Re: Anyone use The Hessling Editor (THE), an Xedit/Kedit look-alike, for off-line VM code development or personal use?
Several years ago, I moved all my assembler code for my products from VM to my Linux desktop. I now use THE, Dignus ASM, and 'make' processes to compile my products which are linked and tested on z/VSE. I have converted several of my prefix macros to be dual-mode. The same source works in both VM and THE. There is one major prefix macro that will not convert due to the way THE works because the macro has several prefix's for the same macros and the EXTRACT/PENDING in THE does not handle that condition correctly. Tony Thigpen -Original Message - From: Les Koehler Sent: 05/17/2011 11:50 PM If you use THE for your own stuff, I'd like a direct email if you'd like to exchange information. Anyone using it to offload VM work to the pc, or considering doing so, I have a wealth of macros to make it as much like Xedit as I can, while at the same time taking advantage of the capabilities of a pc and no 3270 restrictions. Tell us about your VM work on this thread, why you chose THE, or pose questions that I, or others, might be able to help answer. If you're familiar with Kedit, THE can mimic it quite well, *and* it uses either ooRexx or Regina as its macro language. I wasn't sure about posting this, but Dan assures me that as long as it's VM related, it's welcome! Les
Re: Anyone use The Hessling Editor (THE), an Xedit/Kedit look-alike, for off-line VM code development or personal use?
The big difference in prefix macro processing is that THE runs them in the order they were entered, not top to bottom as Xedit does. I haven't done much with them, but another member of RexxLA has overcome the difference. I could send you one of his macros to use as a model, if you'd like. Les Tony Thigpen wrote: Several years ago, I moved all my assembler code for my products from VM to my Linux desktop. I now use THE, Dignus ASM, and 'make' processes to compile my products which are linked and tested on z/VSE. I have converted several of my prefix macros to be dual-mode. The same source works in both VM and THE. There is one major prefix macro that will not convert due to the way THE works because the macro has several prefix's for the same macros and the EXTRACT/PENDING in THE does not handle that condition correctly. Tony Thigpen -Original Message - From: Les Koehler Sent: 05/17/2011 11:50 PM If you use THE for your own stuff, I'd like a direct email if you'd like to exchange information. Anyone using it to offload VM work to the pc, or considering doing so, I have a wealth of macros to make it as much like Xedit as I can, while at the same time taking advantage of the capabilities of a pc and no 3270 restrictions. Tell us about your VM work on this thread, why you chose THE, or pose questions that I, or others, might be able to help answer. If you're familiar with Kedit, THE can mimic it quite well, *and* it uses either ooRexx or Regina as its macro language. I wasn't sure about posting this, but Dan assures me that as long as it's VM related, it's welcome! Les
Re: Anyone use The Hessling Editor (THE), an Xedit/Kedit look-alike, for off-line VM code development or personal use?
The problem is not the order they are processed, but instead is a
problem of how they are stored when using:
'EXTRACT /PENDING OLDNAME' macroname
where macroname is derived from:
parse source os . macroname macroft macrofm name .
parse arg pref func pline op extra '(' options
if os = 'UNIX'
then do
parse arg pref name func pline op extra '(' options
nn = lastpos('/',macroname) + 1
interpret parse var macroname execpath nn macroname '.' .
end
(As a side note, it would have been nice if the 'arg' statement had
matched VM's so I would not have had to play games with it.)
I looked at the code and did not see an easy fix for the problem. The
way the prefix commands are stored is the root problem.
Tony Thigpen
-Original Message -
From: Les Koehler
Sent: 05/18/2011 05:59 AM
The big difference in prefix macro processing is that THE runs them in
the order they were entered, not top to bottom as Xedit does.
I haven't done much with them, but another member of RexxLA has overcome
the difference. I could send you one of his macros to use as a model, if
you'd like.
Les
Tony Thigpen wrote:
Several years ago, I moved all my assembler code for my products from
VM to my Linux desktop. I now use THE, Dignus ASM, and 'make'
processes to compile my products which are linked and tested on z/VSE.
I have converted several of my prefix macros to be dual-mode. The same
source works in both VM and THE. There is one major prefix macro that
will not convert due to the way THE works because the macro has
several prefix's for the same macros and the EXTRACT/PENDING in THE
does not handle that condition correctly.
Tony Thigpen
-Original Message -
From: Les Koehler
Sent: 05/17/2011 11:50 PM
If you use THE for your own stuff, I'd like a direct email if you'd like
to exchange information.
Anyone using it to offload VM work to the pc, or considering doing so, I
have a wealth of macros to make it as much like Xedit as I can, while at
the same time taking advantage of the capabilities of a pc and no 3270
restrictions.
Tell us about your VM work on this thread, why you chose THE, or pose
questions that I, or others, might be able to help answer.
If you're familiar with Kedit, THE can mimic it quite well, *and* it
uses either ooRexx or Regina as its macro language.
I wasn't sure about posting this, but Dan assures me that as long as
it's VM related, it's welcome!
Les
uploading C code to VM
I am working on a project where I am porting some C code from linux to VM, so that I can compile it on z/VSE. As you can imagine, the 72 characters per line restriction is a problem. Has anybody else found a way to automate the conversion that they can share? As mentioned in another thread, I do have THE and REXX on my Linux which could be used. -- Tony Thigpen
Re: uploading C code to VM
Tony, I have not used VM C for several years, but I think that I remember that there is a compiler option to say do the whole record and not just 1-72. Lloyd - Original Message From: Tony Thigpen t...@vse2pdf.com To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Sent: Wed, May 18, 2011 8:37:29 AM Subject: uploading C code to VM I am working on a project where I am porting some C code from linux to VM, so that I can compile it on z/VSE. As you can imagine, the 72 characters per line restriction is a problem. Has anybody else found a way to automate the conversion that they can share? As mentioned in another thread, I do have THE and REXX on my Linux which could be used. -- Tony Thigpen
Re: uploading C code to VM
On Wednesday, 05/18/2011 at 08:32 EDT, Tony Thigpen t...@vse2pdf.com wrote: I am working on a project where I am porting some C code from linux to VM, so that I can compile it on z/VSE. As you can imagine, the 72 characters per line restriction is a problem. Has anybody else found a way to automate the conversion that they can share? As mentioned in another thread, I do have THE and REXX on my Linux which could be used. What 72 character restriction are you talking about, Tony? There is no such restriction in VM. Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 mobile; 607.321.7556 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott
Re: uploading C code to VM
On Wednesday, 05/18/2011 at 09:01 EDT, Lloyd Fuller leful...@sbcglobal.net wrote: I have not used VM C for several years, but I think that I remember that there is a compiler option to say do the whole record and not just 1-72. If Tony is using the IBM compiler, the NOMARGINS option causes the compiler to scan the entire line. If you have sequence numbers you can use MARGINS to control it. (Can use #pragma margins/nomargins as well.) Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 mobile; 607.321.7556 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott
Re: uploading C code to VM
As you can imagine, the 72 characters per line restriction is a problem. Has anybody else found a way to automate the conversion that they can share? As mentioned in another thread, I do have THE and REXX on my Linux which could be used. If you have Emacs installed on your Linux, look at the chapter in the Emacs manual (M-x info) on C mode. You can specify the desired line length, and then: M-x set-mark M- M-x reformat-region And you should end up with 72 column-friendly C code. You can tinker with the coding style as variables for C-mode.
Re: uploading C code to VM
I am not as worried about 72 or 80 as I am the lines from the pc that are way over 80. As I mentioned, I am compiling this on VSE, not VM, so since I am sending the program source though the Power reader, 80 will be the max although I would prefer 72 due to editing the program with xedit. Tony Thigpen -Original Message - From: Alan Altmark Sent: 05/18/2011 09:09 AM On Wednesday, 05/18/2011 at 09:01 EDT, Lloyd Fuller leful...@sbcglobal.net wrote: I have not used VM C for several years, but I think that I remember that there is a compiler option to say do the whole record and not just 1-72. If Tony is using the IBM compiler, the NOMARGINS option causes the compiler to scan the entire line. If you have sequence numbers you can use MARGINS to control it. (Can use #pragma margins/nomargins as well.) Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 mobile; 607.321.7556 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott
Re: Anyone use The Hessling Editor (THE), an Xedit/Kedit look-alike, for off-line VM code development or personal use?
Where can THE be gotten? I've heard of it, but have never had it or tried it. Is it usable as a general purpose PC editor or is it really only usable as a PC resident mainframe tool? Jim On 5/17/2011 11:50 PM, Les Koehler wrote: If you use THE for your own stuff, I'd like a direct email if you'd like to exchange information. Anyone using it to offload VM work to the pc, or considering doing so, I have a wealth of macros to make it as much like Xedit as I can, while at the same time taking advantage of the capabilities of a pc and no 3270 restrictions. Tell us about your VM work on this thread, why you chose THE, or pose questions that I, or others, might be able to help answer. If you're familiar with Kedit, THE can mimic it quite well, *and* it uses either ooRexx or Regina as its macro language. I wasn't sure about posting this, but Dan assures me that as long as it's VM related, it's welcome! Les -- James Bohnsack (972) 596-6377 home/office (972) 342-5823 cell
Re: Anyone use The Hessling Editor (THE), an Xedit/Kedit look-alike, for off-line VM code development or personal use?
http://hessling-editor.sourceforge.net/ On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:35 AM, Jim Bohnsack jab...@cornell.edu wrote: Where can THE be gotten? I've heard of it, but have never had it or tried it. Is it usable as a general purpose PC editor or is it really only usable as a PC resident mainframe tool? Jim On 5/17/2011 11:50 PM, Les Koehler wrote: If you use THE for your own stuff, I'd like a direct email if you'd like to exchange information. Anyone using it to offload VM work to the pc, or considering doing so, I have a wealth of macros to make it as much like Xedit as I can, while at the same time taking advantage of the capabilities of a pc and no 3270 restrictions. Tell us about your VM work on this thread, why you chose THE, or pose questions that I, or others, might be able to help answer. If you're familiar with Kedit, THE can mimic it quite well, *and* it uses either ooRexx or Regina as its macro language. I wasn't sure about posting this, but Dan assures me that as long as it's VM related, it's welcome! Les -- James Bohnsack (972) 596-6377 home/office (972) 342-5823 cell -- Mark D Pace Senior Systems Engineer Mainline Information Systems
Re: Anyone use The Hessling Editor (THE), an Xedit/Kedit look-alike, for off-line VM code development or personal use?
http://hessling-editor.sourceforge.net/ I used it for some pc file editing, but some linux files require that I use a 'true' pc style editor. (Like when editing 'make' files.) Tony Thigpen -Original Message - From: Jim Bohnsack Sent: 05/18/2011 10:35 AM Where can THE be gotten? I've heard of it, but have never had it or tried it. Is it usable as a general purpose PC editor or is it really only usable as a PC resident mainframe tool? Jim On 5/17/2011 11:50 PM, Les Koehler wrote: If you use THE for your own stuff, I'd like a direct email if you'd like to exchange information. Anyone using it to offload VM work to the pc, or considering doing so, I have a wealth of macros to make it as much like Xedit as I can, while at the same time taking advantage of the capabilities of a pc and no 3270 restrictions. Tell us about your VM work on this thread, why you chose THE, or pose questions that I, or others, might be able to help answer. If you're familiar with Kedit, THE can mimic it quite well, *and* it uses either ooRexx or Regina as its macro language. I wasn't sure about posting this, but Dan assures me that as long as it's VM related, it's welcome! Les
Re: uploading C code to VM
Why not FTP to z/VSE to compile straight from Linux? (Still not sure if the C compiler will handle anything greater than 80 though.) Frank M. Ramaekers Jr. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU] On Behalf Of Tony Thigpen Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 9:33 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: uploading C code to VM I am not as worried about 72 or 80 as I am the lines from the pc that are way over 80. As I mentioned, I am compiling this on VSE, not VM, so since I am sending the program source though the Power reader, 80 will be the max although I would prefer 72 due to editing the program with xedit. Tony Thigpen -Original Message - From: Alan Altmark Sent: 05/18/2011 09:09 AM On Wednesday, 05/18/2011 at 09:01 EDT, Lloyd Fuller leful...@sbcglobal.net wrote: I have not used VM C for several years, but I think that I remember that there is a compiler option to say do the whole record and not just 1-72. If Tony is using the IBM compiler, the NOMARGINS option causes the compiler to scan the entire line. If you have sequence numbers you can use MARGINS to control it. (Can use #pragma margins/nomargins as well.) Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 mobile; 607.321.7556 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott _ 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: Anyone use The Hessling Editor (THE), an Xedit/Kedit look-alike, for off-line VM code development or personal use?
You can get it from SourceForge. Frank M. Ramaekers Jr. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU] On Behalf Of Jim Bohnsack Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 9:35 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Anyone use The Hessling Editor (THE), an Xedit/Kedit look-alike, for off-line VM code development or personal use? Where can THE be gotten? I've heard of it, but have never had it or tried it. Is it usable as a general purpose PC editor or is it really only usable as a PC resident mainframe tool? Jim On 5/17/2011 11:50 PM, Les Koehler wrote: If you use THE for your own stuff, I'd like a direct email if you'd like to exchange information. Anyone using it to offload VM work to the pc, or considering doing so, I have a wealth of macros to make it as much like Xedit as I can, while at the same time taking advantage of the capabilities of a pc and no 3270 restrictions. Tell us about your VM work on this thread, why you chose THE, or pose questions that I, or others, might be able to help answer. If you're familiar with Kedit, THE can mimic it quite well, *and* it uses either ooRexx or Regina as its macro language. I wasn't sure about posting this, but Dan assures me that as long as it's VM related, it's welcome! Les -- James Bohnsack (972) 596-6377 home/office (972) 342-5823 cell _ 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.
zvm directions
I see that the list traffic is kind of light right now and though I would toss out a topic for all of us to chew on. I am looking for your thoughts on the current direction of zVM in particular where development needs to be focused. I sense that z/VM 6.2 with SSI will ease the burden of medium to large shops in the area of multi-system maintenance, and hopefully will be extended beyond it's current meager 4 system max size, sooner rather than later. Given the difficulty in making any changes to production workloads I don't see SSI with Live Guest Migration (LGM) as a panacea to issue related to load balancing amongst lpars. Without more direct linux interaction I am concerned about the migration of workloads using dedicated fcp with or without NPIV as well as arp issues. The area I would like to see development is the utilization of the hardware some of us are lucky enough to have, the z196. With a machine that can be delivered with 3TB of memory(1.5TB on a z10), having a maximum size z/VM system of 256GB is very limiting. In reviewing presentations on memory limits, I have read comments that the system has been tested to more than 400GB central storage but no indication (statement of direction...rumor) that the current limit will be increased. So I am pushing for increasing the max z/VM LPAR to at least 512MB if not larger. Expansion of the link aggregation implementation allowing for shared OSA cards. In general I am focused on larger vm systems, so that is where I would like to see development. Phil Tully Viewpoints presented here are my own and not my employer's
Re: uploading C code to VM
On Wednesday, 05/18/2011 at 10:30 EDT, Tony Thigpen t...@vse2pdf.com wrote: I am not as worried about 72 or 80 as I am the lines from the pc that are way over 80. As I mentioned, I am compiling this on VSE, not VM, so since I am sending the program source though the Power reader, 80 will be the max although I would prefer 72 due to editing the program with xedit. Why not FTP it? But if you must go through the Power reader, maybe you can use AFRREBLK on VM to fold the file into 80-character records and then use VSEREBLK to unfold it. AFRREBLK/VSEREBLK can be found at http://www.infoprint.com/internet/dcfdata.nsf/vwWeb/P4000198. Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 mobile; 607.321.7556 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott
Re: zvm directions
Phil, Have you considered getting involved with the Linux VM Program (LVM) at SHARE? In particular, the LVM Technical Steering Committee has been working with IBM on this sort of topic for a number of years. I know they're always looking for interested members from the user community. Marty On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 11:31 AM, PHILIP TULLY tull...@optonline.netwrote: I see that the list traffic is kind of light right now and though I would toss out a topic for all of us to chew on. I am looking for your thoughts on the current direction of zVM in particular where development needs to be focused. I sense that z/VM 6.2 with SSI will ease the burden of medium to large shops in the area of multi-system maintenance, and hopefully will be extended beyond it's current meager 4 system max size, sooner rather than later. Given the difficulty in making any changes to production workloads I don't see SSI with Live Guest Migration (LGM) as a panacea to issue related to load balancing amongst lpars. Without more direct linux interaction I am concerned about the migration of workloads using dedicated fcp with or without NPIV as well as arp issues. The area I would like to see development is the utilization of the hardware some of us are lucky enough to have, the z196. With a machine that can be delivered with 3TB of memory(1.5TB on a z10), having a maximum size z/VM system of 256GB is very limiting. In reviewing presentations on memory limits, I have read comments that the system has been tested to more than 400GB central storage but no indication (statement of direction...rumor) that the current limit will be increased. So I am pushing for increasing the max z/VM LPAR to at least 512MB if not larger. Expansion of the link aggregation implementation allowing for shared OSA cards. In general I am focused on larger vm systems, so that is where I would like to see development. Phil Tully Viewpoints presented here are my own and not my employer's
Re: zvm directions
Phil, I'll 2nd your opinion that 4 systems in the SSI is meager. I'm already in a quandary there with 4 prod systems and capacity planning asking where we put the next ones. So now I'm not sure if we step into SSI with all 4 or have to immediately start with 2 plexes. If two, we're giving up something. I don't see LGR as a load balancing solution at all. We will continue to use our F5 load balancers as well as the WAS IHS plugin for that effort. I see it more for a planned outage move for things you want to move away for a while without the reboot. 512M seems like a good next target given our 196's can do 3TB. We leave half for failover so that would mean we would do 3 prod LPARs on the box, with the 3 standby. That seems reasonable. Avoiding VMWARE type sprawl I think is a good thing :) We've just moved to the 10Gig OSAs and away from the LACP for a couple of reasons, so that is not as important to us. The cost of OSA ports IMHO probably doesn't justify VM developer time. Replication, large ECKD minidisks, zHPF (or any I/O related things to keep ECKD perf on par with FCP), are things that are important here. With the z196s being the fastest thing out there now, I see an avalanche of new workload coming. Sounds the same for you. (PS. I'll 2nd Marty's idea of getting involved in SHARE if you can!) Marcy -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU] On Behalf Of PHILIP TULLY Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 8:31 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: [IBMVM] zvm directions I see that the list traffic is kind of light right now and though I would toss out a topic for all of us to chew on. I am looking for your thoughts on the current direction of zVM in particular where development needs to be focused. I sense that z/VM 6.2 with SSI will ease the burden of medium to large shops in the area of multi-system maintenance, and hopefully will be extended beyond it's current meager 4 system max size, sooner rather than later. Given the difficulty in making any changes to production workloads I don't see SSI with Live Guest Migration (LGM) as a panacea to issue related to load balancing amongst lpars. Without more direct linux interaction I am concerned about the migration of workloads using dedicated fcp with or without NPIV as well as arp issues. The area I would like to see development is the utilization of the hardware some of us are lucky enough to have, the z196. With a machine that can be delivered with 3TB of memory(1.5TB on a z10), having a maximum size z/VM system of 256GB is very limiting. In reviewing presentations on memory limits, I have read comments that the system has been tested to more than 400GB central storage but no indication (statement of direction...rumor) that the current limit will be increased. So I am pushing for increasing the max z/VM LPAR to at least 512MB if not larger. Expansion of the link aggregation implementation allowing for shared OSA cards. In general I am focused on larger vm systems, so that is where I would like to see development. Phil Tully Viewpoints presented here are my own and not my employer's
Re: uploading C code to VM
Tony -- I have done C on CMS for more than 20 years (off and on). Never been limitted to 72 cols that I remember. In the early days I might not have cared. If it ever was a problem, I probably set (NOMARGINS like Alan suggests and then forgot it was ever a problem. One great thing about doing C with CMS is that you can use UPDATE. The length limit for EXECUPDT is 255, which results in 247 cols usable, or 238 with SID codes. I realize you're moving the source the other direction, but ... it could be fun. -- R; On May 18, 2011 8:32 AM, Tony Thigpen t...@vse2pdf.com wrote: I am working on a project where I am porting some C code from linux to VM, so that I can compile it on z/VSE. As you can imagine, the 72 characters per line restriction is a problem. Has anybody else found a way to automate the conversion that they can share? As mentioned in another thread, I do have THE and REXX on my Linux which could be used. -- Tony Thigpen
Re: Anyone use The Hessling Editor (THE), an Xedit/Kedit look-alike, for off-line VM code development or personal use?
I've used KEDIT KEX extensively on the PC for decades because its similarity to XEDIT REXX made working in both environments easier. I have never used THE. I would be interested in your, or anyone else's, views comparing contrasting THE Regina with KEDIT KEX. Are there any benefits/features that could entice me to switching to THE/Regina? Brian Nielsen On Tue, 17 May 2011 23:50:13 -0400, Les Koehler vmr...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: If you use THE for your own stuff, I'd like a direct email if you'd like to exchange information. Anyone using it to offload VM work to the pc, or considering doing so, I have a wealth of macros to make it as much like Xedit as I can, while at the same time taking advantage of the capabilities of a pc and no 3270 restrictions. Tell us about your VM work on this thread, why you chose THE, or pose questions that I, or others, might be able to help answer. If you're familiar with Kedit, THE can mimic it quite well, *and* it uses either ooRexx or Regina as its macro language. I wasn't sure about posting this, but Dan assures me that as long as it's VM related, it's welcome! Les =
Re: zvm directions
On Wednesday, 05/18/2011 at 11:33 EDT, PHILIP TULLY tull...@optonline.net wrote: I sense that z/VM 6.2 with SSI will ease the burden of medium to large shops in the area of multi-system maintenance, and hopefully will be extended beyond it's current meager 4 system max size, sooner rather than later. Given the difficulty in making any changes to production workloads I don't see SSI with Live Guest Migration (LGM) as a panacea to issue related to load balancing amongst lpars. Without more direct linux interaction I am concerned about the migration of workloads using dedicated fcp with or without NPIV as well as arp issues. - Guests that use FCP (with or without NPIV) are not expected to have issues as long as the guest is configured for multipathing, as the System z WWPNs will not move with the guest. That means you need to be thorough in your zoning. - Guests that use the VSWITCH or OSAs are not expected to have ARP issues. - It is possible that a Linux patch will be needed for dedicated OSAs. - There is planned to be a color matching mechanism to let you manage the cross-system equivalence relationships for certain dedicated device types (e.g. FCP and OSA). Your job will be to ensure that all FCP (e.g.) subchannels of the same color have the same access rights into the fabric, both in terms of zoning and masking. Disclaimer: The above statements represent IBM's intent, but is not a commitment. The implementation is subject to change without notice. When the next release of z/VM is announced, we'll be able to give more details and have a firm understanding of any guest patch requirements. The area I would like to see development is the utilization of the hardware some of us are lucky enough to have, the z196. With a machine that can be delivered with 3TB of memory(1.5TB on a z10), having a maximum size z/VM system of 256GB is very limiting. In reviewing presentations on memory limits, I have read comments that the system has been tested to more than 400GB central storage but no indication (statement of direction...rumor) that the current limit will be increased. So I am pushing for increasing the max z/VM LPAR to at least 512MB if not larger. IBM is actively investing in memory scalability for z/VM. When CP dcan reliably use more than 256GB, the support limit will be raised. Expansion of the link aggregation implementation allowing for shared OSA cards. This isn't possible with System z's shared I/O model. There is only one cable on the port and any host putting data on the cable must abide by the LACP protocol, which requires knowledge of the state and relationships of all packets in transit on the cable. Only one cook is allowed in the kitchen. Hence the no sharing requirement. If System z were to switch a System p PowerVM-like virtual I/O server model, then what you describe could happen. All I/O from all LPARs would be intercepted and routed to another LPAR that does the real I/O on everyone's behalf. It would look like a CEC-wide VSWITCH. But it's not clear to me that System z should invest in that model at the expense of other capabilities. (I get complaints from people about OSA latency now) Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 mobile; 607.321.7556 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott
Re: zvm directions
On Wednesday, 05/18/2011 at 12:07 EDT, Marcy Cortes marcy.d.cor...@wellsfargo.com wrote: I don't see LGR as a load balancing solution at all. We will continue to use our F5 load balancers as well as the WAS IHS plugin for that effort. I see it more for a planned outage move for things you want to move away for a while without the reboot. An excellent assessment, Marcy. :-) LGR was not designed to replace any application-level workload balancing solutions (F5). Those balancing solutions provide the needed HA in case you lose a VM LPAR unexpectedly. LGR will let you take back control of your VM LPARs. No longer will you need to get 15 application owners to agree on a time for you to take down and service the VM system. Their servers keep running and the application monitor dashboard shows green. Oh, and I suppose there is an additional benefit in that if someone says, *I* can relocate a server to a different rack in case it starts to overheat! you can stick out your tongue and then say *I* can relocate a server when I want to. My machine doesn't overheat. :-) Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 mobile; 607.321.7556 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott
Re: zvm directions
Too bad it will not work for geographically dispersed LPARS :-( Regards, Richard Schuh -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 11:28 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: zvm directions On Wednesday, 05/18/2011 at 12:07 EDT, Marcy Cortes marcy.d.cor...@wellsfargo.com wrote: I don't see LGR as a load balancing solution at all. We will continue to use our F5 load balancers as well as the WAS IHS plugin for that effort. I see it more for a planned outage move for things you want to move away for a while without the reboot. An excellent assessment, Marcy. :-) LGR was not designed to replace any application-level workload balancing solutions (F5). Those balancing solutions provide the needed HA in case you lose a VM LPAR unexpectedly. LGR will let you take back control of your VM LPARs. No longer will you need to get 15 application owners to agree on a time for you to take down and service the VM system. Their servers keep running and the application monitor dashboard shows green. Oh, and I suppose there is an additional benefit in that if someone says, *I* can relocate a server to a different rack in case it starts to overheat! you can stick out your tongue and then say *I* can relocate a server when I want to. My machine doesn't overheat. :-) Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 mobile; 607.321.7556 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott
Re: zvm directions
The tongue benefit is huge. Gotta keep up with them other guys ;) The other really useful case I see is in the dev/test environment. Say we want to get some good measurements from an app before they go production or to size them properly for their prod server purchase, but we have some pigs (uh, I mean very active developers writing code that is still in the early stages) skewing the results. We shove them off to the other LPAR until our target is LPAR looks the way we want it to ... and put them back later. No one is the wiser and no emails about what happened to my server! Marcy -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 11:28 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: [IBMVM] zvm directions On Wednesday, 05/18/2011 at 12:07 EDT, Marcy Cortes marcy.d.cor...@wellsfargo.com wrote: I don't see LGR as a load balancing solution at all. We will continue to use our F5 load balancers as well as the WAS IHS plugin for that effort. I see it more for a planned outage move for things you want to move away for a while without the reboot. An excellent assessment, Marcy. :-) LGR was not designed to replace any application-level workload balancing solutions (F5). Those balancing solutions provide the needed HA in case you lose a VM LPAR unexpectedly. LGR will let you take back control of your VM LPARs. No longer will you need to get 15 application owners to agree on a time for you to take down and service the VM system. Their servers keep running and the application monitor dashboard shows green. Oh, and I suppose there is an additional benefit in that if someone says, *I* can relocate a server to a different rack in case it starts to overheat! you can stick out your tongue and then say *I* can relocate a server when I want to. My machine doesn't overheat. :-) Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 mobile; 607.321.7556 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott
Re: zvm directions
Depends on how far, right? You have to share DASD so PPRC distances apply. You probably need the same subnet so you need a consultation with your network folks. But should be doable if you do those things (at least that's the plan here). Marcy -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU] On Behalf Of Schuh, Richard Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 11:35 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: [IBMVM] zvm directions Too bad it will not work for geographically dispersed LPARS :-( Regards, Richard Schuh -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 11:28 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: zvm directions On Wednesday, 05/18/2011 at 12:07 EDT, Marcy Cortes marcy.d.cor...@wellsfargo.com wrote: I don't see LGR as a load balancing solution at all. We will continue to use our F5 load balancers as well as the WAS IHS plugin for that effort. I see it more for a planned outage move for things you want to move away for a while without the reboot. An excellent assessment, Marcy. :-) LGR was not designed to replace any application-level workload balancing solutions (F5). Those balancing solutions provide the needed HA in case you lose a VM LPAR unexpectedly. LGR will let you take back control of your VM LPARs. No longer will you need to get 15 application owners to agree on a time for you to take down and service the VM system. Their servers keep running and the application monitor dashboard shows green. Oh, and I suppose there is an additional benefit in that if someone says, *I* can relocate a server to a different rack in case it starts to overheat! you can stick out your tongue and then say *I* can relocate a server when I want to. My machine doesn't overheat. :-) Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 mobile; 607.321.7556 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott
Re: Anyone use The Hessling Editor (THE), an Xedit/Kedit look-alike, for off-line VM code development or personal use?
What appeals to me is (from way back) that I can build Regina and THE reliably from source. I used at least two other REXX implementations and had trouble building them ... at some point along the road. Lately it matters less. (about build ability) So ... I have built and run THE and Regina on ... Linux i386 Linux s390 FreeBSD CYGWIN Linux sparc Linux s390x Linux x86_64 Might have also done Linux ppc. I'm sure there was also a Solaris and an AIX. Of you're on multiple platforms, ya like yer toys to be there. Pretty sure someone built Regina for USS, maybe THE too. -- R; On May 18, 2011 1:52 PM, Brian Nielsen bniel...@sco.idaho.gov wrote: I've used KEDIT KEX extensively on the PC for decades because its similarity to XEDIT REXX made working in both environments easier. I have never used THE. I would be interested in your, or anyone else's, views comparing contrasting THE Regina with KEDIT KEX. Are there any benefits/features that could entice me to switching to THE/Regina? Brian Nielsen On Tue, 17 May 2011 23:50:13 -0400, Les Koehler vmr...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: If you use THE for your own stuff, I'd like a direct email if you'd like to exchange information. Anyone using it to offload VM work to the pc, or considering doing so, I have a wealth of macros to make it as much like Xedit as I can, while at the same time taking advantage of the capabilities of a pc and no 3270 restrictions. Tell us about your VM work on this thread, why you chose THE, or pose questions that I, or others, might be able to help answer. If you're familiar with Kedit, THE can mimic it quite well, *and* it uses either ooRexx or Regina as its macro language. I wasn't sure about posting this, but Dan assures me that as long as it's VM related, it's welcome! Les =
Re: Anyone use The Hessling Editor (THE), an Xedit/Kedit look-alike, for off-line VM code development or personal use?
I once used KEDIT, but switched to THE many years ago. At the time, KEDIT did not support prefix macros, something I use a lot. Tony Thigpen -Original Message - From: Brian Nielsen Sent: 05/18/2011 01:52 PM I've used KEDIT KEX extensively on the PC for decades because its similarity to XEDIT REXX made working in both environments easier. I have never used THE. I would be interested in your, or anyone else's, views comparing contrasting THE Regina with KEDIT KEX. Are there any benefits/features that could entice me to switching to THE/Regina? Brian Nielsen On Tue, 17 May 2011 23:50:13 -0400, Les Koehlervmr...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: If you use THE for your own stuff, I'd like a direct email if you'd like to exchange information. Anyone using it to offload VM work to the pc, or considering doing so, I have a wealth of macros to make it as much like Xedit as I can, while at the same time taking advantage of the capabilities of a pc and no 3270 restrictions. Tell us about your VM work on this thread, why you chose THE, or pose questions that I, or others, might be able to help answer. If you're familiar with Kedit, THE can mimic it quite well, *and* it uses either ooRexx or Regina as its macro language. I wasn't sure about posting this, but Dan assures me that as long as it's VM related, it's welcome! Les =
Re: zvm directions
On Wednesday, 05/18/2011 at 02:46 EDT, Marcy Cortes marcy.d.cor...@wellsfargo.com wrote: Depends on how far, right? You have to share DASD so PPRC distances apply. You probably need the same subnet so you need a consultation with your network folks. But should be doable if you do those things (at least that's the plan here). Indeed, the flat layer 2 LAN requirement is very likely going to be the limiting factor. Most sites are unwilling to extend LANs very far. There is some validity in that position since the subnet numbers are usually architected along some sort of physical boundary (e.g. city, site, building, floor). If two halves of a LAN each have a router in them, you can end up with a split horizon if the bridge connection between the halves goes down. That isn't pretty as both routers give the battle cry To me! To me! Death to the other! So rather than get into this situation, the network architects typically don't allow a LAN segment to extend beyond a single wiring closet. That doesn't mean you shouldn't ask, but it does mean you shouldn't be surprised if the answer comes back No. Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 mobile; 607.321.7556 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott
Mark your calendar for VM Linux Summer Workshop (July 2011)
Cross-posted to IBMVM, IBMMAIN, LINUX390 for the VM enthusiasts. | Update: 18 May 2011 | The VM Workshop registration form is on the VM Workshop web site. | Reserve place today. | http://www.vmworkshop.org/ | Initial post below to refresh your memory: Hi, just wanted to get this on your calendarswork is underway to relaunch the VM Workshop as the VM and Linux Workshop. July 28-30, 2011 at Ohio State University in Columbus Ohio. When they tell me that the new workshop web site is ready I will add the link to it on the VM events calendar. http://www.vm.ibm.com/events/ For now...just mark your calendar. If you would like to be involved in the planning now or later, feel free to speak up (we'll give your name to Len Diegel who has been gathering people together on planning calls). Regards, Pam C
Re: uploading C code to VM
The big issue is that I need to compile it on z/VSE, not on z/VM. (I don't have access to C on z/VM and I am working on z/VSE software.) The normal input for z/VSE is SYSIN or LIBR members where record lengths are limited. Tony Thigpen -Original Message - From: Richard Troth Sent: 05/18/2011 12:31 PM Tony -- I have done C on CMS for more than 20 years (off and on). Never been limitted to 72 cols that I remember. In the early days I might not have cared. If it ever was a problem, I probably set (NOMARGINS like Alan suggests and then forgot it was ever a problem. One great thing about doing C with CMS is that you can use UPDATE. The length limit for EXECUPDT is 255, which results in 247 cols usable, or 238 with SID codes. I realize you're moving the source the other direction, but ... it could be fun. -- R; On May 18, 2011 8:32 AM, Tony Thigpent...@vse2pdf.com wrote: I am working on a project where I am porting some C code from linux to VM, so that I can compile it on z/VSE. As you can imagine, the 72 characters per line restriction is a problem. Has anybody else found a way to automate the conversion that they can share? As mentioned in another thread, I do have THE and REXX on my Linux which could be used. -- Tony Thigpen
Re: zvm directions
Has z/VM 6.2 been released? Regards, Alyce -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU] On Behalf Of PHILIP TULLY Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 8:31 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: zvm directions I see that the list traffic is kind of light right now and though I would toss out a topic for all of us to chew on. I am looking for your thoughts on the current direction of zVM in particular where development needs to be focused. I sense that z/VM 6.2 with SSI will ease the burden of medium to large shops in the area of multi-system maintenance, and hopefully will be extended beyond it's current meager 4 system max size, sooner rather than later. Given the difficulty in making any changes to production workloads I don't see SSI with Live Guest Migration (LGM) as a panacea to issue related to load balancing amongst lpars. Without more direct linux interaction I am concerned about the migration of workloads using dedicated fcp with or without NPIV as well as arp issues. The area I would like to see development is the utilization of the hardware some of us are lucky enough to have, the z196. With a machine that can be delivered with 3TB of memory(1.5TB on a z10), having a maximum size z/VM system of 256GB is very limiting. In reviewing presentations on memory limits, I have read comments that the system has been tested to more than 400GB central storage but no indication (statement of direction...rumor) that the current limit will be increased. So I am pushing for increasing the max z/VM LPAR to at least 512MB if not larger. Expansion of the link aggregation implementation allowing for shared OSA cards. In general I am focused on larger vm systems, so that is where I would like to see development. Phil Tully Viewpoints presented here are my own and not my employer's
Re: Anyone use The Hessling Editor (THE), an Xedit/Kedit look-alike, for off-line VM code development or personal use?
A pc file doesn't have a concept of blank-delimited fn ft
fm, so some adjustment *must* be made. It is my
understanding that *nix doesn't make some information
available for a prefix macro, but I don't know the details.
Les
Tony Thigpen wrote:
The problem is not the order they are processed, but instead is a
problem of how they are stored when using:
'EXTRACT /PENDING OLDNAME' macroname
where macroname is derived from:
parse source os . macroname macroft macrofm name .
parse arg pref func pline op extra '(' options
if os = 'UNIX'
then do
parse arg pref name func pline op extra '(' options
nn = lastpos('/',macroname) + 1
interpret parse var macroname execpath nn macroname '.' .
end
(As a side note, it would have been nice if the 'arg' statement had
matched VM's so I would not have had to play games with it.)
I looked at the code and did not see an easy fix for the problem. The
way the prefix commands are stored is the root problem.
Tony Thigpen
-Original Message -
From: Les Koehler
Sent: 05/18/2011 05:59 AM
The big difference in prefix macro processing is that THE runs them in
the order they were entered, not top to bottom as Xedit does.
I haven't done much with them, but another member of RexxLA has overcome
the difference. I could send you one of his macros to use as a model, if
you'd like.
Les
Tony Thigpen wrote:
Several years ago, I moved all my assembler code for my products from
VM to my Linux desktop. I now use THE, Dignus ASM, and 'make'
processes to compile my products which are linked and tested on z/VSE.
I have converted several of my prefix macros to be dual-mode. The same
source works in both VM and THE. There is one major prefix macro that
will not convert due to the way THE works because the macro has
several prefix's for the same macros and the EXTRACT/PENDING in THE
does not handle that condition correctly.
Tony Thigpen
-Original Message -
From: Les Koehler
Sent: 05/17/2011 11:50 PM
If you use THE for your own stuff, I'd like a direct email if you'd
like
to exchange information.
Anyone using it to offload VM work to the pc, or considering doing
so, I
have a wealth of macros to make it as much like Xedit as I can,
while at
the same time taking advantage of the capabilities of a pc and no 3270
restrictions.
Tell us about your VM work on this thread, why you chose THE, or pose
questions that I, or others, might be able to help answer.
If you're familiar with Kedit, THE can mimic it quite well, *and* it
uses either ooRexx or Regina as its macro language.
I wasn't sure about posting this, but Dan assures me that as long as
it's VM related, it's welcome!
Les
Re: Anyone use The Hessling Editor (THE), an Xedit/Kedit look-alike, for off-line VM code development or personal use?
What do mean by a 'true pc editor'? I'm sure MarkH edits make files all the time! It's probably a question of what constitutes a 'line-end' sequence when writing files. SET EOLOUT can be used to change it. Les Tony Thigpen wrote: http://hessling-editor.sourceforge.net/ I used it for some pc file editing, but some linux files require that I use a 'true' pc style editor. (Like when editing 'make' files.) Tony Thigpen -Original Message - From: Jim Bohnsack Sent: 05/18/2011 10:35 AM Where can THE be gotten? I've heard of it, but have never had it or tried it. Is it usable as a general purpose PC editor or is it really only usable as a PC resident mainframe tool? Jim On 5/17/2011 11:50 PM, Les Koehler wrote: If you use THE for your own stuff, I'd like a direct email if you'd like to exchange information. Anyone using it to offload VM work to the pc, or considering doing so, I have a wealth of macros to make it as much like Xedit as I can, while at the same time taking advantage of the capabilities of a pc and no 3270 restrictions. Tell us about your VM work on this thread, why you chose THE, or pose questions that I, or others, might be able to help answer. If you're familiar with Kedit, THE can mimic it quite well, *and* it uses either ooRexx or Regina as its macro language. I wasn't sure about posting this, but Dan assures me that as long as it's VM related, it's welcome! Les
Re: zvm directions
no. On 05/18/2011 05:32 PM, Austin, Alyce (CIV) wrote: Has z/VM 6.2 been released? Regards, Alyce -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU] On Behalf Of PHILIP TULLY Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 8:31 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: zvm directions I see that the list traffic is kind of light right now and though I would toss out a topic for all of us to chew on. I am looking for your thoughts on the current direction of zVM in particular where development needs to be focused. I sense that z/VM 6.2 with SSI will ease the burden of medium to large shops in the area of multi-system maintenance, and hopefully will be extended beyond it's current meager 4 system max size, sooner rather than later. Given the difficulty in making any changes to production workloads I don't see SSI with Live Guest Migration (LGM) as a panacea to issue related to load balancing amongst lpars. Without more direct linux interaction I am concerned about the migration of workloads using dedicated fcp with or without NPIV as well as arp issues. The area I would like to see development is the utilization of the hardware some of us are lucky enough to have, the z196. With a machine that can be delivered with 3TB of memory(1.5TB on a z10), having a maximum size z/VM system of 256GB is very limiting. In reviewing presentations on memory limits, I have read comments that the system has been tested to more than 400GB central storage but no indication (statement of direction...rumor) that the current limit will be increased. So I am pushing for increasing the max z/VM LPAR to at least 512MB if not larger. Expansion of the link aggregation implementation allowing for shared OSA cards. In general I am focused on larger vm systems, so that is where I would like to see development. Phil Tully Viewpoints presented here are my own and not my employer's -- Dave Jones V/Soft Software www.vsoft-software.com Houston, TX 281.578.7544
Re: zvm directions
No, nor announced. It's statement of direction thus far. Might not even be called 6.2 perhaps :) But go to share.org and look at the Anaheim - Franciscovich 8453. Marcy -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU] On Behalf Of Austin, Alyce (CIV) Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 3:33 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: [IBMVM] zvm directions Has z/VM 6.2 been released? Regards, Alyce -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU] On Behalf Of PHILIP TULLY Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 8:31 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: zvm directions I see that the list traffic is kind of light right now and though I would toss out a topic for all of us to chew on. I am looking for your thoughts on the current direction of zVM in particular where development needs to be focused. I sense that z/VM 6.2 with SSI will ease the burden of medium to large shops in the area of multi-system maintenance, and hopefully will be extended beyond it's current meager 4 system max size, sooner rather than later. Given the difficulty in making any changes to production workloads I don't see SSI with Live Guest Migration (LGM) as a panacea to issue related to load balancing amongst lpars. Without more direct linux interaction I am concerned about the migration of workloads using dedicated fcp with or without NPIV as well as arp issues. The area I would like to see development is the utilization of the hardware some of us are lucky enough to have, the z196. With a machine that can be delivered with 3TB of memory(1.5TB on a z10), having a maximum size z/VM system of 256GB is very limiting. In reviewing presentations on memory limits, I have read comments that the system has been tested to more than 400GB central storage but no indication (statement of direction...rumor) that the current limit will be increased. So I am pushing for increasing the max z/VM LPAR to at least 512MB if not larger. Expansion of the link aggregation implementation allowing for shared OSA cards. In general I am focused on larger vm systems, so that is where I would like to see development. Phil Tully Viewpoints presented here are my own and not my employer's
Re: Anyone use The Hessling Editor (THE), an Xedit/Kedit look-alike, for off-line VM code development or personal use?
I always run mine in xedit compatibility mode because I am normally editing mainframe source files. I know there are other capibilities, but I seldom need to edit 'special files' so I just use gedit for those. (I wish they had not dropped kedit with this new version of KDE.) Tony Thigpen -Original Message - From: Les Koehler Sent: 05/18/2011 07:09 PM What do mean by a 'true pc editor'? I'm sure MarkH edits make files all the time! It's probably a question of what constitutes a 'line-end' sequence when writing files. SET EOLOUT can be used to change it. Les Tony Thigpen wrote: http://hessling-editor.sourceforge.net/ I used it for some pc file editing, but some linux files require that I use a 'true' pc style editor. (Like when editing 'make' files.) Tony Thigpen -Original Message - From: Jim Bohnsack Sent: 05/18/2011 10:35 AM Where can THE be gotten? I've heard of it, but have never had it or tried it. Is it usable as a general purpose PC editor or is it really only usable as a PC resident mainframe tool? Jim On 5/17/2011 11:50 PM, Les Koehler wrote: If you use THE for your own stuff, I'd like a direct email if you'd like to exchange information. Anyone using it to offload VM work to the pc, or considering doing so, I have a wealth of macros to make it as much like Xedit as I can, while at the same time taking advantage of the capabilities of a pc and no 3270 restrictions. Tell us about your VM work on this thread, why you chose THE, or pose questions that I, or others, might be able to help answer. If you're familiar with Kedit, THE can mimic it quite well, *and* it uses either ooRexx or Regina as its macro language. I wasn't sure about posting this, but Dan assures me that as long as it's VM related, it's welcome! Les
Re: Anyone use The Hessling Editor (THE), an Xedit/Kedit look-alike, for off-line VM code development or personal use?
The prefix macro issues I hit are purely a problem with the way the THE
code is written. The design is keyed off the newname, not the oldname. I
looked at the code a year or so ago and discovered that it would take
some major work to fix the problem. I am not a strong enough C
programmer to perform such a revision myself.
Tony Thigpen
-Original Message -
From: Les Koehler
Sent: 05/18/2011 06:57 PM
A pc file doesn't have a concept of blank-delimited fn ft fm, so some
adjustment *must* be made. It is my understanding that *nix doesn't make
some information available for a prefix macro, but I don't know the
details.
Les
Tony Thigpen wrote:
The problem is not the order they are processed, but instead is a
problem of how they are stored when using:
'EXTRACT /PENDING OLDNAME' macroname
where macroname is derived from:
parse source os . macroname macroft macrofm name .
parse arg pref func pline op extra '(' options
if os = 'UNIX'
then do
parse arg pref name func pline op extra '(' options
nn = lastpos('/',macroname) + 1
interpret parse var macroname execpath nn macroname '.' .
end
(As a side note, it would have been nice if the 'arg' statement had
matched VM's so I would not have had to play games with it.)
I looked at the code and did not see an easy fix for the problem. The
way the prefix commands are stored is the root problem.
Tony Thigpen
-Original Message -
From: Les Koehler
Sent: 05/18/2011 05:59 AM
The big difference in prefix macro processing is that THE runs them in
the order they were entered, not top to bottom as Xedit does.
I haven't done much with them, but another member of RexxLA has overcome
the difference. I could send you one of his macros to use as a model, if
you'd like.
Les
Tony Thigpen wrote:
Several years ago, I moved all my assembler code for my products from
VM to my Linux desktop. I now use THE, Dignus ASM, and 'make'
processes to compile my products which are linked and tested on z/VSE.
I have converted several of my prefix macros to be dual-mode. The same
source works in both VM and THE. There is one major prefix macro that
will not convert due to the way THE works because the macro has
several prefix's for the same macros and the EXTRACT/PENDING in THE
does not handle that condition correctly.
Tony Thigpen
-Original Message -
From: Les Koehler
Sent: 05/17/2011 11:50 PM
If you use THE for your own stuff, I'd like a direct email if you'd
like
to exchange information.
Anyone using it to offload VM work to the pc, or considering doing
so, I
have a wealth of macros to make it as much like Xedit as I can,
while at
the same time taking advantage of the capabilities of a pc and no 3270
restrictions.
Tell us about your VM work on this thread, why you chose THE, or pose
questions that I, or others, might be able to help answer.
If you're familiar with Kedit, THE can mimic it quite well, *and* it
uses either ooRexx or Regina as its macro language.
I wasn't sure about posting this, but Dan assures me that as long as
it's VM related, it's welcome!
Les
Re: Anyone use The Hessling Editor (THE), an Xedit/Kedit look-alike, for off-line VM code development or personal use?
Also, KEDIT has a built-in subset of Rexx (KEX) as opposed to a real Rexx interpreter. KEDIT no longer has support, although it does have some nifty features like macro libraries. Perhaps not as important with modern hardware as it was back then. For a full ANSI compliant Rexx, Regina is the way to go. Note, however, that VM/Rexx is *not* ANSI compliant! VM/Rexx is a 'mature' product, no longer being developed. Personally, I use ooRexx. That's because it can interact with Microsoft's OLE enabled products, like Excel. With BSF4REXX it can also interact with Open Office. Les Tony Thigpen wrote: I once used KEDIT, but switched to THE many years ago. At the time, KEDIT did not support prefix macros, something I use a lot. Tony Thigpen -Original Message - From: Brian Nielsen Sent: 05/18/2011 01:52 PM I've used KEDIT KEX extensively on the PC for decades because its similarity to XEDIT REXX made working in both environments easier. I have never used THE. I would be interested in your, or anyone else's, views comparing contrasting THE Regina with KEDIT KEX. Are there any benefits/features that could entice me to switching to THE/Regina? Brian Nielsen On Tue, 17 May 2011 23:50:13 -0400, Les Koehlervmr...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: If you use THE for your own stuff, I'd like a direct email if you'd like to exchange information. Anyone using it to offload VM work to the pc, or considering doing so, I have a wealth of macros to make it as much like Xedit as I can, while at the same time taking advantage of the capabilities of a pc and no 3270 restrictions. Tell us about your VM work on this thread, why you chose THE, or pose questions that I, or others, might be able to help answer. If you're familiar with Kedit, THE can mimic it quite well, *and* it uses either ooRexx or Regina as its macro language. I wasn't sure about posting this, but Dan assures me that as long as it's VM related, it's welcome! Les =
Re: Anyone use The Hessling Editor (THE), an Xedit/Kedit look-alike, for off-line VM code development or personal use?
I think you'll find that THE can deal with those 'special' files, letting you use the power of THE *all* the time! Les Tony Thigpen wrote: I always run mine in xedit compatibility mode because I am normally editing mainframe source files. I know there are other capibilities, but I seldom need to edit 'special files' so I just use gedit for those. (I wish they had not dropped kedit with this new version of KDE.) Tony Thigpen -Original Message - From: Les Koehler Sent: 05/18/2011 07:09 PM What do mean by a 'true pc editor'? I'm sure MarkH edits make files all the time! It's probably a question of what constitutes a 'line-end' sequence when writing files. SET EOLOUT can be used to change it. Les Tony Thigpen wrote: http://hessling-editor.sourceforge.net/ I used it for some pc file editing, but some linux files require that I use a 'true' pc style editor. (Like when editing 'make' files.) Tony Thigpen -Original Message - From: Jim Bohnsack Sent: 05/18/2011 10:35 AM Where can THE be gotten? I've heard of it, but have never had it or tried it. Is it usable as a general purpose PC editor or is it really only usable as a PC resident mainframe tool? Jim On 5/17/2011 11:50 PM, Les Koehler wrote: If you use THE for your own stuff, I'd like a direct email if you'd like to exchange information. Anyone using it to offload VM work to the pc, or considering doing so, I have a wealth of macros to make it as much like Xedit as I can, while at the same time taking advantage of the capabilities of a pc and no 3270 restrictions. Tell us about your VM work on this thread, why you chose THE, or pose questions that I, or others, might be able to help answer. If you're familiar with Kedit, THE can mimic it quite well, *and* it uses either ooRexx or Regina as its macro language. I wasn't sure about posting this, but Dan assures me that as long as it's VM related, it's welcome! Les
Re: zvm directions
Wow ... so many possible directions *this* thread could go. For fifty years, the platform now known as z has been all about scalability. For more than forty years, the environment we call z/VM has been all about resource sharing. Multi-system maint is something most people in the industry (whether vendors or customers) don't seem to get. I hold up CMS, with shared 190, 19E, and the rest, as an example of they get it. CMS may be the *only* such example. Of course, it presumes one's definition of multi-system includes the concept of shared disks. But that's kind of the point: No matter how good your install scheme, sharing a pre-installed copy scales better than re-installing over and over. I guess we all want IBM to put development into things which will continue to make the platform viable. So ... what's coming? Dunno. Some of what's already here is ... * SAN (FBA in general) * IPv6 These are both infrastructure things so they're not flashy. Bill paying executives won't be impressed ... until there is a crisis (or unless they get pro-active). But these things are important, so if VM is going to inter-operate, then it must embrace them. CMS components need to be prepared for IPv6. The stack is. The apps are not. I haven't checked VSwitch readiness. (Alan will hopefully chime in.) VM already supports SAN, but ... two huge gaps: performance and instrumentation. (I will defer additional comments. Comparison with ECKD really warrants discussion, but at another time and with mandatory cool heads.) EDEV makes managing SAN on VM a *lot* easier. But it introduces CP overhead. Using DIAG 250 should help. Not clear how much better it is, so maybe there is opportunity for IBM in the CP Nuc for this. And don't get me started about instrumentation. The single reason (some) people use ECKD is because you can measure what it is doing. I wish I knew FCP well enough to say where the numbers are. As it stands, most of the useful info seems to be proprietary. What is the value of a standard (FCP) if the vendors continue to fight over vital info like performance numbers?? The excellent thing about SAN is that it is common to other platforms. Everyone else uses FBA. Whether SAN (which we can do) or IDE or ATA or USB or Firewire or SATA ... storage is all fixed blocks of stuff. -- R; speaking only for myself On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 11:31, PHILIP TULLY tull...@optonline.net wrote: I see that the list traffic is kind of light right now and though I would toss out a topic for all of us to chew on. I am looking for your thoughts on the current direction of zVM in particular where development needs to be focused. I sense that z/VM 6.2 with SSI will ease the burden of medium to large shops in the area of multi-system maintenance, and hopefully will be extended beyond it's current meager 4 system max size, sooner rather than later. Given the difficulty in making any changes to production workloads I don't see SSI with Live Guest Migration (LGM) as a panacea to issue related to load balancing amongst lpars. Without more direct linux interaction I am concerned about the migration of workloads using dedicated fcp with or without NPIV as well as arp issues. The area I would like to see development is the utilization of the hardware some of us are lucky enough to have, the z196. With a machine that can be delivered with 3TB of memory(1.5TB on a z10), having a maximum size z/VM system of 256GB is very limiting. In reviewing presentations on memory limits, I have read comments that the system has been tested to more than 400GB central storage but no indication (statement of direction...rumor) that the current limit will be increased. So I am pushing for increasing the max z/VM LPAR to at least 512MB if not larger. Expansion of the link aggregation implementation allowing for shared OSA cards. In general I am focused on larger vm systems, so that is where I would like to see development. Phil Tully Viewpoints presented here are my own and not my employer's
