On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 15:08:32 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>We recently moved from z/OS Release 1.4 running on a z900/1C8 to
>running z/OS Release 1.7 on a z9/703.
>
>Now that we know this was just not enough machine power to keep our
business
>processes running as they did on the z900 we have
I have been asked to set up z/OS NFS client to access Linux files on Redhat.
I have searched the archives and found little information. Documentation on
z/OS client is very sparse.
Any pointers/problems/gotchas etc I should be aware of. The requirement is
to have 100 plus user accessing 50 or so f
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My question is what are the MIPs and MSUs of the z9/506?
Since our ISVs software charges are by one or the other.
http://www.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries/lspr/
http://www.tech-news.com/publib/
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
5200 W Century B
I was not going to comment on this as I am finding it quite enjoyable
and I am learning some things. I would like to interject a
performance comparison between an IBM 3081 and a Sun System and a PC.
I don't know if this is a good one or not, I will leave it up to the
reader.
Approximately
We recently moved from z/OS Release 1.4 running on a z900/1C8 to
running z/OS Release 1.7 on a z9/703.
Now that we know this was just not enough machine power to keep our business
processes running as they did on the z900 we have decided to move to a z9/506.
My question is what are the MIPs and
Well of course, Dean, Timothy makes perfect sense. You should believe
everything your vendors say, without any verification, right? ;-)
At the last shop I worked at (a government shop), they had a study done to
evaluate what platform they should be running on, and the study proposed Oracle
ru
>Yep And each one of those servers requires a physical connection to
>electrical power; each requires an operating system license; each one that
>runs a database requires a DBMS license, etc., etc. Oh, did you want
>Test/Development and QA copies too? More $.
I did state that managem
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
>
> >If your point 1 were accurate, management would dump those servers.
>
> Two points that substantiate the TCA argument (or, to be more
> presice ICA (initial cost of acquisition)):
>
> 1. Mainframe D
- Original Message -
From: "Birger Heede" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To:
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 8:55 AM
Subject: Re: PSI MIPS (was: Links to decent 'why the mainframe thrives'
article)
>
> A different benchmark is described here:
>
> http://www.ibm.com
Depending on the deal, you can get an IFL in the low $30's.
I agree too, the RS6000's that we are installing have LPAR's and cost
as much as the z9 in some cases. If you load up a four or eight way
Xeon server box, you are looking at $30-50K in many instances. I
think that to some degree, many
This looks interesting.
Specialty Engine Loaner Program Abstract: The Specialty Engine Loaner
program is a pre-sales trial for IFL, zAAP and zIIP engines. Selected customers
will be given the use of these additional capacity engines for a period of 90
days. Sales teams can offer their cus
It was my experience that the main cost difference is not the hardware, it's
software. Open system software was lisenced by the processor. So doing a
little math.
1 IFL = 1 processor = $100,000
AP Websphere = $10,000 (very old price)
Total = $110,000
30 servers ( 4 way ) @ $3000 each = $90,000
A
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 10:43 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: PSI MIPS (was: Links to decent 'why the
> mainframe thrives' article)
>
>
> >If your point
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 10:45:21 -0500, Dave Kopischke wrote:
>I follow the list through the web browser. Occasionally, I notice the last word
>of a line is duplicated on the next line. At first I thought it was just people
>with similar typing skills as myself, but I noticed it on a lot of posts.
I'
> Two points that substantiate the TCA argument (or, to be more presice
> ICA (initial cost of acquisition)):
>
> 1. Mainframe DASD costs more than midrange disk.
>(Even IBM's DS series).
I ascribe this to "you get what you pay for", to a large degree.
> 2. IFL's cost arounnd 100K (US).
>
Dean Kent wrote:
After all, IBM does use these benchmarks for POWER and x86 based systems
that they sell into those markets.
Regards,
Dean
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 00:01:26 -0500, Bruce Hewson wrote:
>
>I suppose you could call this post a little gripe. :-)
>
Since we're griping today
I follow the list through the web browser. Occasionally, I notice the last word
of a line is duplicated on the next line. At first I thought it was j
>If your point 1 were accurate, management would dump those servers.
Two points that substantiate the TCA argument (or, to be more presice ICA
(initial cost of acquisition)):
1. Mainframe DASD costs more than midrange disk.
(Even IBM's DS series).
2. IFL's cost arounnd 100K (US).
("I can b
Search the archives.
On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 05:08:21 -0700, Phil Payne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RESEARCH.FREESERVE.CO.UK> wrote:
>> |
>> | What's up? I was just checking links in my presentation for next week
and
>> | http://www.isham-research.com/ looks like been squatted on my
something
>> | else.
>
On 18 Jul 2007 07:33:07 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
>If I was making a decision, the H/W platform would be one of the last things
>to consider.
>Companies don't need bemchmarks, they need *applications*. It is possible to
>have good application on poor platform, and it doesn't me
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 9:01 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: PSI MIPS (was: Links to decent 'why the mainframe thrives'
article)
>HOWEVER, the TCO and TCO (ownership, o
Howard Brazee wrote:
[...]
If I was making a decision about my shop's hardware, a Standard
benchmarking test is a start, as long as they are benchmarking real
data processing - but I'm really interested in benchmarking my
particular needs.
If I was making a decision, the H/W platform would be o
On 17 Jul 2007 12:09:37 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dean Kent) wrote:
>I agree with your first point, but not your second. There *is* a reason
>that SPEC (and other benchmarking organizations) exist. These customers
>want a common performance metric to identify the value they are getting for
>the
We recently reported an issue with ASG for their Pro/JCL and Info/XE products
regarding their use of Key 8 CSA.
As a result of our problem report, I believe the vendor is looking into what it
would take for them to fix this.
If you are interested in the resolution of this issue for these produc
I wonder if it happened when all the ".country" nomenclature came into
more wide use.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dave Kopischke
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 7:18 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: What happened to
>HOWEVER, the TCO and TCO (ownership, operation) IS known (regardless of
>physical config). The ROI can be plotted. There is very little HIDDEN costs
>(HCO) in a mature system such as the z/Architecture.
Yes, but:
1. TCA (acquisition) is what scares management.
2. People costs are often a politi
>o If I attempt to allocate OUTDD with DISP=OLD, it fails with
IKJ56241I DATA SET IS ALLOCATED TO ANOTHER JOB OR USER if
another session is editing even a different member of the same PDS.
Disposition does not protect PDS(e)s at the member level.
>o If I allocate OUTDD with DISP=SHR, don't I
Here is some code we have.
/* Rexx */
parse arg DEVADR
"CONSPROF SOLDISPLAY(NO) SOLNUM(100)"
CONSOLE ACTIVATE
"CONSOLE SYSCMD(D U,,,"DEVADR",1)"
msg = GETMSG('conmsg.','sol')
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 08:21:23 -0500, Paul Gilmartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 21:14:20 -0500, Kenneth E Tomiak wrote:
>>
>>OCOPY
>>
>I believe I need to use ISPF LM services. I just tried OCOPY
>and it appears not to serialize properly:
>
>o If I attempt to allocate OUTDD wit
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 8:21 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: UNIX File -> PDS via ISPF LM Services?
>
>
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 21:14:20 -0500, Kenneth E
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Timothy Sipples
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 1:13 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: PSI MIPS (was: Links to decent 'why the mainframe thrives'
article)
Let me try to make it simple agai
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 21:14:20 -0500, Kenneth E Tomiak wrote:
>
>OCOPY
>
I believe I need to use ISPF LM services. I just tried OCOPY
and it appears not to serialize properly:
o If I attempt to allocate OUTDD with DISP=OLD, it fails with
IKJ56241I DATA SET IS ALLOCATED TO ANOTHER JOB OR USER if
I don't intend to broadcast every IBM product announcement -- there are a
lot of them -- but this one is notable given some recent discussions in
this forum.
http://www.ibm.com/common/ssi/rep_ca/6/897/ENUS207-156/ENUS207156.PDF
It's Tivoli OMEGAMON XE for CICS Transaction Gateway on z/OS, Version
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 11:57:22 +0300, גדי בן
אבי <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>A user is running a job that copies a file from one 3590B to another.
>The file is an ADABAS backup.
>
>We've just upgraded to ADABAS v7.4.4.
>
>We are running z/OS 1.7.
>
>As the subject says we are usin
Gadi,
Someone else mentioned reducing the BUFNO.
You have 2 lots of 30 buffers requested. That is over 13MB of storage which
most likely must be below 16MB.
See http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-
bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/dgt2d450/3.2.9.4?
SHELF=EZ2ZO10I.bks&DT=20060524093000 for more informatio
Turned out the person doing the upgrade had only applied HIPERs out of
all the maintenance available in SMPPTS. We found a PTF from March
which wasn't HIPER that fixed the problem. The person went back and
applied all maint without error holds and that is what is going forward
from here.
_
Thanks for drawing the attention to my post @ youtube.
But I actually think this little movie was first made for the virtualization
engine
and they changed the end afterwards for the mainframe.
Unfortunately I can't find the original one any longer.
If you're interested in more of these.
Over t
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 23:51:48 -0700, Dean Kent wrote:
>...As I said, Intel, for
>example, does not use SOI and seems to be producing very high clockrate
>devices without it, which (currently) outperform their rival AMD,
Another assertion without data to back it up. I hope you are not talking
Dean Kent wrote:
I am comparing the pace of improvement in x86 with the mainframe. The IT
Jungle article says that installed mainframe MIPS has increased 4 fold over
7 years. I showed that in the same time period, x86 performance has
increased over 8 fold. We still aren't getting an apples t
Gadi,
In the EXEC statement add parm='SDB=input'. This will allow the large block
interface to be activated. See OSDFSMSdfp Utilities for details. Btw, 3590
supports large block sizes of 256K. You specified 224K which was uses on old
3590 models.
Itschak
-Original Message-
From: IBM
- Original Message
From: Paul Gillis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> In this case immediate support was not what you received, but you got what
> you paid for. I do not believe that anyone can expect ISV levels of support
> for free products that have been put into production regardless of anyone's
Also, it may be worth reducing the number of buffers.
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 05:12:41 -0400 Rob Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
:>Before doing anything else, I would drain and restart the initiator and try
again.
:>It could be that your INIT address space private area has become fragmented
(a co
Before doing anything else, I would drain and restart the initiator and try
again.
It could be that your INIT address space private area has become fragmented (a
common cause of this is either installation exits or ISV software that bleed
storage over time) .
Also check for any IEFUSI exit tha
>> The Devil is in the details. Some free software has better support
>> than some chargeable software.
>
>I really would like to agree with you, but unfortunately I can't.
>
>I downloaded both XMITIP an TXT2PDF package, really nice tools which
>simplify things a lot. However, I had a problem tryin
Hi,
A user is running a job that copies a file from one 3590B to another.
The file is an ADABAS backup.
We've just upgraded to ADABAS v7.4.4.
We are running z/OS 1.7.
As the subject says we are using IEBGENER.
We started out with a REGION of 4M, increased it to 8M and then 0M. All ended
Hi Rob,
Yep, thats what I found in z/OS 1.7, some changes I need to think about.
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 04:05:23 -0400, Rob Scott
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Bruce
>
>This code uses the OCO "UCB Look Up Table" control block - I assume you
are aware that it may well change/disappear in future z/O
Bruce
This code uses the OCO "UCB Look Up Table" control block - I assume you are
aware that it may well change/disappear in future z/OS releases without warning.
Rob Scott
Rocket Software, Inc
275 Grove Street
Newton, MA 02466
617-614-2305
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: I
- Original Message -
From: "Timothy Sipples" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To:
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 11:12 PM
Subject: Re: PSI MIPS (was: Links to decent 'why the mainframe thrives'
article)
>I'm sorry, Dean, but that statement borders on malpractice. If
48 matches
Mail list logo
