3=100%
STORBUF: Q1=300% Q2=275% Q3=250%
DSPBUF : Q1=32767 Q2=32767 Q3=32767
DISPATCHING MINOR TIMESLICE = 5 MS
MAXWSS : LIMIT=%
.. : PAGES=99
XSTORE : 0%
LIMITHARD METHOD: DEADLINE

kind regards
Helmuth


David.Wakser---21.12.2010 15:54:15---All: We are running 2 2.3 VSE systems 
under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800 CPU.

   Von:
david.wak...@infocrossing.com
   An:
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
   Datum:
21.12.2010 15:54
   Betreff:
Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)
   Gesendet von:
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU




All:
We are running 2 2.3 VSE systems under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800 CPU. We are 
experiencing periods of time when VSEs do not respond at all (e.g. cannot get 
in via FAQS from CMS, etc.), even though nothing is running in the VSE system 
and the z/VM system is not very busy. At other times, we have excellent 
response times, though conditions on either the guests or the z/VM host didn't 
seem to change.

We do not have any z/VM monitors (except Explore, which is not set up 
properly), and we have even tried QUICKDSP, without success.

Is anyone aware of any PTFs that address this strange behavior? We believe it 
started when the system was upgraded to z/VM 5.4.

David Wakser

Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may contain 
material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or Protected Health 
Information, within the meaning of the regulations under the Health Insurance 
Portability  Accountability Act as amended. If it is not clear that you are 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this 
transmittal in error, and any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of 
this e-mail, including any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you 
have received this e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender 
and delete it from your system. Thank you.



Raiffeisen Informatik GmbH, Firmenbuchnr. 88239p, Handelsgericht Wien, DVR 
0486809, UID ATU 16351908

Der Austausch von Nachrichten mit oben angefuehrtem Absender via E-Mail dient 
ausschliesslich Informationszwecken. Rechtsgeschaeftliche Erklaerungen duerfen 
ueber dieses Medium nicht ausgetauscht werden.
Correspondence with above mentioned sender via e-mail is only for information 
purposes. This medium may not be used for exchange of legally-binding 
communications.

Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

[Wakser, David]

Thanks, I'll try that.

 

From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Quay, Jonathan (IHG)
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 12:17 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 

Guest operating systems almost always live in Q3.  Try bumping up the Q3
STORBUF.  

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Wakser, David
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 10:21 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 

Already did that:

 

q srm  

IABIAS : INTENSITY=90%; DURATION=3 

LDUBUF : Q1=300% Q2=200% Q3=150%   

STORBUF: Q1=300% Q2=200% Q3=150%   

DSPBUF : Q1=32767 Q2=32767 Q3=32767

DISPATCHING MINOR TIMESLICE = 5 MS 

MAXWSS : LIMIT=%   

.. : PAGES=99  

XSTORE : 0%

 

From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Helmuth Teubl
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 10:06 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 

Hi,
maybe SRM-Settings not OK? You should overcommit LDUBUFs and STORBUFs
The defaults are:
CP Q SRM 
IABIAS : INTENSITY=90%; DURATION=2 
LDUBUF : Q1=100% Q2=75% Q3=60% 
STORBUF: Q1=125% Q2=105% Q3=95% 
DSPBUF : Q1=32767 Q2=32767 Q3=32767 
DISPATCHING MINOR TIMESLICE = 5 MS 
MAXWSS : LIMIT=% 
.. : PAGES=99 
XSTORE : 0% 
LIMITHARD METHOD: DEADLINE 

Have a look, maybe try following settings:
q srm 
IABIAS : INTENSITY=90%; DURATION=2 
LDUBUF : Q1=300% Q2=200% Q3=100% 
STORBUF: Q1=300% Q2=275% Q3=250% 
DSPBUF : Q1=32767 Q2=32767 Q3=32767 
DISPATCHING MINOR TIMESLICE = 5 MS 
MAXWSS : LIMIT=% 
.. : PAGES=99 
XSTORE : 0% 
LIMITHARD METHOD: DEADLINE 

kind regards
Helmuth 


Inactive hide details for David.Wakser---21.12.2010 15:54:15---All: We
are running 2 2.3 VSE systems under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800
David.Wakser---21.12.2010 15:54:15---All: We are running 2 2.3 VSE
systems under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800 CPU.



Von:


david.wak...@infocrossing.com



An:


IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU



Datum:


21.12.2010 15:54



Betreff:


Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)



Gesendet von:


IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU






All: 

We are running 2 2.3 VSE systems under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800 CPU. We are
experiencing periods of time when VSEs do not respond at all (e.g.
cannot get in via FAQS from CMS, etc.), even though nothing is running
in the VSE system and the z/VM system is not very busy. At other times,
we have excellent response times, though conditions on either the guests
or the z/VM host didn't seem to change. 

We do not have any z/VM monitors (except Explore, which is not set up
properly), and we have even tried QUICKDSP, without success. 

Is anyone aware of any PTFs that address this strange behavior? We
believe it started when the system was upgraded to z/VM 5.4. 

David Wakser 

Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may
contain material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or
Protected Health Information, within the meaning of the regulations
under the Health Insurance Portability  Accountability Act as amended.
If it is not clear that you are the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that you have received this transmittal in error, and any
review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, including
any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender and delete
it from your system. Thank you. 



Raiffeisen Informatik GmbH, Firmenbuchnr. 88239p, Handelsgericht Wien,
DVR 0486809, UID ATU 16351908

Der Austausch von Nachrichten mit oben angefuehrtem Absender via E-Mail
dient ausschliesslich Informationszwecken. Rechtsgeschaeftliche
Erklaerungen duerfen ueber dieses Medium nicht ausgetauscht werden. 
Correspondence with above mentioned sender via e-mail is only for
information purposes. This medium may not be used for exchange of
legally-binding communications.




Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may contain 
material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or Protected Health 
Information, within the meaning of the regulations under the Health Insurance 
Portability  Accountability Act as amended.  If it is not clear that you are 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this 
transmittal in error, and any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of 
this e-mail, including any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. 

How Sumbit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS using RSCS ?

[Sergio Lima]

Hello List,
 
We have configured here , a node named JESZOS, defined on ZOS/1.12, and have 
another node named RSCS defined under Z/VM5.4.
How can i submit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS, and received the return in our CMS 
MACHINE?
 
Thanks
 
Sergio Lima Costa
Sao Paulo - Brazil

Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

[Barton Robinson]

so i know sales people that could help you solve your problem
Wouldn't it be nice to tell your boss that you know what happened, it is 
fixed and won't happen again?


Wakser, David wrote:

I’ll have to wait until it happens again! J

 

*From:* The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] 
*On Behalf Of *Neale Ferguson

*Sent:* Tuesday, December 21, 2010 12:21 PM
*To:* IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
*Subject:* Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 


Actually, what does #CP IND Q show when the problem is occuring?


On 12/21/10 12:17 PM, Quay, Jonathan (IHG) jonathan.q...@ihg.com wrote:

Guest operating systems almost always live in Q3.  Try bumping up the Q3 
STORBUF.  
 




*From:* The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] 
*On Behalf Of *Wakser, David

*Sent:* Tuesday, December 21, 2010 10:21 AM
*To:* IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
*Subject:* Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

Already did that:
 
q srm 
IABIAS : INTENSITY=90%; DURATION=3
LDUBUF : Q1=300% Q2=200% Q3=150%  
STORBUF: Q1=300% Q2=200% Q3=150%  
DSPBUF : Q1=32767 Q2=32767 Q3=32767   
DISPATCHING MINOR TIMESLICE = 5 MS
MAXWSS : LIMIT=%  
.. : PAGES=99 
XSTORE : 0%   
 

*From:* The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] 
*On Behalf Of *Helmuth Teubl

*Sent:* Tuesday, December 21, 2010 10:06 AM
*To:* IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
*Subject:* Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

Hi,
maybe SRM-Settings not OK? You should overcommit LDUBUFs and STORBUFs
The defaults are:
CP Q SRM
IABIAS : INTENSITY=90%; DURATION=2
LDUBUF : Q1=100% Q2=75% Q3=60%
STORBUF: Q1=125% Q2=105% Q3=95%
DSPBUF : Q1=32767 Q2=32767 Q3=32767
DISPATCHING MINOR TIMESLICE = 5 MS
MAXWSS : LIMIT=%
.. : PAGES=99
XSTORE : 0%
LIMITHARD METHOD: DEADLINE

Have a look, maybe try following settings:
q srm
IABIAS : INTENSITY=90%; DURATION=2
LDUBUF : Q1=300% Q2=200% Q3=100%
STORBUF: Q1=300% Q2=275% Q3=250%
DSPBUF : Q1=32767 Q2=32767 Q3=32767
DISPATCHING MINOR TIMESLICE = 5 MS
MAXWSS : LIMIT=%
.. : PAGES=99
XSTORE : 0%
LIMITHARD METHOD: DEADLINE

kind regards
Helmuth


David.Wakser---21.12.2010 15:54:15---All: We are running 2 2.3 VSE 
systems under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800 CPU.


   Von:   
david.wak...@infocrossing.com   
   An:   
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU   
   Datum:   
21.12.2010 15:54   
   Betreff:   
Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)   
   Gesendet von:   
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU  







All:
We are running 2 2.3 VSE systems under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800 CPU. We are 
experiencing periods of time when VSEs do not respond at all (e.g. 
cannot get in via FAQS from CMS, etc.), even though nothing is running 
in the VSE system and the z/VM system is not very busy. At other times, 
we have excellent response times, though conditions on either the guests 
or the z/VM host didn’t seem to change.


We do not have any z/VM monitors (except Explore, which is not set up 
properly), and we have even tried QUICKDSP, without success.


Is anyone aware of any PTFs that address this strange behavior? We 
believe it started when the system was upgraded to z/VM 5.4.


David Wakser

Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may 
contain material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or 
Protected Health Information, within the meaning of the regulations 
under the Health Insurance Portability  Accountability Act as amended. 
If it is not clear that you are the intended recipient, you are hereby 
notified that you have received this transmittal in error, and any 
review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, including 
any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender and delete 
it from your system. Thank you.




Raiffeisen Informatik GmbH, Firmenbuchnr. 88239p, Handelsgericht Wien, 
DVR 0486809, UID ATU 16351908


Der Austausch von Nachrichten mit oben angefuehrtem Absender via E-Mail 
dient ausschliesslich Informationszwecken. Rechtsgeschaeftliche 
Erklaerungen duerfen ueber dieses Medium nicht ausgetauscht werden.
Correspondence with above mentioned sender via e-mail is only for 
information purposes. This medium may not be used for exchange of 
legally-binding communications.



Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may 
contain material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or 
Protected Health Information, within the meaning of the regulations 

Re: How Sumbit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS using RSCS ?

[Michael Coffin]

I'm not a z/OS'er, but thinking back many, many years I'm pretty sure to
submit the file from CMS:

 

CP SPOOL PUN TO RSCS

CP TAG DEV PUN JESZOS

PUNCH cmsfile (NOHEADER

 

To route the output back to your VM node I think you use ROUTE PRINT, so for
example to route the output to MAINT at MYVM1 something like:

 

// ROUTE PRINT MYVM1.MAINT

 

I'm probably wrong on at least one count, hopefully the z/OS'ers will step
in and correct my mistakes - but at least it gives you a starting point.  :)

 

-Mike

 

From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Sergio Lima
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 1:02 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: How Sumbit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS using RSCS ?

 

Hello List,
 
We have configured here , a node named JESZOS, defined on ZOS/1.12, and have
another node named RSCS defined under Z/VM5.4.
How can i submit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS, and received the return in our CMS
MACHINE?
 
Thanks
 
Sergio Lima Costa
Sao Paulo - Brazil

Re: How Sumbit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS using RSCS ?

[Lizette Koehler]

I am not 100% sure. but if you use a route print the syntax (depending on JES2 or JES3)

JES2 /*ROUTE PRINT nodename

or 

JES3 //*ROUTE PRINT nodename

I am just guessing for JES3Lizette
-Original Message- From: Michael Coffin Sent: Dec 21, 2010 1:39 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: How Sumbit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS using RSCS ? 



I’m not a z/OS’er, but thinking back many, many years I’m pretty sure to submit the file from CMS:

CP SPOOL PUN TO RSCS
CP TAG DEV PUN JESZOS
PUNCH cmsfile (NOHEADER

To route the output back to your VM node I think you use ROUTE PRINT, so for example to route the output to MAINT at MYVM1 something like:

// ROUTE PRINT MYVM1.MAINT

I’m probably wrong on at least one count, hopefully the z/OS’ers will step in and correct my mistakes – but at least it gives you a starting point. :)

-Mike



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Sergio LimaSent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 1:02 PMTo: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDUSubject: How Sumbit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS using RSCS ?

Hello List,We have configured here , a node named JESZOS, defined on ZOS/1.12, and have another node named RSCS defined under Z/VM5.4.How can i submit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS, and received the return in our CMS MACHINE?ThanksSergio Lima CostaSao Paulo - Brazil

Re: How Sumbit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS using RSCS ?

[Sergio Lima]

Hello, Mark and Michael.
 
Thanks very much for your help.
We will teste here.
 
Regards
 
Sergio
 


Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 14:01:13 -0500
From: pacemainl...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: How Sumbit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS using RSCS ?
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU

My exec I also have the keyword JOB on the TAG
CP TAG DEV 00D N1 JOB





On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Michael Coffin michaelcof...@mccci.com wrote:




I’m not a z/OS’er, but thinking back many, many years I’m pretty sure to submit 
the file from CMS:
 
CP SPOOL PUN TO RSCS
CP TAG DEV PUN JESZOS
PUNCH cmsfile (NOHEADER
 
To route the output back to your VM node I think you use ROUTE PRINT, so for 
example to route the output to MAINT at MYVM1 something like:
 
// ROUTE PRINT MYVM1.MAINT
 
I’m probably wrong on at least one count, hopefully the z/OS’ers will step in 
and correct my mistakes – but at least it gives you a starting point.  :)
 
-Mike
 


From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf 
Of Sergio Lima
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 1:02 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: How Sumbit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS using RSCS ?



 
Hello List,
 
We have configured here , a node named JESZOS, defined on ZOS/1.12, and have 
another node named RSCS defined under Z/VM5.4.
How can i submit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS, and received the return in our CMS 
MACHINE?
 
Thanks
 
Sergio Lima Costa
Sao Paulo - Brazil

-- 

Mark D Pace 
Senior Systems Engineer 
Mainline Information Systems 






  

Re: How Sumbit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS using RSCS ?

[Shimon Lebowitz]

I wrote an exec for our programmers here that allows them to send batch jobs
to our MVS, which I will be happy to share when I get to the office
tomorrow.
For now, I just don't remember what it does inside, sorry!

Shimon

-Original Message-
 From: Michael Coffin
 Sent: Dec 21, 2010 1:39 PM
 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
 Subject: Re: How Sumbit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS using RSCS ?

  I’m not a z/OS’er, but thinking back many, many years I’m pretty sure to
 submit the file from CMS:



 CP SPOOL PUN TO RSCS

 CP TAG DEV PUN JESZOS

 PUNCH cmsfile (NOHEADER



 To route the output back to your VM node I think you use ROUTE PRINT, so
 for example to route the output to MAINT at MYVM1 something like:



 // ROUTE PRINT MYVM1.MAINT



 I’m probably wrong on at least one count, hopefully the z/OS’ers will step
 in and correct my mistakes – but at least it gives you a starting point.  :)



 -Mike



 *From:* The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] *On
 Behalf Of *Sergio Lima
 *Sent:* Tuesday, December 21, 2010 1:02 PM
 *To:* IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
 *Subject:* How Sumbit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS using RSCS ?



 Hello List,

 We have configured here , a node named JESZOS, defined on ZOS/1.12, and
 have another node named RSCS defined under Z/VM5.4.
 How can i submit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS, and received the return in our
 CMS MACHINE?

 Thanks

 Sergio Lima Costa
 Sao Paulo - Brazil

Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

[Berry van Sleeuwen]

Our guests are not in Q3 unless they are doing actual work. And even
then they usually are in Q1 or Q2. This applies to zVM guests, zVSE
guests and Linux guests. Obviously it depends on the setup and what the
guests (or rather, the applications) are actually doing.

Regards, Berry.

Op 21-12-10 18:17, Quay, Jonathan (IHG) schreef:

 Guest operating systems almost always live in Q3. Try bumping up the
 Q3 STORBUF.

 

 *From:* The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu]
 *On Behalf Of *Wakser, David
 *Sent:* Tuesday, December 21, 2010 10:21 AM
 *To:* IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
 *Subject:* Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 Already did that:

 q srm

 IABIAS : INTENSITY=90%; DURATION=3

 LDUBUF : Q1=300% Q2=200% Q3=150%

 STORBUF: Q1=300% Q2=200% Q3=150%

 DSPBUF : Q1=32767 Q2=32767 Q3=32767

 DISPATCHING MINOR TIMESLICE = 5 MS

 MAXWSS : LIMIT=%

 .. : PAGES=99

 XSTORE : 0%

 *From:* The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu]
 *On Behalf Of *Helmuth Teubl
 *Sent:* Tuesday, December 21, 2010 10:06 AM
 *To:* IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
 *Subject:* Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 Hi,
 maybe SRM-Settings not OK? You should overcommit LDUBUFs and STORBUFs
 The defaults are:
 CP Q SRM
 IABIAS : INTENSITY=90%; DURATION=2
 LDUBUF : Q1=100% Q2=75% Q3=60%
 STORBUF: Q1=125% Q2=105% Q3=95%
 DSPBUF : Q1=32767 Q2=32767 Q3=32767
 DISPATCHING MINOR TIMESLICE = 5 MS
 MAXWSS : LIMIT=%
 .. : PAGES=99
 XSTORE : 0%
 LIMITHARD METHOD: DEADLINE

 Have a look, maybe try following settings:
 q srm
 IABIAS : INTENSITY=90%; DURATION=2
 LDUBUF : Q1=300% Q2=200% Q3=100%
 STORBUF: Q1=300% Q2=275% Q3=250%
 DSPBUF : Q1=32767 Q2=32767 Q3=32767
 DISPATCHING MINOR TIMESLICE = 5 MS
 MAXWSS : LIMIT=%
 .. : PAGES=99
 XSTORE : 0%
 LIMITHARD METHOD: DEADLINE

 kind regards
 Helmuth


 Inactive hide details for David.Wakser---21.12.2010 15:54:15---All: We
 are running 2 2.3 VSE systems under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800
 David.Wakser---21.12.2010 15:54:15---All: We are running 2 2.3 VSE
 systems under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800 CPU.

 Von:

   


 david.wak...@infocrossing.com

 An:

   


 IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU

 Datum:

   


 21.12.2010 15:54

 Betreff:

   


 Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 Gesendet von:

   


 IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU

 




 All:

 We are running 2 2.3 VSE systems under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800 CPU. We are
 experiencing periods of time when VSEs do not respond at all (e.g.
 cannot get in via FAQS from CMS, etc.), even though nothing is running
 in the VSE system and the z/VM system is not very busy. At other
 times, we have excellent response times, though conditions on either
 the guests or the z/VM host didn’t seem to change.

 We do not have any z/VM monitors (except Explore, which is not set up
 properly), and we have even tried QUICKDSP, without success.

 Is anyone aware of any PTFs that address this strange behavior? We
 believe it started when the system was upgraded to z/VM 5.4.

 David Wakser

 Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may
 contain material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or
 Protected Health Information, within the meaning of the regulations
 under the Health Insurance Portability  Accountability Act as
 amended. If it is not clear that you are the intended recipient, you
 are hereby notified that you have received this transmittal in error,
 and any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail,
 including any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you have
 received this e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the
 sender and delete it from your system. Thank you.


 
 Raiffeisen Informatik GmbH, Firmenbuchnr. 88239p, Handelsgericht Wien,
 DVR 0486809, UID ATU 16351908

 Der Austausch von Nachrichten mit oben angefuehrtem Absender via
 E-Mail dient ausschliesslich Informationszwecken. Rechtsgeschaeftliche
 Erklaerungen duerfen ueber dieses Medium nicht ausgetauscht werden.
 Correspondence with above mentioned sender via e-mail is only for
 information purposes. This medium may not be used for exchange of
 legally-binding communications.
 

Re: How Sumbit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS using RSCS ?

[Sergio Lima]

Hello Shimon

We wait, and will be very happy if have also this exec.
 
Thanks a lot,
 
Sergio
 


Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 21:33:48 +0200
From: shim...@iname.com
Subject: Re: How Sumbit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS using RSCS ?
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU


I wrote an exec for our programmers here that allows them to send batch jobs
to our MVS, which I will be happy to share when I get to the office tomorrow.
For now, I just don't remember what it does inside, sorry!

Shimon






-Original Message- 
From: Michael Coffin 
Sent: Dec 21, 2010 1:39 PM 
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU 

Subject: Re: How Sumbit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS using RSCS ? 



I’m not a z/OS’er, but thinking back many, many years I’m pretty sure to submit 
the file from CMS:
 
CP SPOOL PUN TO RSCS
CP TAG DEV PUN JESZOS
PUNCH cmsfile (NOHEADER
 
To route the output back to your VM node I think you use ROUTE PRINT, so for 
example to route the output to MAINT at MYVM1 something like:
 
// ROUTE PRINT MYVM1.MAINT
 
I’m probably wrong on at least one count, hopefully the z/OS’ers will step in 
and correct my mistakes – but at least it gives you a starting point.  :)
 
-Mike
 


From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf 
Of Sergio Lima
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 1:02 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: How Sumbit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS using RSCS ?
 
Hello List,
 
We have configured here , a node named JESZOS, defined on ZOS/1.12, and have 
another node named RSCS defined under Z/VM5.4.
How can i submit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS, and received the return in our CMS 
MACHINE?
 
Thanks
 
Sergio Lima Costa
Sao Paulo - Brazil
  

Merry Christmas

[Sergio Lima]

Hello List,
 
Wish all members of this list a Merry Christmas and a prosperous new year.
Thank you for your help.
 
Sergio Lima Costa
Sao Paulo - Brazil
  

Re: ISFC connection between LPARs

[Kris Buelens]

What do you really need?  Sharing some SFS servers can be done using IPGATE,
no CTC then.

2010/12/21 Schuh, Richard rsc...@visa.com

 A long time ago, Alan (or was it Chuckie? I sometimes can't tell them
 apart.) thought that ISFC over IP was a neat idea when I suggested it. Maybe
 a requirement is in order.

 Regards,
 Richard Schuh



  -Original Message-
  From: The IBM z/VM Operating System
  [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Martha McConaghy
  Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 11:32 AM
  To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
  Subject: ISFC connection between LPARs
 
  Its been a long while since I had to create an ISFC
  connection. We are finally getting a z10 and I need to create
  a link between the two main LPARs.  I don't have ESCON
  adapters in this box and I'd really hate to use up a couple
  of FICON just for a CTC connection between the 2 LPARs.
 
  Is there any other way to do this on a z10?
 
  Martha
 




-- 
Kris Buelens,
IBM Belgium, VM customer support

Re: ISFC connection between LPARs

[Frank M. Ramaekers]

What kind?   TCP/IP - Hyper- (or is it Hiper-) sockets

 
Frank M. Ramaekers Jr.
 
 

-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Martha McConaghy
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 1:32 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: ISFC connection between LPARs

Its been a long while since I had to create an ISFC connection. We are
finally
getting a z10 and I need to create a link between the two main LPARs.  I
don't have ESCON adapters in this box and I'd really hate to use up a
couple of FICON just for a CTC connection between the 2 LPARs.

Is there any other way to do this on a z10?

Martha

_
This message contains information which is privileged and confidential and is 
solely for the use of the
intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any 
review, disclosure,
copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this message is strictly 
prohibited. If you have
received this in error, please destroy it immediately and notify us at 
privacy...@ailife.com.

Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

[Edward M Martin]

Hello Dave,

 

Not sure what is happening, but on the system that is happening,

 

Since FAQS is not responding, can you message AR, F1, VTAM, etc on the
way down to FAQS partition?

 

If AR does not respond, look to z/VM.

 

Ed Martin

Aultman Health Foundation

330-363-5050

ext 35050

From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Wakser, David
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 12:18 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 

No, FAQS is not the problem - we normally never have more than 1 or 2
FAQS users at a time, and most of the time there are NO users. CICS and
TCP/IP also seem to be asleep. I only brought up FAQS to attempt to
portray how the system fails to respond.

 

David Wakser

 

From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Ron Schmiedge
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 11:52 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 

Is FAQS the problem? Are the VSE consoles responding when FAQS is not?

How many FAQS users do you have? I have a vague memory (and no books at
hand) of a limit to the number of FAQS users you can have. 

On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 9:05 AM, Wakser, David
david.wak...@infocrossing.com wrote:

No, that is not the problem. This is a VERY low-usage system. Even when
it seems to be asleep, its CPU usage is less than 2% (from both the VM
and VSE perspectives).

 

David Wakser

 

From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Frank M. Ramaekers
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 10:01 AM


To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU

Subject: Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 

Are we sure it's VM?  Are there any partitions with a high priority than
FAQS (that could be dominating the CPU)?

 

 

Frank M. Ramaekers Jr.

 

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Wakser, David
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 8:54 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 

All:

We are running 2 2.3 VSE systems under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800 CPU.
We are experiencing periods of time when VSEs do not respond at all
(e.g. cannot get in via FAQS from CMS, etc.), even though nothing is
running in the VSE system and the z/VM system is not very busy. At other
times, we have excellent response times, though conditions on either the
guests or the z/VM host didn't seem to change.

We do not have any z/VM monitors (except Explore, which is not
set up properly), and we have even tried QUICKDSP, without success.

Is anyone aware of any PTFs that address this strange behavior?
We believe it started when the system was upgraded to z/VM 5.4.

David Wakser

 

 

Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may
contain material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or
Protected Health Information, within the meaning of the regulations
under the Health Insurance Portability  Accountability Act as amended.
If it is not clear that you are the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that you have received this transmittal in error, and any
review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, including
any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender and delete
it from your system. Thank you. 

Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

[Mike Walter]

David,

Have you been able to detect if the periods of time when VSEs do not 
respond at all occur at the same intervals, or the same time of day each 
time?  If so, would those time periods happen match your MONITOR SAMPLE 
INTERVAL?  (To see, enter: CP Query MONitor)
How's your paging load during those periods?

Mike Walter
Aon Corporation
The opinions expressed herein are mine alone, not my employer's.



Wakser, David david.wak...@infocrossing.com 

Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
12/21/2010 08:53 AM
Please respond to
The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU



To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc

Subject
Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)






All:
We are running 2 2.3 VSE systems under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800 CPU. We 
are experiencing periods of time when VSEs do not respond at all (e.g. 
cannot get in via FAQS from CMS, etc.), even though nothing is running in 
the VSE system and the z/VM system is not very busy. At other times, we 
have excellent response times, though conditions on either the guests or 
the z/VM host didn?t seem to change.
We do not have any z/VM monitors (except Explore, which is not set 
up properly), and we have even tried QUICKDSP, without success.
Is anyone aware of any PTFs that address this strange behavior? We 
believe it started when the system was upgraded to z/VM 5.4.
David Wakser
Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may 
contain material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or 
Protected Health Information, within the meaning of the regulations 
under the Health Insurance Portability  Accountability Act as amended. If 
it is not clear that you are the intended recipient, you are hereby 
notified that you have received this transmittal in error, and any review, 
dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, including any 
attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail 
in error, please immediately return it to the sender and delete it from 
your system. Thank you. 



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: lognauo in the result from Q NAMES

[Mike Walter]

Ann,

 What's the case XAUTOLOG is not completed. ?

Something is preventing the virtual machine construction from being 
completed.  Have you manually logged onto any of those IDs when they were 
not in lognauto state?  As you do so, watch VERY CAREFULLY for any error 
messages during logon.

Then, while one of the target userids is hung in that lognauto state, 
try logging onto it (reconnecting) and watching for errors.  One would 
expect that first, or this, method should provide some useful clues.

If the target userid's have their console SCIF'ed (Secondary Console Image 
Facility) to OPERATOR, or some other service machine with a console 
SPOOL'ed START, you might be able to see error messages on that console 
log.  For more information about SCIF, see the CP Planning and 
Administration manual, under the CONSOLE Directory Control Statement 
(the userid operand, with or without the OBSERVER keyword).

Mike Walter
Aon Corporation
The opinions expressed herein are mine alone, not my employer's.



Aisik Chang a829...@gmail.com 

Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
12/21/2010 07:33 AM
Please respond to
The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU



To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc

Subject
lognauo in the result from Q NAMES






Good morning, Listers,

Q NAMES displays  some of
 lognauto - DSC , lognauto - DSC , AUTOPROC - DSC , lognauto - DSC.
Why is this happenning, the manual says:
 If a user has not completed AUTOLOG or XAUTOLOG processing, the
userid is displayed as lognauto.
There may be multiple instances of lognauto for different users.

What's the case XAUTOLOG is not completed. ?

Thanks,

Ann






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: Copyfile with PACK on MVS ?

[Roger Bolan]

TERSE works for both sequential and PDS, but with PDS you have to specify
directory blocks on the output to unterse it.
In my own JCL I do this:
//MYJCLJCLLIB ORDER=BOLAN.MY.PROCLIB
// SET SPACE='(CYL,(200,20,250),RLSE)'
//UN1  EXEC UNTRSPDS,INDS=TRSDSN.

and in my proclib I have this member:
//UNTRSPDS PROC INDS=NULLFILE,DATE=
//DELOUT   EXEC PGM=IEFBR14
//DD1  DD  DISP=(MOD,DELETE),SPACE=(TRK,(0)),UNIT=SYSDA,
// DSN=SERVE2.INDS.DATE.
//UNTERSE  EXEC PGM=TRSMAIN,PARM=UNPACK
//SYSPRINT DD  SYSOUT=*
//INFILE   DD  DISP=SHR,DSN=INDS..TRS
//OUTFILE  DD  DSN=*.DELOUT.DD1,
// UNIT=SYSDA,
// DISP=(NEW,CATLG,DELETE),
// SPACE=SPACE.
//DELTRSIN EXEC PGM=IEFBR14,COND=(0,LT,UNTERSE)
//DD1  DD  DISP=(OLD,DELETE),UNIT=SYSDA,
// DSN=*.UNTERSE.INFILE,
// SPACE=(TRK,(0))
// PEND

--Roger

On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 6:00 AM, McKown, John john.mck...@healthmarkets.com
 wrote:

  -Original Message-
  From: The IBM z/VM Operating System
  [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Rob van der Heij
  Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 3:22 AM
  To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
  Subject: Copyfile with PACK on MVS ?
 
  Friends,
 
  When a RECFM V file is transferred through download/upload with a PC,
  we need to protect the record layout. And when it's non-text you can't
  stick CRLF between the lines. On VM we normally have people use the
  PACK option of COPYFILE, which puts enough info in the file to restore
  the structure.
 
  What do people do on MVS? I thought a simple IEBGENER to convert to VB
  or whatever would do, but that does not seem to be common practice...
  does TERSE maybe put stuff in to retain the record structure? And does
  our DETERSE recover that?
 
  Thanks, Rob

 You can use AMATERSE or TSO XMIT. AMATERSE only works for sequential
 datasets. XMIT works for both PDS and sequential. I use XMIT. There is
 something called XMITMANAGER for Winblows which can then manipulate that
 file if you need to on a Windows machine. I don't use it.

 In some cases, I just use z/OS UNIX files and pax.

 --
 John McKown
 Systems Engineer IV
 IT

 Administrative Services Group

 HealthMarkets(r)

 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010
 (817) 255-3225 phone *
 john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com

 Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or
 proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please
 contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
 message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and
 issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake
 Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of
 TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM

Re: How Submit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS using RSCS ?

[Mike Walter]

Sergio,

You already have the SPOOL and PUNCH command needed.

You also asked about the return code.  z/OS batch jobs will send you a 
message through RSCS if you include the NOTIFY statement, either as part 
of the job card,  something like:
//jobname JOB (whatever),'S. LIMA', 
// MSGCLASS=A,CLASS=E,NOTIFY=vmnodeID.vmid 

or as a command in the JCL:

/*NOTIFY   vmnodeID(vmid)

Obviously, replace the vmnodeID with your VM node ID as known to JES2 
(usually matching the node ID your SYSTEM NETID S file), and changing 
the vmid to the userid on z/VM which should receive the job completion 
message from JES.  This appears right on your screen, similarly to the 
message that appears from a CP MSG command.

To cause JES2 job logs to be sent to both z/OS JES2 and also a copy sent 
to z/VM we use the JCL statements: 

//ZOS  OUTPUT JESDS=ALL,DEST=mvsnode.LOCAL 
//ZVM  OUTPUT JESDS=ALL,DEST=vmnodeID.vmid
In your case, change the 'mvsnode' to JESZOS, and the 'vmnodeID' to your 
VM NODEID, and the 'vmid' to your target VM userid.


Mike Walter
Aon Corporation
The opinions expressed herein are mine alone, not my employer's.




Sergio Lima sergiovm...@hotmail.com 

Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
12/21/2010 01:34 PM
Please respond to
The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU



To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: How Sumbit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS using RSCS ?






Hello, Mark and Michael.
 
Thanks very much for your help.
We will teste here.
 
Regards
 
Sergio
 
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 14:01:13 -0500
From: pacemainl...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: How Sumbit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS using RSCS ?
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU

My exec I also have the keyword JOB on the TAG 
CP TAG DEV 00D N1 JOB



On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Michael Coffin michaelcof...@mccci.com 
wrote:
I?m not a z/OS?er, but thinking back many, many years I?m pretty sure to 
submit the file from CMS:
 
CP SPOOL PUN TO RSCS
CP TAG DEV PUN JESZOS
PUNCH cmsfile (NOHEADER
 
To route the output back to your VM node I think you use ROUTE PRINT, so 
for example to route the output to MAINT at MYVM1 something like:
 
// ROUTE PRINT MYVM1.MAINT
 
I?m probably wrong on at least one count, hopefully the z/OS?ers will step 
in and correct my mistakes ? but at least it gives you a starting point. 
:)
 
-Mike
 
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On 
Behalf Of Sergio Lima
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 1:02 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: How Sumbit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS using RSCS ?
 
Hello List,
 
We have configured here , a node named JESZOS, defined on ZOS/1.12, and 
have another node named RSCS defined under Z/VM5.4.
How can i submit a JOB from Z/VM to Z/OS, and received the return in our 
CMS MACHINE?
 
Thanks
 
Sergio Lima Costa
Sao Paulo - Brazil



-- 
Mark D Pace 
Senior Systems Engineer 
Mainline Information Systems 







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: Copyfile with PACK on MVS ?

[Tony Saul]

If you use XMIT on MVS it compresses into a RECFM FB 80 file and then you use 
Bin FTP to transfer the file around. The handy thing with this is that when 
you transfer to the other MVS system you then use RECEIVE and give it and 
output 
dataset and it will create the dataset based on the original dataset attributes 
(so you don't need to pre-define).

I've usually found TERSE needs you to know the output dataset attributes.

Xmitmanager on windows works well, but I don't think it is maintained anymore.

I thought VM used XMIT when you sent files via RSCS to and MVS machine, but it 
has been a while since I have used that.

Let me know if you need JCL examples for XMIT and RECEIVE. They are TSO 
commands, but can be run as a batch TSO.
 Regards,
Tony 



- Original Message 
From: Rob van der Heij rvdh...@gmail.com
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Sent: Tue, 21 December, 2010 7:51:43 PM
Subject: Copyfile with PACK on MVS ?

Friends,

When a RECFM V file is transferred through download/upload with a PC,
we need to protect the record layout. And when it's non-text you can't
stick CRLF between the lines. On VM we normally have people use the
PACK option of COPYFILE, which puts enough info in the file to restore
the structure.

What do people do on MVS? I thought a simple IEBGENER to convert to VB
or whatever would do, but that does not seem to be common practice...
does TERSE maybe put stuff in to retain the record structure? And does
our DETERSE recover that?

Thanks, Rob

Re: ISFC connection between LPARs

[Schuh, Richard]

For me, SFS is enough. In a former life, I did write a complex APPC application 
that involved code and data in VM, MVS and TPF. That was enough to make me 
swear off of APPC unless it is absolutely the right tool for the job. If that 
happens, I will delegate.

I have looked at IPGATE. There are two problems with it:

 1.
We have restrictions on what we can download and install. The search argument 
is vendor support-freeware
 2.
The documentation is pretty sparse. I do not have the time to do a lot of 
experimenting.

Regards,
Richard Schuh






From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf 
Of Kris Buelens
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 12:10 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: ISFC connection between LPARs

What do you really need?  Sharing some SFS servers can be done using IPGATE, no 
CTC then.

2010/12/21 Schuh, Richard rsc...@visa.commailto:rsc...@visa.com
A long time ago, Alan (or was it Chuckie? I sometimes can't tell them apart.) 
thought that ISFC over IP was a neat idea when I suggested it. Maybe a 
requirement is in order.

Regards,
Richard Schuh



 -Original Message-
 From: The IBM z/VM Operating System
 [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDUmailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU] On Behalf Of 
 Martha McConaghy
 Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 11:32 AM
 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDUmailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
 Subject: ISFC connection between LPARs

 Its been a long while since I had to create an ISFC
 connection. We are finally getting a z10 and I need to create
 a link between the two main LPARs.  I don't have ESCON
 adapters in this box and I'd really hate to use up a couple
 of FICON just for a CTC connection between the 2 LPARs.

 Is there any other way to do this on a z10?

 Martha




--
Kris Buelens,
IBM Belgium, VM customer support

Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

[Wakser, David]

Yes, my original post was to see if anyone know of PTFs applicable to
such a problem with the combination of hardware/software we are using.

 

From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Edward M Martin
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 3:35 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 

Hello Dave,

 

Not sure what is happening, but on the system that is happening,

 

Since FAQS is not responding, can you message AR, F1, VTAM, etc on the
way down to FAQS partition?

 

If AR does not respond, look to z/VM.

 

Ed Martin

Aultman Health Foundation

330-363-5050

ext 35050

From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Wakser, David
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 12:18 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 

No, FAQS is not the problem - we normally never have more than 1 or 2
FAQS users at a time, and most of the time there are NO users. CICS and
TCP/IP also seem to be asleep. I only brought up FAQS to attempt to
portray how the system fails to respond.

 

David Wakser

 

From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Ron Schmiedge
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 11:52 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 

Is FAQS the problem? Are the VSE consoles responding when FAQS is not?

How many FAQS users do you have? I have a vague memory (and no books at
hand) of a limit to the number of FAQS users you can have. 

On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 9:05 AM, Wakser, David
david.wak...@infocrossing.com wrote:

No, that is not the problem. This is a VERY low-usage system. Even when
it seems to be asleep, its CPU usage is less than 2% (from both the VM
and VSE perspectives).

 

David Wakser

 

From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Frank M. Ramaekers
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 10:01 AM


To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU

Subject: Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 

Are we sure it's VM?  Are there any partitions with a high priority than
FAQS (that could be dominating the CPU)?

 

 

Frank M. Ramaekers Jr.

 

 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Wakser, David
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 8:54 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 

All:

We are running 2 2.3 VSE systems under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800 CPU.
We are experiencing periods of time when VSEs do not respond at all
(e.g. cannot get in via FAQS from CMS, etc.), even though nothing is
running in the VSE system and the z/VM system is not very busy. At other
times, we have excellent response times, though conditions on either the
guests or the z/VM host didn't seem to change.

We do not have any z/VM monitors (except Explore, which is not
set up properly), and we have even tried QUICKDSP, without success.

Is anyone aware of any PTFs that address this strange behavior?
We believe it started when the system was upgraded to z/VM 5.4.

David Wakser

 

 

Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may
contain material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or
Protected Health Information, within the meaning of the regulations
under the Health Insurance Portability  Accountability Act as amended.
If it is not clear that you are the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that you have received this transmittal in error, and any
review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, including
any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender and delete
it from your system. Thank you. 



Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may contain 
material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or Protected Health 
Information, within the meaning of the regulations under the Health Insurance 
Portability  Accountability Act as amended.  If it is not clear that you are 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this 
transmittal in error, and any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of 
this e-mail, including any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you 
have received this e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender 
and delete it from your system. Thank you.

Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

[Wakser, David]

No monitor sampling on the system, and no paging at all.

 

From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Mike Walter
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 2:51 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 


David, 

Have you been able to detect if the periods of time when VSEs do not
respond at all occur at the same intervals, or the same time of day
each time?  If so, would those time periods happen match your MONITOR
SAMPLE INTERVAL?  (To see, enter: CP Query MONitor) 
How's your paging load during those periods? 


Mike Walter
Aon Corporation
The opinions expressed herein are mine alone, not my employer's. 



Wakser, David david.wak...@infocrossing.com 

Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU 

12/21/2010 08:53 AM 

Please respond to
The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU

To

IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU 

cc


Subject

Strange response time problems (also posted on VSE-L)

 






All: 

We are running 2 2.3 VSE systems under z/VM 5.4 on a Z800 CPU.
We are experiencing periods of time when VSEs do not respond at all
(e.g. cannot get in via FAQS from CMS, etc.), even though nothing is
running in the VSE system and the z/VM system is not very busy. At other
times, we have excellent response times, though conditions on either the
guests or the z/VM host didn't seem to change. 

We do not have any z/VM monitors (except Explore, which is not
set up properly), and we have even tried QUICKDSP, without success. 

Is anyone aware of any PTFs that address this strange behavior?
We believe it started when the system was upgraded to z/VM 5.4. 

David Wakser 

Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may
contain material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or
Protected Health Information, within the meaning of the regulations
under the Health Insurance Portability  Accountability Act as amended.
If it is not clear that you are the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that you have received this transmittal in error, and any
review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, including
any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender and delete
it from your system. Thank you. 




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. 



Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may contain 
material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or Protected Health 
Information, within the meaning of the regulations under the Health Insurance 
Portability  Accountability Act as amended.  If it is not clear that you are 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this 
transmittal in error, and any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of 
this e-mail, including any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you 
have received this e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender 
and delete it from your system. Thank you.

Re: Copyfile with PACK on MVS ?

[Rob van der Heij]

Thanks for all the on-line and off-line enhancements of my rusty MVS
skills. I should have some options now.
Two platforms separated by a common code page ;-)

Re: Tracing FTP Server Activity

[Moore, Terry A.]

Aha, the missing magic incantation.  Thank you Steve.  That was exactly
what I needed.  I didn't realize that adding TRACE to the CONFIG file
only enabled tracing, but didn't actually start it.  I love this list.
Happy Holidays to all.

Terry

-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Steve Harman
Sent: Monday, December 20, 2010 4:17 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Tracing FTP Server Activity

Did you try the smsg command to turn on tracing?  I did this and got a 
trace file:

Ready;   
   
smsg ftpserve trace on file
 
Ready;   
   
 15:08:48 FTPSERVE: Tracing to file has been enabled

-
This message and any attachments are intended for the individual or
entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, please
do not forward, copy, print, use or disclose this communication to
others; also please notify the sender by replying to this message,
and then delete it from your system. The Timken Company / The
Timken Corporation

AW: ISFC connection between LPARs

[Riedel, Alexander]

Hi Martha,

it is not necessary to reserve some FICON Links for only CTC. You can share 
them for DASD, TAPE and FICON-CTC.

Kind regards,

Alexander


-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] Im Auftrag 
von Martha McConaghy
Gesendet: Dienstag, 21. Dezember 2010 20:32
An: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Betreff: ISFC connection between LPARs

Its been a long while since I had to create an ISFC connection. We are finally
getting a z10 and I need to create a link between the two main LPARs.  I
don't have ESCON adapters in this box and I'd really hate to use up a
couple of FICON just for a CTC connection between the 2 LPARs.

Is there any other way to do this on a z10?

Martha