Re: Sevice level
We don't want it part of SES, at least not the SES that exists today. We may be faced with a requirement that "other group" installs our changes or at least signs off on them. Joe Operator needs to be able to confirm that PTF UMx is installed. I don't want him on MAINT. I want him to issue that equiv to "rpm -q" or "uname" command that any general user on Linux can execute. Alan, just give us stuff that makes SOX and PCI and all that other stuff be happy :) For some odd reason, separation of duties is a big deal right now. Marcy -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU] On Behalf Of Dave Jones Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 6:17 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: [IBMVM] Sevice level My opinion of this is: 1) it should support all of the components of z/VM and not just CP. 2) it should be part of the SERVICE command, or at least part of VM/SES. I do like the approach LE takes, being able to see what service is for any given module. DJ On 4/11/2011 10:54 AM, Schuh, Richard wrote: > That would be nice. It ought to also have a way to answer Marcy's question, > "Has PTF xxx been applied to the system (or, perhaps, to a specified > module)?" without having to wade through a list of the universe of PTFs. As > long as we are dreaming, it would be nice to have a defined interface so that > we could interrogate cooperative ISV modifications to CP (VSSI, CA, et. al.) > via the same command. > > Regards, > Richard Schuh > > > >> -Original Message- >> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System >> [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU] On Behalf Of David Boyes >> Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2011 3:28 PM >> To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU >> Subject: Re: Sevice level >> >> What I would like: >> >> 1) a flag for the output of Q CPLEVEL that indicates that >> additional service beyond the displayed level has been >> applied. Something like 8801++. >> >> Applying the next RSU would reset the flag until the next PTF >> outside the RSU is applied. >> >> 2) a new option to SERVICE that does the VMFSIM magic to list >> all PTFS applied to a component. Example: >> >> SERVICE LIST CP >> >> Resulting in something like: >> >> RSU 8801 >> PTF c >> PTF yyygyygyy >> Etc >> >> I think that would help non-SES wizards to understand without >> breaking the older method. >> >> >> >> >> On Apr 9, 2011, at 20:06, "Alan Altmark" >> wrote: >> >>> Following up on Nick Harris' expectation to see a change to QUERY >>> CPLEVEL after applying COR service to CP, I'd like to open a >>> discussion on how folks perceive service levels. That is, is there >>> some way that you feel IBM should express the concept of >> 'service level'? >>> >>> For the sake of discussion, let us assert that: >>> - We are talking about the running entity, not the copy of >> the entity >>> on the build disk. >>> - Unless there are specific pre-reqs or co-reqs, PTFs can >> be applied >>> in any order or combination. >>> - Each component (CP, CMS, DIRMAINT, RACF, SES, etc.) has its own >>> service stream >>> >>> Regards, >>> Alan >>> >>> z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant >>> IBM System Lab Services and Training >>> ibm.com/systems/services/labservices >>> office: 607.429.3323 >>> alan_altm...@us.ibm.com >>
Re: Sevice level
My opinion of this is: 1) it should support all of the components of z/VM and not just CP. 2) it should be part of the SERVICE command, or at least part of VM/SES. I do like the approach LE takes, being able to see what service is for any given module. DJ On 4/11/2011 10:54 AM, Schuh, Richard wrote: That would be nice. It ought to also have a way to answer Marcy's question, "Has PTF xxx been applied to the system (or, perhaps, to a specified module)?" without having to wade through a list of the universe of PTFs. As long as we are dreaming, it would be nice to have a defined interface so that we could interrogate cooperative ISV modifications to CP (VSSI, CA, et. al.) via the same command. Regards, Richard Schuh -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU] On Behalf Of David Boyes Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2011 3:28 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Sevice level What I would like: 1) a flag for the output of Q CPLEVEL that indicates that additional service beyond the displayed level has been applied. Something like 8801++. Applying the next RSU would reset the flag until the next PTF outside the RSU is applied. 2) a new option to SERVICE that does the VMFSIM magic to list all PTFS applied to a component. Example: SERVICE LIST CP Resulting in something like: RSU 8801 PTF c PTF yyygyygyy Etc I think that would help non-SES wizards to understand without breaking the older method. On Apr 9, 2011, at 20:06, "Alan Altmark" wrote: Following up on Nick Harris' expectation to see a change to QUERY CPLEVEL after applying COR service to CP, I'd like to open a discussion on how folks perceive service levels. That is, is there some way that you feel IBM should express the concept of 'service level'? For the sake of discussion, let us assert that: - We are talking about the running entity, not the copy of the entity on the build disk. - Unless there are specific pre-reqs or co-reqs, PTFs can be applied in any order or combination. - Each component (CP, CMS, DIRMAINT, RACF, SES, etc.) has its own service stream Regards, Alan z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com
Re: Sevice level
On 4/11/11 11:54 AM, "Schuh, Richard" wrote: >That would be nice. It ought to also have a way to answer Marcy's >question, "Has PTF xxx been applied to the system (or, perhaps, to a >specified module)?" without having to wade through a list of the universe >of PTFs. PIPE COMMAND SERVICE LIST CP | LOCATE 'xx' | CONSOLE Maybe have a optional module argument to SERVICE LIST, eg SERVICE LIST CP HCPRIO Adding a option of ONLINE vs ONDISK to SERVICE LIST might serve the "is it in the running code" question. You'd have to modify the code to maintain a service ID table somewhere in storage, though to efficiently process a ONLINE option. Probably not a bad idea, but would take up some space. >As long as we are dreaming, it would be nice to have a defined interface >so that we could interrogate cooperative ISV modifications to CP (VSSI, >CA, et. al.) via the same command. Amen to that -- libvmses or a CSL routine, here we come! But shouldn't those show up in normal SES, ie as local mods? -- db >>
Re: Sevice level
That would be nice. It ought to also have a way to answer Marcy's question, "Has PTF xxx been applied to the system (or, perhaps, to a specified module)?" without having to wade through a list of the universe of PTFs. As long as we are dreaming, it would be nice to have a defined interface so that we could interrogate cooperative ISV modifications to CP (VSSI, CA, et. al.) via the same command. Regards, Richard Schuh > -Original Message- > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU] On Behalf Of David Boyes > Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2011 3:28 PM > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > Subject: Re: Sevice level > > What I would like: > > 1) a flag for the output of Q CPLEVEL that indicates that > additional service beyond the displayed level has been > applied. Something like 8801++. > > Applying the next RSU would reset the flag until the next PTF > outside the RSU is applied. > > 2) a new option to SERVICE that does the VMFSIM magic to list > all PTFS applied to a component. Example: > > SERVICE LIST CP > > Resulting in something like: > > RSU 8801 > PTF c > PTF yyygyygyy > Etc > > I think that would help non-SES wizards to understand without > breaking the older method. > > > > > On Apr 9, 2011, at 20:06, "Alan Altmark" > wrote: > > > Following up on Nick Harris' expectation to see a change to QUERY > > CPLEVEL after applying COR service to CP, I'd like to open a > > discussion on how folks perceive service levels. That is, is there > > some way that you feel IBM should express the concept of > 'service level'? > > > > For the sake of discussion, let us assert that: > > - We are talking about the running entity, not the copy of > the entity > > on the build disk. > > - Unless there are specific pre-reqs or co-reqs, PTFs can > be applied > > in any order or combination. > > - Each component (CP, CMS, DIRMAINT, RACF, SES, etc.) has its own > > service stream > > > > Regards, > > Alan > > > > z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant > > IBM System Lab Services and Training > > ibm.com/systems/services/labservices > > office: 607.429.3323 > > alan_altm...@us.ibm.com >
Re: Sevice level
Language Environment (LE) has its LEMODLVL routine which displays the APARs applied to each part used to build an input MODULE name, e.g. LEMODLVL CEEPLPKA will display a list of all the parts used to build CEEPLPKA MODULE and the latest APAR applied to each part.Specifying the SEGMENT option on the command will display the same information about the copy of the MODULE in the SCEE or SCEEX DCSS. Using the two commands together will help you determine if the DCSS are at the same levels on the MODULEs on disk. Performance Toolkit has its FC FCXLEVEL which displays a message with the release level of the product and displays a list of parts and their latest APAR levels. Mike Donovan From: Mark Wheeler To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Date: 04/11/2011 09:32 AM Subject:Re: Sevice level Sent by:The IBM z/VM Operating System TCPSLVL let's you see service level of TCPIP components on a module-by-module basis. Mark Wheeler UnitedHealth Group > Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 20:31:37 -0500 > From: marcy.d.cor...@wellsfargo.com > Subject: Re: Sevice level > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > > > TCPIP would be nice too, but not as important as CP. > > > > Marcy
Re: Sevice level
TCPSLVL let's you see service level of TCPIP components on a module-by-module basis. Mark Wheeler UnitedHealth Group > Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 20:31:37 -0500 > From: marcy.d.cor...@wellsfargo.com > Subject: Re: Sevice level > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > > > TCPIP would be nice too, but not as important as CP. > > > > Marcy
Re: Sevice level
What I would like: 1) a flag for the output of Q CPLEVEL that indicates that additional service beyond the displayed level has been applied. Something like 8801++. Applying the next RSU would reset the flag until the next PTF outside the RSU is applied. 2) a new option to SERVICE that does the VMFSIM magic to list all PTFS applied to a component. Example: SERVICE LIST CP Resulting in something like: RSU 8801 PTF c PTF yyygyygyy Etc I think that would help non-SES wizards to understand without breaking the older method. On Apr 9, 2011, at 20:06, "Alan Altmark" wrote: > Following up on Nick Harris' expectation to see a change to QUERY CPLEVEL > after applying COR service to CP, I'd like to open a discussion on how > folks perceive service levels. That is, is there some way that you feel > IBM should express the concept of 'service level'? > > For the sake of discussion, let us assert that: > - We are talking about the running entity, not the copy of the entity on > the build disk. > - Unless there are specific pre-reqs or co-reqs, PTFs can be applied in > any order or combination. > - Each component (CP, CMS, DIRMAINT, RACF, SES, etc.) has its own service > stream > > Regards, > Alan > > z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant > IBM System Lab Services and Training > ibm.com/systems/services/labservices > office: 607.429.3323 > alan_altm...@us.ibm.com
Re: Sevice level
I don't see how any sort of meaningful number could be assigned to an
entity to reflect COR service. Everyone will have their own. An RSU
OTOH, "floats everybody's boat" to the same level, at least for a
while. About the only thing you (IBM) could do is to add a flag that
some service had been applied beyond the RSU ("service level 801+" ?).
I suppose you could assign each PTF a sequential number and use that
to build a bit-string (1=applied, 0=not) and report a honkin' big hex
value. ;-) Then, not only could you tell that extra-RSU service had
been applied, but with a little effort you could tell exactly what.
Hey, with VMSES/E in Rexx, it's all just a SMOP isn't it? :-))
-Chip-
On 4/10/11 00:05 Alan Altmark said:
Following up on Nick Harris' expectation to see a change to QUERY CPLEVEL
after applying COR service to CP, I'd like to open a discussion on how
folks perceive service levels. That is, is there some way that you feel
IBM should express the concept of 'service level'?
For the sake of discussion, let us assert that:
- We are talking about the running entity, not the copy of the entity on
the build disk.
- Unless there are specific pre-reqs or co-reqs, PTFs can be applied in
any order or combination.
- Each component (CP, CMS, DIRMAINT, RACF, SES, etc.) has its own service
stream
Regards,
Alan
z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant
IBM System Lab Services and Training
ibm.com/systems/services/labservices
office: 607.429.3323
alan_altm...@us.ibm.com
Re: Sevice level
I'd still like a CP QUERY command to query to see if a particular PTF is applied to your *running* nucleus. Don't care about CMS or GCS needing to do that, because those are always fixable without getting the world involved. TCPIP would be nice too, but not as important as CP. Marcy -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2011 5:05 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: [IBMVM] Sevice level Following up on Nick Harris' expectation to see a change to QUERY CPLEVEL after applying COR service to CP, I'd like to open a discussion on how folks perceive service levels. That is, is there some way that you feel IBM should express the concept of 'service level'? For the sake of discussion, let us assert that: - We are talking about the running entity, not the copy of the entity on the build disk. - Unless there are specific pre-reqs or co-reqs, PTFs can be applied in any order or combination. - Each component (CP, CMS, DIRMAINT, RACF, SES, etc.) has its own service stream Regards, Alan z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com
Re: Sevice level
I would like that associated with some definitive criteria of system integration quality assurance; e.g., validated to some level of assurance that the component plays nicely with other components at various service levels of their own. On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 8:05 PM, Alan Altmark wrote: > Following up on Nick Harris' expectation to see a change to QUERY CPLEVEL > after applying COR service to CP, I'd like to open a discussion on how > folks perceive service levels. That is, is there some way that you feel > IBM should express the concept of 'service level'? > > For the sake of discussion, let us assert that: > - We are talking about the running entity, not the copy of the entity on > the build disk. > - Unless there are specific pre-reqs or co-reqs, PTFs can be applied in > any order or combination. > - Each component (CP, CMS, DIRMAINT, RACF, SES, etc.) has its own service > stream > > Regards, > Alan > > z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant > IBM System Lab Services and Training > ibm.com/systems/services/labservices > office: 607.429.3323 > alan_altm...@us.ibm.com >
