In a message dated 3/11/2006 1:51:16 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>"copy is immediately available before the physical tracks are copied".
I can tell you how the IBM ESS (aka 2105) FlashCopy does it.
At 03:00:00:00 you execute a TSO command (or use some other means
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 16:06:49 -0500, Bruce Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Ed, let me have Scotty beam you up and explain it...
>
>Sorry, Scottie is not available (actually he's dead) so let me try again.
Right
So he cannot destroy the source copies after one second
yeah .. it's weekend
Bruno
Mike,
Your comments about running without TAPEVOL and/or TVTOC raises the
following issue. It is my understanding that with RMM the only way to
protect against unauthorized access to a tape dataset by taking
inappropriate advantage of tape label containing just the last 17 characters
of the dsname
Call me amazed... but not long ago on here.. this was instantaneous..
now its some amount of time.. Did there just happen to by a hole in
the space time continuum (and only for certain people?).
Ed, let me have Scotty beam you up and explain it...
Sorry, Scottie is not available (actually he's
>I understand Ed because like him i am also running a shop ,and can't rely
on such theory
Ed is NOT running a shop!
Ed is retired.
Unfortunately, technology has moved since.
-
-teD
I’m an enthusiastic proselytiser of the universal panacea I believe in!
--
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 14:13:23 -0600, Ed Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I would not want to be responsible to management if a disaster struck
>after you initiated the "snap short" Its just like any other backup
>"procedure" it has to fully complete before you have a real copy.
>
Ed and Ron you g
This story was taken from www.inq7.net
http://news.inq7.net/infotech/index.php?index=1&story_id=69069
Mainframe replacement faster than before -- IBM
First posted 00:25am (Mla time) Mar 12, 2006
By Alexander Villafania
INQ7.net
Mainframes, once touted as the last IT equipment to be hauled ou
On Mar 11, 2006, at 1:48 PM, Ron and Jenny Hawkins wrote:
Ed, Ed. Ed.
what are you amazed about exactly?
The instant snap is still an instant snap - nothing in this thread
changes
that. In fact it reinforces the concept with the statement "copy is
immediately available before the physical t
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 10:30:45 -0600, Harry Riedel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Due to SOX and VISA security regulations, my company needs to encrypt credit
>card sales data being sored in DB2 tables. We have tried both IBM's
>Encryption for IMS & DB2 product along with ASPG's Megacryption. Can anyon
Ed, Ed. Ed.
what are you amazed about exactly?
The instant snap is still an instant snap - nothing in this thread changes
that. In fact it reinforces the concept with the statement "copy is
immediately available before the physical tracks are copied".
You really don't understand this stuff, do
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 17:34:12 +0100, John (IBM-MAIN)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>--- snip ---
>Does the DUMPCOND(SET) parameter of ICKDSF REFORMAT get you anything?
>I've never tried it with a suspended Duplex secondary.
Well thanks
I don't know i did not even know it in ickdsf ( i know the one i
Timothy Sipples wrote:
The State of New Hampshire had a system with malware installed -- a single
Microsoft Windows server -- that was processing payments for government
agencies, including motor vehicles. Those payment records were
compromised. This news broke a couple weeks ago.
According
--- snip ---
The fact that ickdsf cannot clip the volser is because the hardware knows
that this secondary disk is part of a suspended pair .
When you suspend , ickdsf will tell you
ICK30111I DEVICE SPECIFIED IS THE SECONDARY OF A DUPLEX OR PPRC PAIR
ICK31024I UNABLE TO OPEN VOLUME.
ICK30003I FUNCT
I was looking through this thread, and I never saw any suggestion of using
an external box! There was a RYO solution with fieldproc, using native DB2
v8 (wow, very nice!), and the solution I stated using Protegrity with
views/triggers/UDFs. I perhaps was unclear when I spoke about DTP - DTP
allows
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's what had me a bit confused. When I changed the storage
distribution to be only central with no expanded, the new config didn't
take affect until I did a DEACTIVATE, then an ACTIVATE on the LOAD
profile. I'm still trying to find out whether ACTIVATE retains the
pr
I am looking for suggestions on how to upgrade a JES2 exit for z/OS 1.7.
The exit is currently exit 20 on z/OS 1.4. It validates the first accounting
field on the job card. Sounds like exit 3? The person that wrote it
said that he started out with exit 3 but moved it to 20 because it worked
be
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 00:15:05 -0700, Timothy Sipples
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>processing), the data would flow unencrypted over the wire to/from the box
>anyway (and that doesn't seem to pass muster with the PCI auditors I've
>heard about), and you've just created a really tough DR and key reco
17 matches
Mail list logo
