Re: Maximum Virtual Storage

2010-10-02 Thread Rob van der Heij
On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 1:11 AM, Gary M. Dennis gary.den...@mantissa.com wrote:

 If the volume limit for a z/VM page volumes is 240+, how does this relate to
 maximum defined virtual storage for all active guests under a z/VM image?

The total amount of virtual storage in the universe is limited by the
amount segment and page tables in PTRM address spaces that we'd need
to span that virtual memory. Some of that is resident, some is paged
out, and some is just not there. The amount resident is limited by
your real memory, paged out is limited by the amount of paging space,
etc. Paging volumes is due cpowned maximum and number of spool packs,
plus size of a device, etc.

The way I remember the presentation is that Bit points at the various
restrictions independent of each other. So you know that once this
restriction is gone, the next barrier in space would be that one. Or
the other way around: don't start bugging us about this limit because
the other one is hitting you first.

We don't want the car manufacturers to list all cars maximum speed at
55 mph because that's the local limit in your area. But looking at the
glossies, it does make sense to realize whether a listed 110 mph does
you any good...

| Rob


Maximum Virtual Storage

2010-10-01 Thread Gary M. Dennis
What is the maximum guest virtual storage supported by z/VM?

--.  .-  .-.  -.--

Gary Dennis
Mantissa Corporation




Re: Maximum Virtual Storage

2010-10-01 Thread O'Brien, Dennis L
Gary,

It depends on your hardware.  From Bill Bitner's z/VM System Limits
SHARE presentation:

 

Virtual machine size:

- Supported/Tested 1 TB (240)

- Hardware limits

* z10 8TB

* z9 1TB

* z990 256GB

* z900 256GB

 

That's for one virtual machine.  There's also a guest real limit of 8 TB
imposed by PTRM space limits.

 

 
Dennis

 

Decision is not a verb.

 

From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Gary M. Dennis
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 12:47
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: [IBMVM] Maximum Virtual Storage

 

What is the maximum guest virtual storage supported by z/VM?

--.  .-  .-.  -.--

Gary Dennis
Mantissa Corporation



Re: Maximum Virtual Storage

2010-10-01 Thread Bill Munson
Memory
? Central storage
? Supported central storage: 256 GB
? Unsupported central storage (maximum LPAR size):
? z9: 512 GB minus your HSA
? z10: 1 TB
? z196: 1TB
? z/VM primitive tests with 1TB
? Expanded storage (architected): 16TB
? z/VM Limit: 128GB supported
? Upto 660GB unsupported (depends on other factors)
? See http://www.vm.ibm.com/perf/tips/storconf.html
? Virtual machine size:
? Supported/Tested 1 TB (240)
? Hardware limits
? z10 8TB
? z9 1TB
? z990 256GB
? z900 256GB 
Memory
? Active, or instantiated, guest real limit imposed by
PTRM space limits (architected): 8 TB
? 16 4-GB PTRM spaces; each PTRM space can map 512 GB of guest real

http://proceedings.share.org/client_files/SHARE_in_Boston_2/Session_7124_handout_372_0.pdf
 






From:   Gary M. Dennis gary.den...@mantissa.com
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Date:   10/01/2010 03:47 PM
Subject:Maximum Virtual Storage
Sent by:The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU



What is the maximum guest virtual storage supported by z/VM?

--.  .-  .-.  -.--

Gary Dennis
Mantissa Corporation



*** IMPORTANT
NOTE*-- The opinions expressed in this
message and/or any attachments are those of the author and not
necessarily those of Brown Brothers Harriman  Co., its
subsidiaries and affiliates (BBH). There is no guarantee that
this message is either private or confidential, and it may have
been altered by unauthorized sources without your or our knowledge.
Nothing in the message is capable or intended to create any legally
binding obligations on either party and it is not intended to
provide legal advice. BBH accepts no responsibility for loss or
damage from its use, including damage from virus.


Re: Maximum Virtual Storage

2010-10-01 Thread Mike Walter
Do you mean REAL virtual storage, to which answers have already been 
supplied?
Or do you mean VIRTUAL virtual storage, as documented as the Maximum 
Input Values for Storage Units in the CP Planning and Administration 
manual?

For z/VM 5.4 and 6.1 the maximum stor size for any virtual machine is 
16E (exabytes).

I'd venture a guess that IBM would be pleased to sell you sufficient real 
storage and DASD to support a few of those VMs, their paging and dump 
space requirements.  :-)

110101001000100110010010110101001110011010011001001110100011110110011001

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




Gary M. Dennis gary.den...@mantissa.com 

Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
10/01/2010 02:47 PM
Please respond to
The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU



To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc

Subject
Maximum Virtual Storage






What is the maximum guest virtual storage supported by z/VM?

--.  .-  .-.  -.--

Gary Dennis
Mantissa Corporation





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: Maximum Virtual Storage

2010-10-01 Thread Ivan Warren

On 10/1/2010 10:07 PM, Mike Walter wrote:


I'd venture a guess that IBM would be pleased to sell you sufficient real
storage and DASD to support a few of those VMs, their paging and dump
space requirements.  :-)

110101001000100110010010110101001110011010011001001110100011110110011001



Ah.. IBM  Storage..

I was a bit appalled by the ad I was (and still am) seeing here locally 
(I don't know if you all get that kind)..


Basically, the poster was saying : Storage requirements double every 18 
hours (!!??)


And since I've been seeing this one for about a couple of years, I 
figured that by now, the 'storage requirement' would have, by far, 
exceed the number of electrons in the whole universe by several orders 
of magnitude.. Of course, I may be a bit conservative by assigning 1 bit 
per electron.


But sure - they'll sell it !

(Hey - it's Friday !)

--Ivan


Re: Maximum Virtual Storage

2010-10-01 Thread Gary M. Dennis
The thread on mixed paging volumes caused me to ask the question. I should
have been more specific.

If the volume limit for a z/VM page volumes is 240+, how does this relate to
maximum defined virtual storage for all active guests under a z/VM image?

For example, in an environment where each guest requires 4BG virtual, how
many such guests could a single z/VM system manage?



On 10/1/10 3:07 PM, Mike Walter mike.wal...@hewitt.com wrote:

 Do you mean REAL virtual storage, to which answers have already been
 supplied?
 Or do you mean VIRTUAL virtual storage, as documented as the Maximum
 Input Values for Storage Units in the CP Planning and Administration
 manual?
 
 For z/VM 5.4 and 6.1 the maximum stor size for any virtual machine is
 16E (exabytes).
 
 I'd venture a guess that IBM would be pleased to sell you sufficient real
 storage and DASD to support a few of those VMs, their paging and dump
 space requirements.  :-)
 
 11010100100010011001001011010100111001101001100100111010001111
 0110011001
 
 Mike Walter
 Hewitt Associates
 The opinions expressed herein are mine alone, not my employer's.
 
 
 
 
 Gary M. Dennis gary.den...@mantissa.com
 
 Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
 10/01/2010 02:47 PM
 Please respond to
 The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
 
 
 
 To
 IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
 cc
 
 Subject
 Maximum Virtual Storage
 
 
 
 
 
 
 What is the maximum guest virtual storage supported by z/VM?
 
 --.  .-  .-.  -.--
 
 Gary Dennis
 Mantissa Corporation
 
 
 
 
 
 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.
 

--.  .-  .-.  -.--

Gary Dennis
Mantissa Corporation
1121 Edenton Street
Birmingham, Alabama 35242-9257

0 ... living between the zeros... 0

p: 205.968-3942
m: 205.218-3937
f: 205.968.3932

gary.den...@mantissa.com
http://www.mantissa.com
http://www.idovos.com


Re: Maximum Virtual Storage

2010-10-01 Thread Scott Rohling
Well - this probably seems circular .. but it depends on the level of
overcommitment of virtual to real you define and on what size your paging
volumes are.   Or maybe I'm misunderstanding (frequently the case)..

Scott Rohling

On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Gary M. Dennis gary.den...@mantissa.comwrote:

 The thread on mixed paging volumes caused me to ask the question. I should
 have been more specific.

 If the volume limit for a z/VM page volumes is 240+, how does this relate
 to
 maximum defined virtual storage for all active guests under a z/VM image?

 For example, in an environment where each guest requires 4BG virtual, how
 many such guests could a single z/VM system manage?



 On 10/1/10 3:07 PM, Mike Walter mike.wal...@hewitt.com wrote:

  Do you mean REAL virtual storage, to which answers have already been
  supplied?
  Or do you mean VIRTUAL virtual storage, as documented as the Maximum
  Input Values for Storage Units in the CP Planning and Administration
  manual?
 
  For z/VM 5.4 and 6.1 the maximum stor size for any virtual machine is
  16E (exabytes).
 
  I'd venture a guess that IBM would be pleased to sell you sufficient real
  storage and DASD to support a few of those VMs, their paging and dump
  space requirements.  :-)
 
 
 11010100100010011001001011010100111001101001100100111010001111
  0110011001
 
  Mike Walter
  Hewitt Associates
  The opinions expressed herein are mine alone, not my employer's.
 
 
 
 
  Gary M. Dennis gary.den...@mantissa.com
 
  Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
  10/01/2010 02:47 PM
  Please respond to
  The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
 
 
 
  To
  IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
  cc
 
  Subject
  Maximum Virtual Storage
 
 
 
 
 
 
  What is the maximum guest virtual storage supported by z/VM?
 
  --.  .-  .-.  -.--
 
  Gary Dennis
  Mantissa Corporation
 
 
 
 
 
  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.
 

 --.  .-  .-.  -.--

 Gary Dennis
 Mantissa Corporation
 1121 Edenton Street
 Birmingham, Alabama 35242-9257

 0 ... living between the zeros... 0

 p: 205.968-3942
 m: 205.218-3937
 f: 205.968.3932

 gary.den...@mantissa.com
 http://www.mantissa.com
 http://www.idovos.com



Re: Maximum Virtual Storage

2010-10-01 Thread Phil Smith
Gary M. Dennis asked:
If the volume limit for a z/VM page volumes is 240+, how does this relate to
maximum defined virtual storage for all active guests under a z/VM image?

Well, in theory, I guess it's 
(real storage)+(page space)-(real system requirements)
but that's cutting it close to the line. So it's more like 
(real storage)*n
where n is the overcommit ratio, as Scott Rohling indicated -- likely no more 
than 3x in production, probably closer to 2x.

If you're thinking Ginormous zEnterprise with 3TB of real and one z/VM 
system, do the math:
240 x 48GB* = 11TB, if I'm doing it right. So you're OK, FSVO OK.

Let us know how that baby runs, eh?

...phsiii

* 48GB = 65530*180*4096


Re: Maximum Virtual Storage

2010-10-01 Thread Scott Rohling
There is also that intangible factor of how each of those 4GB guests make
use of memory..  combine that with use of VDISK for things like Linux
swapping ...  another unpredictable.

That's why 'how many xxGB guests can I run within the maximum architectural
limits' isn't really answerable..  all you can really do is come up with a
worst case value and estimate.

Yet another factor is your willingness to suffer poor performance ..
overcommit to 5x and if response times are acceptable -- than you can have
twice as many guests running than with an overcommit of 2.5x.   (and yes -
you need the paging space available to support those overcommit levels)

Anyway - unless all those 4GB guests are doing exactly the same thing, and
accepting work at exactly the same rate -  the number you can support isn't
really predictable except within some broad ranges.  Cost effective
virtualization sort of depends on the hypothesis that there is usually a
natural disparity of work between guests moment to moment.   Ideally - the
peaks and valleys of activity all average into that 'sweet spot' plateau we
are all searching for.

So - 4 paragraphs to say 'it depends' again.  :-)Friday night and time
for a nightcap and some sleep.. dreaming of dolphins and swimming after
imaginary numbers.

Good discussion, I think --   nite all -

Scott Rohling


On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 7:06 PM, Phil Smith p...@voltage.com wrote:

 Gary M. Dennis asked:
 If the volume limit for a z/VM page volumes is 240+, how does this relate
 to
 maximum defined virtual storage for all active guests under a z/VM image?

 Well, in theory, I guess it's
(real storage)+(page space)-(real system requirements)
 but that's cutting it close to the line. So it's more like
(real storage)*n
 where n is the overcommit ratio, as Scott Rohling indicated -- likely no
 more than 3x in production, probably closer to 2x.

 If you're thinking Ginormous zEnterprise with 3TB of real and one z/VM
 system, do the math:
 240 x 48GB* = 11TB, if I'm doing it right. So you're OK, FSVO OK.

 Let us know how that baby runs, eh?

 ...phsiii

 * 48GB = 65530*180*4096



Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-06 Thread David Boyes
  I was being facetious, of course.  I just needed to pull Sir Rob's
 chain.
  (I feel better now.)  :-)
 I'm sure that little curl on your head is standing upright again now
:-)

WAY more information than we need8-)

-- db


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-06 Thread Schuh, Richard
And I pulled yours. You are right, it does feel better.

Regards, 
Richard Schuh 

-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Alan Altmark
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 10:01 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Maximum virtual storage

On Monday, 02/05/2007 at 10:01 PST, Schuh, Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:
 Since it is a directory defined value and the user cannot change it
and
 the user's ability to update the directory is under control of the
ESM,
 maxstor already is under control of the ESM.

I was being facetious, of course.  I just needed to pull Sir Rob's
chain. 
(I feel better now.)  :-)

Alan Altmark
z/VM Development
IBM Endicott


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-05 Thread Rob van der Heij

On 2/5/07, Alan Altmark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


Now you've gone and done it.  You've discussed ESM and maxstor in the
same note.  Now I want to put maxstor under control of the ESM!
H..  :-)


Sounds great Alan.  The profile should probably hold the maximum size
in binary, so that you can use generic profiles. So a permit to a
generic profile consisting of 39 0's and then a 1like this
01*  would allow any size up to 16M.  And don't let confusing
CP error messages for lack of authorization (like with the VMNODE)
hold you back in this.

Telling Alan something is a dumb idea only encourages him, so I try
like this now... :-)

Rob


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-05 Thread Schuh, Richard
That sounds like a great solution to a problem that doesn't exist!!!
(Those are not exclamation points, they are sarcasm dripping from the
page.) :-)

Regards, 
Richard Schuh 

-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rob van der Heij
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 1:18 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Maximum virtual storage


Next time we may get that also for when you try to link a disk which
the ESM does not allow, just have you link some other disk instead
that you can have... ;-)

Rob


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-05 Thread McKown, John
 -Original Message-
 From: The IBM z/VM Operating System 
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob van der Heij
 Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 3:18 PM
 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
 Subject: Re: Maximum virtual storage

snip

 
 Next time we may get that also for when you try to link a disk which
 the ESM does not allow, just have you link some other disk instead
 that you can have... ;-)
 
 Rob
 

Nah, just create a TDISK of a default size. Also, if you happen to be
running CMS, automagically invoke the CMS format command.

--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
HealthMarkets
Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage
Administrative Services Group
Information Technology

The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged
and/or confidential.  It is for intended addressee(s) only.  If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is
strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal
offense.  If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the
sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing
it. 


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-05 Thread Schuh, Richard
What release are you running? Here is the result on my 5.2 system:

def stor 4g  
HCPDST094E Storage exceeds allowed maximum of 2G

Regards, 
Richard Schuh 


-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rich Smrcina
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 6:19 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Maximum virtual storage

Wow, that is interesting, but this is what I get when I try to define 1G

to MAINT:

def stor 1g
HCPDST025E Storage missing or invalid
Ready(00025); T=0.01/0.03 08:17:25


Ron Schmiedge wrote:
 Odd that the online help on z/VM 4.4.0 would mention them then
 
 On 2/3/07, Rich Smrcina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 G, P and E were added with Version 5.

 Ron Schmiedge wrote:
  You guys must be on the new z/VM. My old unsupported z/VM 4.4 (32
bit)
  simply tells me what the max is when I ask for more than I am
allowed.
  Interestingly, even though the online help for DEFINE STORAGE says
I
  can ask for G or P or E, when I ask for 16E the error message just
  says that is invalid. The message explanation says I can only ask
for
  K or M.
  But if I ask for something like 1024M, it tells me I can''t have
that
  much, here's your max, but storage is not reset
 
  On 2/3/07, Rob van der Heij [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  On 2/3/07, Ray Mansell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
   I just tried this second-level. You did not misread . This looks

 like a
   very good reason to request Q STOR MAX.
 
  Right, someone has been way too helpful in making CP do what is
good
  rather than what you asked for. But let's hope the person who
designed
  that is not looking or they may even change it into always taking
your
  directory maximum when you aim too high.
 
  Next time we may get that also for when you try to link a disk
which
  the ESM does not allow, just have you link some other disk instead
  that you can have... ;-)
 
  Rob
 
 

 -- 
 Rich Smrcina
 VM Assist, Inc.
 Phone: 414-491-6001
 Ans Service:  360-715-2467
 rich.smrcina at vmassist.com

 Catch the WAVV!  http://www.wavv.org
 WAVV 2007 - Green Bay, WI - May 18-22, 2007

 

-- 
Rich Smrcina
VM Assist, Inc.
Phone: 414-491-6001
Ans Service:  360-715-2467
rich.smrcina at vmassist.com

Catch the WAVV!  http://www.wavv.org
WAVV 2007 - Green Bay, WI - May 18-22, 2007


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-05 Thread Schuh, Richard
Since it is a directory defined value and the user cannot change it and
the user's ability to update the directory is under control of the ESM,
maxstor already is under control of the ESM.

Regards, 
Richard Schuh 


-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Alan Altmark
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 7:17 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Maximum virtual storage

On Saturday, 02/03/2007 at 10:17 CET, Rob van der Heij
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:
 Next time we may get that also for when you try to link a disk which
 the ESM does not allow, just have you link some other disk instead
 that you can have... ;-)

Now you've gone and done it.  You've discussed ESM and maxstor in
the 
same note.  Now I want to put maxstor under control of the ESM! 
H..  :-)

Alan Altmark
z/VM Development
IBM Endicott


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-05 Thread Alan Altmark
On Monday, 02/05/2007 at 10:01 PST, Schuh, Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:
 Since it is a directory defined value and the user cannot change it and
 the user's ability to update the directory is under control of the ESM,
 maxstor already is under control of the ESM.

I was being facetious, of course.  I just needed to pull Sir Rob's chain. 
(I feel better now.)  :-)

Alan Altmark
z/VM Development
IBM Endicott


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-05 Thread Rob van der Heij

On 2/6/07, Alan Altmark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


On Monday, 02/05/2007 at 10:01 PST, Schuh, Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
 Since it is a directory defined value and the user cannot change it and
 the user's ability to update the directory is under control of the ESM,
 maxstor already is under control of the ESM.


Right.. like we believe it is sufficient to grant access to a vswitch once...


I was being facetious, of course.  I just needed to pull Sir Rob's chain.
(I feel better now.)  :-)


I'm sure that little curl on your head is standing upright again now :-)

Rob


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-04 Thread Rich Smrcina
Wow, that is interesting, but this is what I get when I try to define 1G 
to MAINT:


def stor 1g
HCPDST025E Storage missing or invalid
Ready(00025); T=0.01/0.03 08:17:25


Ron Schmiedge wrote:

Odd that the online help on z/VM 4.4.0 would mention them then

On 2/3/07, Rich Smrcina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

G, P and E were added with Version 5.

Ron Schmiedge wrote:
 You guys must be on the new z/VM. My old unsupported z/VM 4.4 (32 bit)
 simply tells me what the max is when I ask for more than I am allowed.
 Interestingly, even though the online help for DEFINE STORAGE says I
 can ask for G or P or E, when I ask for 16E the error message just
 says that is invalid. The message explanation says I can only ask for
 K or M.
 But if I ask for something like 1024M, it tells me I can''t have that
 much, here's your max, but storage is not reset

 On 2/3/07, Rob van der Heij [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On 2/3/07, Ray Mansell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  I just tried this second-level. You did not misread . This looks 
like a

  very good reason to request Q STOR MAX.

 Right, someone has been way too helpful in making CP do what is good
 rather than what you asked for. But let's hope the person who designed
 that is not looking or they may even change it into always taking your
 directory maximum when you aim too high.

 Next time we may get that also for when you try to link a disk which
 the ESM does not allow, just have you link some other disk instead
 that you can have... ;-)

 Rob



--
Rich Smrcina
VM Assist, Inc.
Phone: 414-491-6001
Ans Service:  360-715-2467
rich.smrcina at vmassist.com

Catch the WAVV!  http://www.wavv.org
WAVV 2007 - Green Bay, WI - May 18-22, 2007





--
Rich Smrcina
VM Assist, Inc.
Phone: 414-491-6001
Ans Service:  360-715-2467
rich.smrcina at vmassist.com

Catch the WAVV!  http://www.wavv.org
WAVV 2007 - Green Bay, WI - May 18-22, 2007


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-04 Thread Steele, Phil
MY 4.3 VM (64 bit) behaves as reported if  I 'define stor 16E' ( says
your machine does not support that much storage etc etc)
  ... My 4.3 VM (32 bit) does not recognise the E suffix. ( I guess PETA
or EXA  makes no sense in a 32 bit world!) 
I think that's were the difference is, not whethere it is VM 4.4 or 5.x 

There!...  I don't feel so back level after all !  
Phil Steele 

-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ron Schmiedge
Sent: Monday, 5 February 2007 2:23 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Maximum virtual storage

Yep, me too. The online message explanation for HCP025E says I can only
specify K or M, but the online HELP CP DEFINE lists them all.
Guess IBM pre-announced the feature!

def stor 1g
HCPDST025E Storage missing or invalid
Ready(00025); T=0.01/0.01 09:22:58
def stor 1024m
HCPDST094E Storage exceeds allowed maximum of 128M Ready(00094);
T=0.01/0.01 09:23:05 q cplevel z/VM Version 4 Release 4.0, service level
0403 (32-bit)

On 2/4/07, Rich Smrcina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Wow, that is interesting, but this is what I get when I try to define 
 1G to MAINT:

 def stor 1g
 HCPDST025E Storage missing or invalid
 Ready(00025); T=0.01/0.03 08:17:25


 Ron Schmiedge wrote:
  Odd that the online help on z/VM 4.4.0 would mention them then
 
  On 2/3/07, Rich Smrcina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  G, P and E were added with Version 5.
 
  Ron Schmiedge wrote:
   You guys must be on the new z/VM. My old unsupported z/VM 4.4 (32

   bit) simply tells me what the max is when I ask for more than I
am allowed.
   Interestingly, even though the online help for DEFINE STORAGE 
   says I can ask for G or P or E, when I ask for 16E the error 
   message just says that is invalid. The message explanation says I

   can only ask for K or M.
   But if I ask for something like 1024M, it tells me I can''t have 
   that much, here's your max, but storage is not reset
  
   On 2/3/07, Rob van der Heij [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   On 2/3/07, Ray Mansell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  
I just tried this second-level. You did not misread . This 
looks
  like a
very good reason to request Q STOR MAX.
  
   Right, someone has been way too helpful in making CP do what is 
   good rather than what you asked for. But let's hope the person 
   who designed that is not looking or they may even change it into

   always taking your directory maximum when you aim too high.
  
   Next time we may get that also for when you try to link a disk 
   which the ESM does not allow, just have you link some other disk

   instead that you can have... ;-)
  
   Rob
  
  
 
  --
  Rich Smrcina
  VM Assist, Inc.
  Phone: 414-491-6001
  Ans Service:  360-715-2467
  rich.smrcina at vmassist.com
 
  Catch the WAVV!  http://www.wavv.org WAVV 2007 - Green Bay, WI - 
  May 18-22, 2007
 
 

 --
 Rich Smrcina
 VM Assist, Inc.
 Phone: 414-491-6001
 Ans Service:  360-715-2467
 rich.smrcina at vmassist.com

 Catch the WAVV!  http://www.wavv.org
 WAVV 2007 - Green Bay, WI - May 18-22, 2007


***
PLEASE NOTE: This internet email message has been checked for viruses
and appropriate content to ensure it complies with TABCORP's electronic
communication policy.
***

***
The information in this e-mail message and any files transmitted with it 
are intended to be confidential and for the use of only the individual or 
entity to whom they are addressed. The message and files may be
protected by legal professional privilege, or other legal rules. The 
confidentiality of and privilege applying to this message and 
files is not waived if this message or files has been sent to you by mistake. 
If the reader of this message or files is not the intended recipient, you are 
notified that retention, distribution or copying of this message and files are 
strictly prohibited.  If you receive this message or files in error, please 
notify us immediately by telephone or return e-mail and delete all copies 
from your computer system. It is the recipient's responsibility to check this 
message and files for viruses.

Thank you.
***


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-03 Thread Phil Smith III
Alan Altmark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 HCPDST093E Storage size requested (16E) exceeds maximum allowed on this 
 processor (256G). Size set to maximum allowed.

I suppose that should be an I or W, not an E.  The request continues 
as though you had issued DEFINE STORAGE 256G.  If your directory maximum 
was 256G, your DEFINE STORAGE 16E would have worked.

So if I had 1G before, I get to reIPL?  That's a change in behavior, and makes 
the issue a ridiculous size to see what my max is unworkable!  Or am I 
misreading what you wrote?

...phsiii


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-03 Thread Ray Mansell
I just tried this second-level. You did not misread . This looks like a 
very good reason to request Q STOR MAX.


q v stor 
STORAGE = 64M
def stor 16e  
HCPDST093E Storage size requested (16E) exceeds maximum allowed on this 
processor (256G). Size set to maximum allowed.
STORAGE = 256G 
Storage cleared - system reset.


Ray Mansell

Phil Smith III wrote:

So if I had 1G before, I get to reIPL?  That's a change in behavior, and makes the 
issue a ridiculous size to see what my max is unworkable!  Or am I misreading 
what you wrote?

...phsiii

  


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-03 Thread Rob van der Heij

On 2/3/07, Ray Mansell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


I just tried this second-level. You did not misread . This looks like a
very good reason to request Q STOR MAX.


Right, someone has been way too helpful in making CP do what is good
rather than what you asked for. But let's hope the person who designed
that is not looking or they may even change it into always taking your
directory maximum when you aim too high.

Next time we may get that also for when you try to link a disk which
the ESM does not allow, just have you link some other disk instead
that you can have... ;-)

Rob


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-03 Thread Ron Schmiedge

You guys must be on the new z/VM. My old unsupported z/VM 4.4 (32 bit)
simply tells me what the max is when I ask for more than I am allowed.
Interestingly, even though the online help for DEFINE STORAGE says I
can ask for G or P or E, when I ask for 16E the error message just
says that is invalid. The message explanation says I can only ask for
K or M.
But if I ask for something like 1024M, it tells me I can''t have that
much, here's your max, but storage is not reset

On 2/3/07, Rob van der Heij [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

On 2/3/07, Ray Mansell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I just tried this second-level. You did not misread . This looks like a
 very good reason to request Q STOR MAX.

Right, someone has been way too helpful in making CP do what is good
rather than what you asked for. But let's hope the person who designed
that is not looking or they may even change it into always taking your
directory maximum when you aim too high.

Next time we may get that also for when you try to link a disk which
the ESM does not allow, just have you link some other disk instead
that you can have... ;-)

Rob



Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-03 Thread Rich Smrcina

G, P and E were added with Version 5.

Ron Schmiedge wrote:

You guys must be on the new z/VM. My old unsupported z/VM 4.4 (32 bit)
simply tells me what the max is when I ask for more than I am allowed.
Interestingly, even though the online help for DEFINE STORAGE says I
can ask for G or P or E, when I ask for 16E the error message just
says that is invalid. The message explanation says I can only ask for
K or M.
But if I ask for something like 1024M, it tells me I can''t have that
much, here's your max, but storage is not reset

On 2/3/07, Rob van der Heij [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

On 2/3/07, Ray Mansell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I just tried this second-level. You did not misread . This looks like a
 very good reason to request Q STOR MAX.

Right, someone has been way too helpful in making CP do what is good
rather than what you asked for. But let's hope the person who designed
that is not looking or they may even change it into always taking your
directory maximum when you aim too high.

Next time we may get that also for when you try to link a disk which
the ESM does not allow, just have you link some other disk instead
that you can have... ;-)

Rob





--
Rich Smrcina
VM Assist, Inc.
Phone: 414-491-6001
Ans Service:  360-715-2467
rich.smrcina at vmassist.com

Catch the WAVV!  http://www.wavv.org
WAVV 2007 - Green Bay, WI - May 18-22, 2007


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-03 Thread Ron Schmiedge

Odd that the online help on z/VM 4.4.0 would mention them then

On 2/3/07, Rich Smrcina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

G, P and E were added with Version 5.

Ron Schmiedge wrote:
 You guys must be on the new z/VM. My old unsupported z/VM 4.4 (32 bit)
 simply tells me what the max is when I ask for more than I am allowed.
 Interestingly, even though the online help for DEFINE STORAGE says I
 can ask for G or P or E, when I ask for 16E the error message just
 says that is invalid. The message explanation says I can only ask for
 K or M.
 But if I ask for something like 1024M, it tells me I can''t have that
 much, here's your max, but storage is not reset

 On 2/3/07, Rob van der Heij [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On 2/3/07, Ray Mansell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  I just tried this second-level. You did not misread . This looks like a
  very good reason to request Q STOR MAX.

 Right, someone has been way too helpful in making CP do what is good
 rather than what you asked for. But let's hope the person who designed
 that is not looking or they may even change it into always taking your
 directory maximum when you aim too high.

 Next time we may get that also for when you try to link a disk which
 the ESM does not allow, just have you link some other disk instead
 that you can have... ;-)

 Rob



--
Rich Smrcina
VM Assist, Inc.
Phone: 414-491-6001
Ans Service:  360-715-2467
rich.smrcina at vmassist.com

Catch the WAVV!  http://www.wavv.org
WAVV 2007 - Green Bay, WI - May 18-22, 2007



Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-02 Thread Colin Allinson
Alan Altmark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote :
 Could you change to use:
 XAUTOLOG user STORAGE requested amount
 ?

 If it exceeds the maximum, the command will fail and the user doesn't 
 start. 

Sorry, I wasn't very clear. In our case this wouldn't work.

What we are actually doing is setting up a test TPF system (guest OS) to 
work. 
All the userids have a relatively small default but large maximum storage.

The guy or gal setting up the TPF system logs on (into CMS) and runs an 
EXEC 
that allows them to specify the resources (including memory) that they 
require
to run this specific instance of TPF. 

Once everything is validated the EXEC then defines the resources and 
RE-IPL's
into TPF.

If an invalid storage was specified at the wrong time then the user could 
just
IPL CMS and start over - but they would have to fill in the panel again, 
and 
it is not very user friendly.

I guess our case maybe a bit specific but it is an example of where a 
QUERY VIRTUAL STORAGE MAXIMUM might be of help.

Colin Allinson
Amadeus Data Processing

Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-02 Thread Rob van der Heij

On 2/2/07, Colin Allinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


I guess our case maybe a bit specific but it is an example of where a
QUERY VIRTUAL STORAGE MAXIMUM might be of help.


Colin,
I think you missed the point that was made. If you issue the DEFINE
STORAGE with a outrageous silly large number that will never work, the
error message tells what the maximum in the directory is. I think it's
cheating and if it were me that message should not show it, but you
can take advantage of it.

Rob
--
Rob van der Heij
Velocity Software, Inc
http://velocitysoftware.com/


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-02 Thread Mike Walter
To Rob's point, here's a console cut/paste...
---snip---
cp q v stor 
STORAGE = 999M  
M2WALTER HALINVA1; T=0.01/0.01 08:37:07  
cp def stor 16e   
HCPDST093E Storage size requested (16E) exceeds maximum allowed on this 
processo
r (256G). Size set to maximum allowed.   --- Not sure why is 
says Size set to maximum allowed; nothing changed!   HCPDST094E Storage 
exceeds allowed maximum of 16G--- this is the CP msg from which you 
could get the maxM2WALTER HALINVA1(00094); 
T=0.01/0.01 08:37:15 
*
vmsecure inquire storage --- this is the 
Hewitt-developed VM:Secure INQUIRE command
STORAGE:  Default= 999M   Maximum= 16G   --- info directly 
from the source directory entry.M2WALTER 
HALINVA1; T=0.01/0.01 08:37:23   
---snip---

Mike Walter 
Hewitt Associates 
Any opinions expressed herein are mine alone and do not necessarily 
represent the opinions or policies of Hewitt Associates.




Rob van der Heij [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
02/02/2007 02:48 AM
Please respond to
The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU



To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: Maximum virtual storage






On 2/2/07, Colin Allinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I guess our case maybe a bit specific but it is an example of where a
 QUERY VIRTUAL STORAGE MAXIMUM might be of help.

Colin,
I think you missed the point that was made. If you issue the DEFINE
STORAGE with a outrageous silly large number that will never work, the
error message tells what the maximum in the directory is. I think it's
cheating and if it were me that message should not show it, but you
can take advantage of it.

Rob
-- 
Rob van der Heij
Velocity Software, Inc
http://velocitysoftware.com/



 
The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents may 
contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from 
disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this 
message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender 
by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any attachments. Any 
dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by 
anyone other than the intended recipient 
is strictly prohibited.




Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-02 Thread Alan Altmark
On Friday, 02/02/2007 at 08:45 CST, Mike Walter [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:
 cp def stor 16e 


 HCPDST093E Storage size requested (16E) exceeds maximum allowed on this 
 processo 
 r (256G). Size set to maximum allowed.   --- Not sure why 
is says 
 Size set to maximum allowed; nothing changed!

I suppose that should be an I or W, not an E.  The request continues 
as though you had issued DEFINE STORAGE 256G.  If your directory maximum 
was 256G, your DEFINE STORAGE 16E would have worked.

Alan Altmark
z/VM Development
IBM Endicott


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-02 Thread Mike Walter
I did try setting my max to 256G, and as you advised it did work.

But it seems as if there should be two separate messages (or text 
variations)...

If it does nothing, as it did in the case when I asked for more storage 
than permitted, it should say something like (with red below showing the 
changes):
HCPDST093E Storage size requested (16E) exceeds maximum allowed on this 
processor (256G).  Size remains unchanged. 

If it actually made a change (although different from the requested size:
HCPDST093W Storage size requested (16E) exceeds maximum allowed on this 
processor (256G). Size set to maximum allowed.

Is that worth my opening a PMR?  I would not ask for the red coloring in 
the messages.  (Gee, that makes me think of the old command CMS command 
SET REDTYPE ON!)  ;-)

Mike Walter 
Hewitt Associates 
Any opinions expressed herein are mine alone and do not necessarily 
represent the opinions or policies of Hewitt Associates.



Alan Altmark [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
02/02/2007 08:55 AM
Please respond to
The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU



To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: Maximum virtual storage






On Friday, 02/02/2007 at 08:45 CST, Mike Walter [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:
 cp def stor 16e 
 
 
 HCPDST093E Storage size requested (16E) exceeds maximum allowed on this 
 processo 
 r (256G). Size set to maximum allowed.   --- Not sure why 
is says 
 Size set to maximum allowed; nothing changed! 

I suppose that should be an I or W, not an E.  The request continues 

as though you had issued DEFINE STORAGE 256G.  If your directory maximum 
was 256G, your DEFINE STORAGE 16E would have worked.

Alan Altmark
z/VM Development
IBM Endicott



 
The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents may 
contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from 
disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this 
message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender 
by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any attachments. Any 
dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by 
anyone other than the intended recipient 
is strictly prohibited.




Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-02 Thread Alan Altmark
On Friday, 02/02/2007 at 09:13 CST, Mike Walter [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:
 Is that worth my opening a PMR?  I would not ask for the red coloring in 
the 
 messages.  (Gee, that makes me think of the old command CMS command SET 

 REDTYPE ON!)  ;-) 

:-)  The help for HCP093E is also a bit misleading in this cont

(Pardon me.  No.)
(Move over.  No.)
(MOVE YOUR BLINKIN' ARSE!  Fine!)
(Thank you.)

How does one measure the worth of a PMR?  Good question.  Have you ever 
noticed that there's never a good philosopher around when you need one? 
Opinionated IT professionals (yes, that includes sysprogs, too!) are a 
dime a dozen, but a good philosopher is as rare as hen's teeth.  I imagine 
The Bard would have something to say about PMRs.  As would Scott Adams. 
Ah, but would they say the same thing?  I think not (poof!)

-- C


Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-01 Thread Phil Smith III
A customer asked me today how she could find out what the maximum allowable
virtual storage size was for a given guest (without looking at the CP
directory entry).  The only thing I could think of was 
 CP DEFINE STORAGE reallybignumber
and seeing if it fails.  Of course, that carries a risk: if you happen to
hit a value that *is* allowed, you get to reIPL.

Is there another way?  QUERY VIRTUAL STORAGE MAX or something would seem
like a reasonable extension...

...phsiii


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-01 Thread Ed Zell
 Is there another way?  QUERY VIRTUAL STORAGE MAX or something
 would seem like a reasonable extension...

Phil,

  Could you do a DEF STOR 1024M or some other really large value
  and check the value specified in the CP response saying you
  asked for too much?

def stor 1024m   
HCPDST094E Storage exceeds allowed maximum of 64M


Ed Zell
(309) 674-8255 x-107
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
.


CONFIDENTIAL NOTICE:  This communication, including any attachments, is 
intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed 
and contains information which may be confidential.  If you are not the 
intended recipient, any distribution or copying of this communication is 
strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, notify 
the sender immediately, delete the communication and destroy all copies. Thank 
you for your compliance.


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-01 Thread David Kreuter
yes but if it works you're toast! Reipl time
David

-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Ed Zell
Sent: Thu 2/1/2007 9:28 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: [IBMVM] Maximum virtual storage
 
 Is there another way?  QUERY VIRTUAL STORAGE MAX or something
 would seem like a reasonable extension...

Phil,

  Could you do a DEF STOR 1024M or some other really large value
  and check the value specified in the CP response saying you
  asked for too much?

def stor 1024m   
HCPDST094E Storage exceeds allowed maximum of 64M


Ed Zell
(309) 674-8255 x-107
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
.


CONFIDENTIAL NOTICE:  This communication, including any attachments, is 
intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed 
and contains information which may be confidential.  If you are not the 
intended recipient, any distribution or copying of this communication is 
strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, notify 
the sender immediately, delete the communication and destroy all copies. Thank 
you for your compliance.


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-01 Thread Gregg Reed
I don't (famous last words...) to see  CP DEF STOR 16E
*real soon now*
HCPDST093E Storage size requested (16E) exceeds maximum allowed on this
processor (1T). Size set to maximum allowed.
HCPDST094E Storage exceeds allowed maximum of 512M
Gregg
office:404-322-2316 mobile:404455-1291 text page:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
No plan survives execution revised: 01Jun06
file:\\Usfs01\Common\CPPS\VM\VMCapPlan.htm


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-01 Thread Colin Allinson
 Rob van der Heij [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote (in part): 
 
 But I am tempted to reply that I need to see the first case where 
 there is a valid reason to know what the maximum value is if you're 
 not going to use it... 
 
In our case we have an EXEC that set up a GUEST region (OS) with a 
requested store. If we just believe the requestor, and the amount they 
request is too large, we loose control. So, we try to validate the request 
before we action it.

On 32bit VM we used to define 2047M (more than that gave a different 
message) but now, on 64 bit Z/VM,  we define M as we are unlikely to 
have a user larger than that. However, I do agree with Greg that 16E is 
probably the best option. 
 
Colin Allinson 
Amadeus Data Processing 

Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-01 Thread Mike Walter
Do you use VM:Secure on those systems?
If so, I've previously posted a home-grown VM:Secure macro (thus, user 
command) INQUIRE, which will return most directory information 
(obviously, not passwords or other security-related info) from the source 
directory entry.  I can post it again if anyone wants.

Mike Walter 
Hewitt Associates 
Any opinions expressed herein are mine alone and do not necessarily 
represent the opinions or policies of Hewitt Associates.

The syntax for INQUIRE is:

Function:
Provides users with information about their or other's directory
entry without the need to enter VMSECURE menus.
Syntax:
--VMSECURE-INQUIRE--+-+--+--+---
  +-Account-+  +-ACIgroup-+
 --+--+--+-+-
+-APPCpass-+  +-AUTOlog-+
 --+---+--+-+--++
+-CLass-+  +-Console-+  +-CRYPto-+
 --++--+--+--+--+
+-DATEFformat+  +-DISTcode-+  +-D8ONECMD-+
 --+-+--+--+--+-+--+-+---
+-Ipl-+  +-IUCV-+  +-LOGONBY-+  +-MACHine-+
 --+--+--+-+--++-
+-NAMEsave-+  +-NOPDATA-+  +-Option-+
 --+--+--+--+--++
+-PRIOrity-+  +-PRIVclas-+  +-SCReen-+
 --+---+--+---+--+---+---
+-SHARE-+  +-Spool-+  +-SPOOLFile-+
 --+--+--+-+--+--+---
+-STDEvopt-+  +-STORage-+  +-User-+
 --+--+--+-+--++-
+-XAUTOlog-+  +-XCONFig-+  +-XSTORE-+
 --+--+--+-+--++-
+-*LL=-+  +-*LA=+  +-*UI=---+
 --+--+--
+-LOGON+
 ---+-+-
 +-(-| Options |-+---+-+
+-)-+
 Options:
 |--+-+-+--+-+--+|
+-USER userid-+ +-COMPRESS-+ +-LIFO-+
 +-FIFO-+
Where:
userid
  Is another userid other than your own.

*LL=   returns the *LL= (Last Logon) record
*LA=   returns the *LA= (Last Autolog) record

Plus the following Hewitt Associates-only
 operands, although *UI= could be useful anywhere

*UI=   returns the *UI= (User Info) record
COMPRESS
  requests that the Account code be returned in
  compressed 8-byte format.




Colin Allinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
02/01/2007 09:19 AM
Please respond to
The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU



To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: Maximum virtual storage







  
Rob van der Heij [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote (in part):   

 But I am tempted to reply that I need to see the first case where 
 there is a valid reason to know what the maximum value is if you're   
 not going to use it... 

In our case we have an EXEC that set up a GUEST region (OS) with a 
requested store. If we just believe the requestor, and the amount they 
request is too large, we loose control. So, we try to validate the request 
before we action it. 

On 32bit VM we used to define 2047M (more than that gave a different 
message) but now, on 64 bit Z/VM,  we define M as we are unlikely to 
have a user larger than that. However, I do agree with Greg that 16E is 
probably the best option. 

Colin Allinson 
Amadeus Data Processing 

 
The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents may 
contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from 
disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this 
message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender 
by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any attachments. Any 
dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by 
anyone other than the intended recipient 
is strictly prohibited.




Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-01 Thread Schuh, Richard
So make it really, really big - E, for example. :-)

Or you could use TRACK or DISPLAY HOST to look at the VMDBK.

Regards, 
Richard Schuh 

-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Phil Smith III
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 5:45 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Maximum virtual storage

A customer asked me today how she could find out what the maximum
allowable
virtual storage size was for a given guest (without looking at the CP
directory entry).  The only thing I could think of was 
 CP DEFINE STORAGE reallybignumber
and seeing if it fails.  Of course, that carries a risk: if you happen
to
hit a value that *is* allowed, you get to reIPL.

Is there another way?  QUERY VIRTUAL STORAGE MAX or something would seem
like a reasonable extension...

...phsiii


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-01 Thread Alan Altmark
On Thursday, 02/01/2007 at 08:20 PST, Schuh, Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:
 Or you could use TRACK or DISPLAY HOST to look at the VMDBK.

CP doesn't keep the maximum size in the VMDBK.  Have you ever noticed that 
you don't have to logoff/logon after you raise the maximum in the 
directory?

You actually have to read the directory.

Alan Altmark
z/VM Development
IBM Endicott


Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-01 Thread pfa
It really wouldn't be too hard to have something like

   QUERY VIRTUAL STORAGE DEFAULT : MAXIMUM

and get the default or maximum storage from the directory definitions.





Phil Smith III [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
02/01/2007 08:45 AM
Please respond to
The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU


To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc

Subject
Maximum virtual storage







A customer asked me today how she could find out what the maximum 
allowable
virtual storage size was for a given guest (without looking at the CP
directory entry).  The only thing I could think of was 
 CP DEFINE STORAGE reallybignumber
and seeing if it fails.  Of course, that carries a risk: if you happen to
hit a value that *is* allowed, you get to reIPL.

Is there another way?  QUERY VIRTUAL STORAGE MAX or something would seem
like a reasonable extension...

...phsiii



Re: Maximum virtual storage

2007-02-01 Thread Alan Altmark
On Thursday, 02/01/2007 at 04:19 CET, Colin Allinson 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   
 In our case we have an EXEC that set up a GUEST region (OS) with a 
requested 
 store. If we just believe the requestor, and the amount they request is 
too 
 large, we loose control. So, we try to validate the request before we 
action 
 it. 
 
 On 32bit VM we used to define 2047M (more than that gave a different 
message) 
 but now, on 64 bit Z/VM,  we define M as we are unlikely to have a 
user 
 larger than that. However, I do agree with Greg that 16E is probably the 
best 
 option. 

Could you change to use:
 XAUTOLOG user STORAGE requested amount
?

If it exceeds the maximum, the command will fail and the user doesn't 
start.   

Alan Altmark
z/VM Development
IBM Endicott