Bruce Black wrote:
You could use RACF and make the volume UACC of read.
You must be thinking of the DASDVOL class. DASDVOL is only checked for
certain operations, such as full-volume backups. It is not checked for
every access to datasets on the volume, so making DASDVOL UACC=READ
would
Slightly off topic: in Japan some of the bars list their hours as, for
example, "1100 to 2800" (11:00 a.m. to 4:00 a.m.)
I have no idea what that factoid has to do with anything, but I'm
learning. :-)
- - - - -
Timothy F. Sipples
Consulting Enterprise Software Architect, z9/zSeries
IBM Japan, L
>Open Systems is Hitachi parlance for drives formatted in FBA format and
used
>by Linux, UNIXen, and Windows. I don't see that we need to change 10
years
>of convention.
So when z/OS uses FBA (as z/VSE, z/VM, and Linux already do), is
everything an "open system" in the storage world?
I suppose
Andy,
I understand now. The HSM ARECOVER will allow you to rename the HLQ of
VSAM even if the VSAM was migrated to ML2. I tried and verified this
using DATASETCONFLICT(RENAMETARGET(qualifier))and
RECOVERNEWNAMELEVEL(olevel1,nlevel1,...) and RECOVERNEWNAMEALL(level)
subparameters.
Terry Traylor
To get "READ only" protection for existing datasets I use the ICHRCX01 RACF
Pre-processing exit to modify the RACF dataset profile name based on VOLSER
information. Fairly simple to code.
In my case it is used to protect all datasets on the SYSRES set of volumes
with a single profile. The profile
On Feb 20, 2006, at 9:11 PM, Bruce Black wrote:
I am, most concerned with the "copy that is perhaps miles (up to
1000's). Where I last worked (IIRC) we had approximately 160
volumes that were XRC'd that went from Chicago to Colorado then
back to NY. The (only other) copy being in Poughkee
In a message dated 2/20/2006 9:11:41 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
times. Local mirroring allows backups to be "created" in very little
time, and then moved to tape outside the backup window, so the tape
speed becomes less important.
>>
I was on active duty in l
I am, most concerned with the "copy that is perhaps miles (up to
1000's). Where I last worked (IIRC) we had approximately 160 volumes
that were XRC'd that went from Chicago to Colorado then back to NY.
The (only other) copy being in Poughkeepsie. This is old information
so it might have chang
Arithmetic modulo 24:00 does not admit of the value 2400 any more than
arithmetic modulo 2 admits of the value 2. The licit values of an
arithmetic operation modulo 2 are just 0 and 1.
The botched discussions of date arithmetic that are pervasive here, are
perhaps the most compelling argument
However note that 2400 is invalid to MVS
T CLOCK=24.00.00
IEE306I SET INVALID NUMERICS
"John S. Giltner, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 19 Feb 2006 14:18:20 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John S. Giltner,
> Jr.) wrote:
>
>
>>I perso
They are certainly subliterate, and they may perhaps even be epochal.
John Gilmore
Ashland, MA 01721-1817
USA
From: ibm-main <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Military Time?
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 18:56:12 -0500
At 2006-02-20 04
On Feb 20, 2006, at 3:39 PM, Mark Zelden wrote:
On Mon, 20 Feb 2006 13:18:48 -0500, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) +ibm-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I know for a fact that it's been discussed here before. IMHO the
lack
of knowledge of the process is gross negligence.
Excuse me, but when did read
John D. Slayton wrote:
EMS1164E Pass mode logon request failed for application TMONTCP.
Everytime I after I select a command or type it ratherI get the
message in (Yellow) thats above...
What can this mean?
This is a message from NetView Access Services.
Apparenlty the application TMO
Gil,
With External Storage on a USP you can create Shadowimages of volumes in a
storage that is attached through a channel extender. You would do this with
Instant Split method, but the COW technique wouldn't leave you with much
that is useful.
Ron
> It appears, then, that the particular value o
Ed,
If you think the main issue is distance then you seem to have missed the
point. This is "In System Replication," meaning the source and the target
are managed by the same Storage Control Unit.
If you are running XRC or TrueCopy then you send commands to the Remote
Storage Controller to make a
>I've been using also Strobe but I don't like it anymore since
it's become a Compuware product.
I almost became a tech rep for STROBE in the early 1980's.
The rep in Toronto was (unfortunately) a bit of a jerk.
I remember one day sitting in front of our CICS sysprog (late 1980's), when he
was ta
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 19 Feb 2006 14:18:20 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John S. Giltner,
Jr.) wrote:
I personally perfer 24 hour time, as it saves a few characters
on the screen, no need to put AM, PM.
I agree. I especially dislike the illogical and incorrect use of
12:00 AM or 12:00 PM
At 2006-02-20 04:56, "Robert A. Rosenberg" wrote:
epic
At 2006-02-20 10:38, "Anne & Lynn Wheeler" wrote:
epoc
These are misspellings of epoch proportions!
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
Not that it is much consolation, but JCLCHECK only uses prefixes CAZ1 and
CAZ2 - currently no IBM APA modules have this prefix.
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of John Eells
> Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 8:47 AM
> To: IB
I've been using also Strobe but I don't like it anymore since
it's become a Compuware product.
1. Support for CTS 3.1 just about 9 months after GA
2. A lot of S0C4 in the current release (3.2 current maintenance)
3. Problems with DB2 V8 SQL text while "strobing" a CICS V3.1
4. Problems with DB2
I had a client that did almost the equivilent of a read only MVS
volume via ICHRTX00. IGGPRE00 could also be used. Search the archives.
Mark
--
Mark Zelden
Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead
Zurich North America and Farmers Insurance Group
mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Systems Progra
On Mon, 20 Feb 2006 13:18:48 -0500, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
>I know for a fact that it's been discussed here before. IMHO the lack
>of knowledge of the process is gross negligence.
>
Excuse me, but when did reading all IBM-MAIN posts past and
present become required for vendors?
--
Mar
>Try and get that out of user procs its pretty close to impossible.
Like I said 100's of procs (or more) *BEFORE* the change for the
binder (and linkage editor) almost always included it.
LE is a different beast.
Enterprise/COBOL is a different beast.
If you used your old procs against it they
In a message dated 2/20/2006 2:54:39 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What he actually had was the PDU to the wall cable.
It wouldn't reach, so he gave it a reef.
The whole site came down on that pull.
>>
One of our Profs was on the post mortem team at one of Kansas
Jeffrey Deaver wrote:
The latest issue of the z/OS Hot Topics Newsletter, Issue 14, has hit the
stands! If you didn't receive it already, you can obtain a hardcopy
version
from http://www.ibm.com/shop/publications/order/ (order number
GA22-7501-10) or download the PDF from
http://www.ibm.co
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Got the above email, but the link is not on the webpage yet. The pdf,
however, is there at
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/epubs/pdf/e0z2n161.pdf
Already sent them a note about it.
You and (I'm told) a LOT of other people. The missing link
should be add
>About the same time we had a floor buffer plugged into the service port on
the control unit.
Ours was a vacuum cleaner.
Of course, my favourite was the intermittant heat checks on an old V8 during
third shift.
By the time the Amdahl CE got there the problem disappeared.
Finally, he stuck aro
In a message dated 2/20/2006 12:44:24 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You could use RACF and make the volume UACC of read
>>
Which profile do you use for floor polishers
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe
You could use RACF and make the volume UACC of read.
You must be thinking of the DASDVOL class. DASDVOL is only checked for
certain operations, such as full-volume backups. It is not checked for
every access to datasets on the volume, so making DASDVOL UACC=READ
would not result in making
There is one very simple reason there is no MVCY instruction:
the MVC instruction is 6 bytes long. Adding the two bytes needed
for long displacements would create an 8-byte instruction; the
zSeries (and ancestor) architecture(s) would require major
revisions to handle instructions longer than 3 hal
Hi, all
When the proceedings are available ont the web Site. there is a file
associated with no attachements.
Francis Godin
Networking IT SPecialist
France - Paris
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructio
>The latest issue of the z/OS Hot Topics Newsletter, Issue 14, has hit the
>stands! If you didn't receive it already, you can obtain a hardcopy
version
>from http://www.ibm.com/shop/publications/order/ (order number
>GA22-7501-10) or download the PDF from
>http://www.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries
To clarify my prior post: APA has not caught on with my applications group.
I conducted some training but I think most were overwhelmed with the
interface/navigation and underwhelmed by the amount of application-related
data, especially in a CICS environment. (A lot of the stats show up under
CICS
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/19/2006
at 01:16 PM, Ed Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>This was in the *OLD* days when each drive had its own enclosure
And continued after that.
>(although the 2314's might have had them as well).
Not just the 2314.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysPr
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/20/2006
at 11:42 AM, John Eells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>I'm pretty sure I've written about it here before.
I know for a fact that it's been discussed here before. IMHO the lack
of knowledge of the process is gross negligence.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Me
You could use RACF and make the volume UACC of read.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ed Finnell
Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 11:21 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Mount DASD as read-only
In a message dated 2/20/
On Feb 20, 2006, at 12:00 AM, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
Someone (sorry for got his name) said that with the new releases of
the cobol compiler modules are no longer statically linked.
That was me.
I would
guess though unless the binder execution specifies NCAL that syslib
is still opened and there
On Feb 20, 2006, at 10:42 AM, John Eells wrote:
-SNIP
John,
I agree with you pretty much ad I do remember seeing the doc about
message prefix's a long time ago. I even tried getting a vendor to
submit their prefix to IBM. I don't recall whether they ever did
John Eells wrote:
Edward E. Jaffe wrote:
It's no surprise. The so-called "registry" is still somewhat informal
and not that well known. Hardly anyone at IBM even knows of its
existence. The vast majority of ISV products aren't registered there.
This is *especially* true of products that were
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Yeah, but it was years before C/C++ and didn't cause an integrity
> exposure..just a big honkin' outage
a classic buffer overflow story involving outage (27 system crashes in a
single day).
http://www.multicians.org/thvv/360-67.html
the problem was as an undergraduate
In a message dated 2/20/2006 11:28:57 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So you haven't seen memory leaks in Windows and all the efforts to fix them
? Never seen a protection exception in Windows?
I find the pointer notation in c++ childish.
>>
Many. Many. Still tau
In a message dated 2/20/2006 10:43:56 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Setting up a "security product at VOL and DSN level" is a lot
of work, particularly when you're not sure what's on the volumes, or
when the volumes are under the control of another OS, such as VSE
So you haven't seen memory leaks in Windows and all the efforts to fix them
? Never seen a protection exception in Windows?
I find the pointer notation in c++ childish.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Ed Finnell
Sent: Monday,
In a message dated 2/20/2006 10:43:52 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Not the first time a buffer problem has caused a system error.
>>
Yeah, but it was years before C/C++ and didn't cause an integrity
exposure..just a big honkin' outage
-
>Someone (sorry for got his name) said that with the new releases of
the cobol compiler modules are no longer statically linked.
That was me.
>I would
guess though unless the binder execution specifies NCAL that syslib
is still opened and there for read access has to be given.
LE/370 is n
See below...
Steve Comstock wrote:
I would imagine many ISV providers prefer to distribute
their products via their own channels, and not feel
"beholden" to IBM (which is a bit disingenous, since
these products rest on z/OS).
Feel free to propose a different industry registry for this
purpo
On Monday 20 February 2006 11:31, Willy Jensen wrote:
> I guess that it is fair to say there is no such thing as a read-only
> disk in zos, unless you are only using excp-like access.
> Even a read will update the last-ref datestamp in the VTOC, and I dont
> think that zos will be happy if it pre
Not the first time a buffer problem has caused a system error.
Jon
About the same time we had a floor buffer plugged into the service port on
the control unit. Ummm, no mystery there. "We weren't doing anything, it just
died!"
--
On Sunday 19 February 2006 12:53, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> remember, in the ancient past, that there was a switch
>> on the device to make it read-only.
>
> There was but probably don't want to do it today.
> Can control with security product at VOL and DSN level.
I really wish MVS had the c
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Walter Marguccio
> Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 3:19 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Dummy question about VOLCAT.
>
>
> --- "McKown, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Timothy Sipples
> Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 11:37 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Disk vs Tape scenario
>
>
> Quick pet peeve alert(*): the term "open systems" as
> cur
R.S. wrote:
Is the prefix list available for us, poor peasants buying both IBM and
ISV software ?
Alas, no. In part, this is because only a single list is
maintained and it usually includes some number of unannounced
products. For various reasons, I don't foresee the list being
made a
> I would imagine many ISV providers prefer to distribute
> their products via their own channels, and not feel
> "beholden" to IBM (which is a bit disingenous, since
> these products rest on z/OS). But there is some sense
> of pride, independence, self-reliance in not bothering.
That would potent
In a message dated 2/20/2006 9:44:52 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Took several hours to determine what had happened due to the midnight
phenomenon
>>
About the same time we had a floor buffer plugged into the service port on
the control unit. Ummm, no mystery th
I remember when the cleaning crew flipped one on a 3350, which is the last
device I remember having the switch.
Took several hours to determine what had happened due to the midnight
phenomenon.
One of my cow-orkers tells the same story. Cleaning guy used to snap a
rag to knock dust off, and h
I remember when the cleaning crew flipped one on a 3350, which is the last
device I remember having the switch.
Took several hours to determine what had happened due to the midnight
phenomenon.
Dennis Roach
United Space Alliance
600 Gemini Avenue
Mail Code USH-4A3L
Houston, Texas 77058
Voice:
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Ed Gould
>
> On Feb 20, 2006, at 7:16 AM, Chase, John wrote:
> >
> > So?? LE is no longer a "program product"; it's an integral part of
> > z/OS.
> > Besides, LE doesn't compile anything.
>
> I wasn't just talking a
IBM Mainframe Discussion List wrote on 02/19/2006
06:12:42 PM:
> df/sort
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Burks
> Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 5:46 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: FileAid Empty File Che
On Feb 20, 2006, at 7:16 AM, Chase, John wrote:
-
SNIP--
So?? LE is no longer a "program product"; it's an integral part of
z/OS.
Besides, LE doesn't compile anything.
I wasn't just talking about compiling I was talkin
John Eells wrote:
Edward E. Jaffe wrote:
It's no surprise. The so-called "registry" is still somewhat informal
and not that well known. Hardly anyone at IBM even knows of its
existence. The vast majority of ISV products aren't registered there.
This is *especially* true of products that were
Gene Cash wrote:
> I never understood the reasoning behind this implementation. So it had
> to go across the bus to increment the clock? It wasn't just a hardware
> counter with an increment line tied to an oscillator?
note that the 360 just had the cpu timer (at location 80) ... and
everything el
John Eells wrote:
Edward E. Jaffe wrote:
It's no surprise. The so-called "registry" is still somewhat informal
and not that well known. Hardly anyone at IBM even knows of its
existence. The vast majority of ISV products aren't registered there.
This is *especially* true of products that were
Edward E. Jaffe wrote:
It's no surprise. The so-called "registry" is still somewhat informal
and not that well known. Hardly anyone at IBM even knows of its
existence. The vast majority of ISV products aren't registered there.
This is *especially* true of products that were written so long ago
Tell me about it Ed.I forget how many assembly errors I got the first
time I attemped:
MVCY
TRTY
UNPKY, etc.
Too bad.
Roland, it's not that the IBM DSECTs are > 4096, it's that mine is. And,
for instance, the MF=(E,WORKOPEN) execute form of the macro was in storage >
12 bits away.
The IEAB
>Not only that sync requests are converted to async by PR/SM, it's done
without z/OS knowing about it.
IIRC, only the requests from the same physical CEC are converted.
Those from another footprint stay synchronous.
-
-teD
I’m an enthusiastic proselytiser of the universal panacea I believe in!
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Ed Gould
>
> On Feb 17, 2006, at 9:55 PM, Joel C. Ewing wrote:
> SNIP-
>
> > I haven't seen anyone mention only allowing RACF "EXECUTE"
> > permission to the COBOL compiler loadlib an
We just applied the ptf for PQ95214 as a part of E. Cobol 3.4 on our sandbox.
No roll-out til this problem is fixed in our application if any.
Roland
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Barbara Nitz
Sent: Monday, February 20, 200
We am running a similar configuration for our sandbox CF (internal CF LPAR
sharing 3 CPs with 4 other LPARs).
Not only that sync requests are converted to async by PR/SM, it's done
without z/OS knowing about it.
z/OS still thinks its a sync request, and RMF will report it as a sync
request.
So the
>What else is anyone using to assess the risk? Are you electing
>to back out the PE without waiting for any reports of problems at your
>site or fixes from IBM?
We backed out the ptf and went back to Enterprise Cobol 3.2 since we weren't
sure that Enterprise Cobol 3.4 would work without the pq-ptf
-- snip --
I would not say that Hyperswap (GDPS) only swaps UCB's. It must communicate
the hardware to change the mirroring direction at the same time.
I remember we had to wait for new microcode levels to use Hyperswap or at
least some of its new features. E.g. one of the features is (was) changi
<- snip ->
I thought that Hiperswap was a software only feature ( after all it only
swaps UCB's ) . So i am curious .. why would hardware matter ?
<- snip ->
I would not say that Hyperswap (GDPS) only swaps UCB's. It must communicate
the hardware to change the mirroring direction a
At 19:45 -0700 on 02/19/2006, Paul Gilmartin wrote about Re: Military Time?:
> standard called for "zero" time to be the first second of the century.
I believe the standard calls for "zero" time to be one year prior
to the first second of the century. And that's a year before the
beginning
--- "McKown, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But just for my comfort, has anybody moved this VOLCAT? Did you just
> use the "normal" methods, or did you need to something special.
John,
I moved this catalog a couple of months ago using normal methods as for
any other catalog. This means EXPOR
-- snip --
>Is there any IBM public list about what DASD vendors suppport GDPS?. If
>so, could you please provide me with the URL?
>
I dont'know why my post did not get through , i'll re-ask .
My question : If you talk about DASD support for GDPS , i suppose you mean
the ability to do Hiperswap ..
74 matches
Mail list logo
