Vernooy, C.P. - SPLXM [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
t...
Mark Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Does anyone know the procedure to rename an LPAR on a z9 without a
POR?
--
Mark Jacobs
We happened to try this last week and
John,
I have been told that CFW must be turned off for Hyperswap, but I never
understood why. You say that CFW must be written to disk for Hyperswap,
but
why can all the other writes still be deferred in cache/NVS?
Ron
Hyperswap would be one of those circumstances were you would
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Phil Payne
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 2:58 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: New Mainframes coming in February
The announcement in February is scarcely news. I predicted
According to IBM, (see APARS OA05936 and OA21002 and marketing request
MR0508025651)
there are several ways that ISMF can report conflicting and/or incorrect
storate usage numbers at
the Storage Group level as compared to the volume level.
We have on OA21002 but still see conflicting numbers.
Michael B Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
com...
According to IBM, (see APARS OA05936 and OA21002 and marketing request
MR0508025651)
there are several ways that ISMF can report conflicting and/or
incorrect
storate usage numbers at
the Storage Group level as
The user stipulates that when the dsn was recalled from ML2 to disk, it
(recall) corrupted the data.
It's more likely that the data was corrupted before the dataset was migrated.
Bob Shannon
Rocket Software
--
For IBM-MAIN
Mike,
I feel your pain, as I went through this with the MXI 4.3 SGRP command (which
relies on the information returned by SMS to report on space usage). Quite a
few users reported the inconsistancy - so in MXI G2, the SGRP command now uses
the latest cached LSPACE data gathered by the MXI
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David Andrews
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 3:28 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: IDC3009I return code *5*??
I did a LISTC VOL against one of my catalogs today and was rewarded in
part with
There have been rare instances of a bad recall. Mostly due to I/O errors on
the tape. I do not remember any recent issues for DFSMShsm for recall.
I maybe incorrect, but I think you can go to the HSM logs to see how the data
set was recalled. I believe it will include the volser of the tape
On 19 Jan 2008 03:36:04 -0800,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (R.S.) wrote:
I wonder why people get excited about z890 on eBay.
Second hand equipment is widely available, although not on aBay.
The prices for z/8xx are reasonably low, I heard about $10k for z/800
with CPs.
But excited they do become. Looks
Thanks to the respondents.
At one time, I had RTFMd that stated the way to bring down OMVS/USS was
to issue the 'F BPXOINIT,SHUTDOWN=FILEOWNER' 'F
BPXOINIT,SHUTDOWN=FORKS' commands.
These two commands have worked until Saturday. I will use the new
command and monitor its success.
SyncSort should use CFW for SORTWK I/O unless the device is not enabled
for it. SORTOUT I/O will use DFW.
John Reda
Syncsort, Inc.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Baker
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 4:30 PM
To:
John,
I have been told that CFW must be turned off for Hyperswap, but I never
understood why. You say that CFW must be written to disk for Hyperswap,
but
why can all the other writes still be deferred in cache/NVS?
Ron
Hyperswap would be one of those circumstances were
On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 11:09:57 -0800, Edward Jaffe wrote:
Binyamin Dissen wrote:
In the past (370 pre PLO), CS was the only way to do this function.
While it certainly is possible for IBM to rewrite WAIT/POST to use the PLO
instruction, I certainly doubt that such a code change will occur.
In a message dated 1/21/2008 10:39:36 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It looks like the GDPS group also misunderstood CFW.
...
Excerpt from GDPS
You should eliminate any known exploitation of Cache Fast Write (CFW).
Disk write operations using CFW (Cache Fast Write)
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Mark Yuhas
The following contains excerpts the SYSLOG from a shutdown
from Saturday night, 1/19:
F BPXOINIT,SHUTDOWN=FORKS
[ snip ]
After a few minutes, the following PID was still active.
D OMVS,ASID=ALL
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 11:11 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: How does ATTACH pass address of ECB to child?
On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 11:09:57 -0800, Edward
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of McKown, John
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 11:28 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: How does ATTACH pass address of ECB to child?
-Original Message-
From: IBM
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers as well.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Gilmartin) writes:
I have believed, and other updates to this thread appear to concur,
that WAIT/POST are older than CS. At some time,
Hi All,
We have a batch job that's worked reliably for the last 7 or 8 years that's
stopped working when we moved to zOS 1.9 from zOS 1.8. For some reason
that I can't figure out, BLSCPRNT CURRENT is not processing any
more. Other parameter for BLSCPRNT works, just CURRENT is failing.
The light bulb finally went off, ever so dimly. Now I think I got it.
ATTACH can use an ECB that the Mother can wait on until Daughter ends.
The POSTing of the ECB is done by the system upon completion of
Daughter.
But, and this is what was so hard for me to get. Mother can pass
Daughter an
I used to believe that I was good at reading IBM doc.
z/OS 1.9
IGD17279I 1 VOLUMES WERE REJECTED BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT INITIALIZED (*
04160054*)
See the ANTRQST section in z/OS DFSMSdfp Advanced Services for information
on the QFRVOLS volume reason texts and volume reason code.
diagdata
is the
Lindy,
Close. Mother should not clear the ECB, as while the daughter task is
waiting, the ECB contains the address of the daughter's RB.
Correct protocol is for the WAITer (in this case, the daughter) to clear
the ECB immediately after being POSTed by mother.
Tom Harper
-Original
Frank Chu wrote:
We have a batch job that's worked reliably for the last 7 or 8 years
that's stopped working when we moved to zOS 1.9 from zOS 1.8. For some
reason that I can't figure out, BLSCPRNT CURRENT is not processing any
more. Other parameter for BLSCPRNT works, just CURRENT is
Found it - z/OS DFSMSdfp Diagnosis
--
Mark Pace
Mainline Information Systems
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the
I understand that during a WAIT, bits 1-31 of the ECB hold the
address of a control block. If that control block resides above
the Line, might not its address spoof the POST bit? I suppose
this is not a concern because no two tasks are allowed to WAIT
concurrently on the same ECB.
The
Hello,
Is there a way to resend queued emails? This past Friday afternoon, our
primary email server was switched and I wasn't told about it until this
morning. Since the IP address of the email server changed (IPMAILERADDRESS
parm), I've updated it and bounced SMTP to get it going. In the
Tom,
I'm looking at a presentation from the Webpage you specified. Under
Presentations, Workload Manager, the A03.pdf Workload Manager for
the DB2 Professional PDF on page 10 has me a little bit confused. It
says:
Workload Manager calculates a Performance Index for every ask in the
system that
But, and this is what was so hard for me to get. Mother can pass
Daughter an ECB for the Daughter task to use. Daughter does some
stuff
and then WAITs. Mother goes about her business until she needs
Daughter
do so something. this is still fuzzy Mother clears the ECB and
POSTs
it freeing
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lindy Mayfield
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 12:34 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: How does ATTACH pass address of ECB to child?
[snip]
Lindy
Things like atomic and
Greg Zimmerman wrote:
Hello,
Is there a way to resend queued emails? This past Friday afternoon, our
primary email server was switched and I wasn't told about it until this
morning. Since the IP address of the email server changed (IPMAILERADDRESS
parm), I've updated it and bounced SMTP to
Developing a sound data protection strategy is one of the more
complex tasks faced by today's IT organizations. Historically
speaking, many companies have been concerned about data protection
only from access (i.e., authentication and authorization), backup and
recovery or business
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 13:56:37 -0500, Craddock, Chris wrote:
But, and this is what was so hard for me to get. Mother can pass
Daughter an ECB for the Daughter task to use. Daughter does some
stuff
and then WAITs. Mother goes about her business until she needs
Daughter
do so something. this
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers as well.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (McKown, John) writes:
Atomic is used quite a bit in computer science. Like the original
Greek, it means indivisible. That is, when an atomic
Thanks Richard, that worked and cleared out and delivered the emails. I
needed to put in the IP address of the old server at the end of the command,
and after doing that, it took off.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff /
I am trying to write out a Unix System Services file -- a tar archive --
to tape. For simplicity's sake, I was planning on using IEBGENER, but
I'm a bit confused as to what file characteristics to use for this.
Anybody out there have any sample JCL?
Thanks,
Jon
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jon Brock
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 2:42 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Copying Unix tar file to tape
I am trying to write out a Unix System Services file -- a tar
archive
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 08:05:37 -0600, McKown, John
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm more interested in the new instructions, and any enhancements to the
architecture itself (if any). The only way that we will get one is if it
is cheaper (in hard dollars) than our current z9BC.
Assuming things stay
But perhaps part of the grand plan is to only have one very scalable model
moving forward. Guess those of us not under NDA will find out soon...
I have found that my company (before downsizing me) was totally confused with
the EC/BC determinations.
I wish IBM would try to simplify their
In a message dated 1/21/2008 3:39:23 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I wish IBM would try to simplify their offerings.
I've dealt with their marketting cr*p for 27 years, and I find their
distintions only make sense to IBM
Lots of possibilities. Based on same
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 14:48:23 -0600, McKown, John wrote:
-Original Message-
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jon Brock
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 2:42 PM
I am trying to write out a Unix System Services file -- a tar
archive --
to tape. For simplicity's sake, I was
If you use pax instead of tar, it can already use MVS datasets.
On Jan 21, 2008 4:05 PM, Paul Gilmartin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 14:48:23 -0600, McKown, John wrote:
-Original Message-
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jon Brock
Sent: Monday, January 21,
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 15:41:53 -0500, Jon Brock [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I am trying to write out a Unix System Services file -- a tar archive --
to tape. For simplicity's sake, I was planning on using IEBGENER, but
I'm a bit confused as to what file characteristics to use for this.
Anybody out
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:01:54 EST, Ed Finnell wrote:
Lots of possibilities. Based on same matrix as G6 guess it would logical to
make it a Zipper chip*? Wonder if we can firewire sysplexes together like the
XBoxeslots of possibilities
*That would be interlocking slide fastener for the
I did a major boob!
I was creating some LVM under Linux SLES 9 on a z/VM machine.
I ran the mkinitrd and zipl commands after updating the /etc/zipl.conf.
I incorrectly updated the dasd= entry in the zipl.conf file parameters
string.
It should have been dasd=100-106 but I set it to 101-106.
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 01/18/2008
at 01:03 PM, Shai Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I want to add a small feature which I call it virtual MF printer.
Why?
This will enable MVS user to print to MVS virtual printer any MVS file.
What's wrong with the support already in JES2 and JES3?
My
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on
01/18/2008
at 10:04 PM, shai hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
2. I think the printers are not like disks. They can not have complicate
CCWs,
Mah pitom! They most cedrtainly can.
3. I am sure that UCS and FCB are open to everyone, because user need to
know how he can
Craddock, Chris wrote:
As in horshoes? Yes. The ECB is one of the most widely used tools in
the system. As a serialization primitive it is just awful, but there's
no getting away from it now.
The ECB might not be perfect, but compared to what you have to put up with
on Unix where there are
On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 5:12 PM, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Paul Gilmartin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-snip-
Whose trademark is Firewire? (And how can one do a trademark search?)
http://www.uspto.gov/
Mark Post
--
For
What exactly is wrong with the ECB/WAIT/POST mechanism? I think it has
always worked great. It's got some pretty difficult limitations in cross
memory mode (but it still works!), but otherwise I'm not sure where you get
awful.
David Logan
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 01/18/2008
at 02:15 PM, Thomas Kern [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Okay, Then I will gladly be your z/VM sysprog. My experience on the 'dark
side' goes back to June 23, 1976 when I first logged onto a virtual
machine.
I'm a TSO bigot from way bac,, and I would *NEVER* refer
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 01/13/2008
at 06:38 PM, Edward Jaffe [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Perhaps worthy of a poll question. But, I suspect most service orders
don't include superseded maintenance. Certainly, that's my preference.
And if a PE shows up for the superseding PTF? I'd prefer to get
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
Are we losing our hosting? If not, why discuss options for a new host?
I've heard nothing about UA dropping us. Yes, Darren has retired, but he's
still willing to put in time for the list. If there is a need to move,
it's his opinions that
I have found that my company (before downsizing me) was totally
confused with the EC/BC determinations.
I wish IBM would try to simplify their offerings.
I've dealt with their marketting cr*p for 27 years, and I find
their distintions only make sense to IBM sales.
Ted, what are the confusing
Warning: kind of a long-ish reply coming up;
What exactly is wrong with the ECB/WAIT/POST mechanism? I think it has
always worked great. It's got some pretty difficult limitations in
cross
memory mode (but it still works!), but otherwise I'm not sure where
you
get awful.
Yeah, it works FSVO
HI,
Yes, I understand that virtual printers is not needed in the MF
environment.
Thanks,
Shai
On 1/21/08, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 01/18/2008
at 01:03 PM, Shai Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I want to add a small feature which I call
At 1:38 PM -0600 on 1/21/08, Paul Gilmartin wrote about Re: How does
ATTACH pass address of ECB to child?:
When the mother needs the daughter's assistance, it WAITs on the
second ECB, clears it, and POSTS the first.
ONLY IF the mother task has nothing else it can do while it is
waiting for
57 matches
Mail list logo
