How do you know it was "EXAGGERATED using FEAR for profit purposes"?
Exaggerated by whom? Perhaps the executives at your former employer were
risk-adverse, or saw senior management's attention to Y2K as a chance to
implement worthwhile equipment upgrades.
Home PCs are different from corporate P
Hi Linda,
Yes, my point was, that it was EXAGGERATED using FEAR for profit purposes.
There was no need to upgrade all the
Mainframes/Desktops/Servers/Operating systems etc.
The place I worked at, spent 16 Million Dollars, on upgrading all the
PC's in the Organization and each PC received a Y
Hi Charles,
Right you are. For my senior project (1979), I personally wrote some very
non-Y2K compliant COBOL code. It was a major enhancement to a payroll system
for a city that was running a Burroughs 1800 at the time. They were so short
on memory that everthing else had to be shut do
Automation software and loops. Not quite on the topic, but I remember when
some Brainiac implemented automated responses to IEF238D and IEF433D. We
lost almost 25% of a 400E while Net/Master replied WAIT and then NOHOLD as
fast as it could...
Yes, waiting is far more efficient.
>
> A loop of thi
On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 15:09 -0400, Mark Zelden wrote:
> I think you are referring to VVDS mode sharing. If you have the catalog
> in ECS mode, the above isn't true.
>
> As an aside, it's a little difficult to avoid sharing catalogs between systems
> these days. :-)
My notes were from a prese
On Mon, 17 May 2010 12:46:42 -0400, David Andrews wrote:
>
>Eileen McClintock has done a presentation at SHARE about catalog tuning.
>See if you can find it. She recommended (in 2007), among other things:
>
> - Shared catalog volumes kill you. Don't have
> multiple catalogs on the
On Mon, 17 May 2010 09:38:27 -0500, Roland Schiradin
wrote:
>Tom,
>
>z/OS contains a cblock IPST pointed by ECVTIPST.
>
>This cblock contains information about the IPL time for various steps.
>SHOWzOS display the data and there is also a IPCS command
>but can't remember the name.
>
>Roland
IPLD
On Mon, 17 May 2010 16:59:54 +0100, Nick Varley
wrote:
> (snip)
>
>Anyway, if you want a simple SLEEP program, I can mail you one (it's in
>Assembler and is free, with NO support offered under any circumstances)
>
Note that z/OS includes a ready-to-use "SLEEP program".
A few lines extracted fr
There was a feature for AUTOTUNING but back in 2008 IBM recommended
turning it off (OA20748).
I'm not sure if the issues were ever resolved but OA25072 09/2009 turns
it off and disables enabling it.
F CATALOG,REPORT,CATSTATS should show what is currently in use.
-Original Message-
John
> considerations with regard to the following catalog
> performance options beyond the defaults
Eileen McClintock has done a presentation at SHARE about catalog tuning.
See if you can find it. She recommended (in 2007), among other things:
- Don't use anything larger than 8K CI size; th
Hi,
Just wondering if anyone had to to any of the previous seminars?
Was it worthwhile?
Kind Regards,
Mark
Negotiating mainframe software and hardware contracts
Arcati¹s annual seminar on mainframe pricing and contract negotiation takes
place on 28th June 2010 at the Premier Inn Touchbase
Hi Matan,
With regard to your post on this subject which included:
RC = TIME(R)
SECS = 1800 /* 1800 second you want them to pass */
DO FOREVER
N = TIME(E)/*get the time in second which was pass */
IF N >= SECS THEN LEAVE
END
As Dustin Hoffman said in "Hook", bad form.
Whilst DO
"Sleeping" is a lot less hard on your processor, in my opinion...your
code will spin an entire CPU won't it...? It will be checking as fast
as the processor will let it what the elapsed time is since resetting
the Rexx timer.
I saw this done about 10 years ago when a company moved from an 8-way
A
We are currently reviewing all of the ICF catalog definitions in our shop. All
of our catalogs are ECS defined.
Any best pratice or considerations with regard to the following catalog
performance options beyond the defaults when these are not specified?
STRNO
BUFND
BUFNI
FREESPACE
RECORDSIZE
On Mon, 17 May 2010 17:57:55 +0300, Matan Cohen wrote:
>i think the best way to accomplish that is to perfom the check of 30 minute
>in the rexx (in case you don't want it to go to sleep)
>if your rexx performing somthing in this 30 minutes you should add a check
>in it of the time like this:
>
>
Dazzo, Matt wrote:
We are running z1.9 and I'm getting ready to pull RSU maint for the next
maintenance cycle. There is also a possibility that we will upgrade our box
from z890 to a z10BC with a ZIIP in the not too distant future. Is there any
harm at this time in pulling and applying the P
i think the best way to accomplish that is to perfom the check of 30 minute
in the rexx (in case you don't want it to go to sleep)
if your rexx performing somthing in this 30 minutes you should add a check
in it of the time like this:
RC = TIME(R)
SECS = 1800 /* 1800 second you want them to p
Tom,
z/OS contains a cblock IPST pointed by ECVTIPST.
This cblock contains information about the IPL time for various steps.
SHOWzOS display the data and there is also a IPCS command
but can't remember the name.
Roland
>Timothy,
>
>I saw your post talking about having an A01 warm standby w
Tom, if you're running as a guest under z/vm, which some D/R vendors do,
then you could cap it with a set share xxx absolute limithard. You didn't say
if
this was your box or a D/R Vendor box.
If there's no z/VM, then LPAR weights is what you have to work with.
I would definitely check out t
We are running z1.9 and I'm getting ready to pull RSU maint for the next
maintenance cycle. There is also a possibility that we will upgrade our box
from z890 to a z10BC with a ZIIP in the not too distant future. Is there any
harm at this time in pulling and applying the PTF's for the ZIIP whi
On Mon, 17 May 2010 07:41:33 -0500, Kelman, Tom
wrote:
>I saw your post talking about having an A01 warm standby with Z03 CBU.
Tom,
Thats the setup we are using: z9BC A01 at an alternate site. FWIW, our
most recent IPLs of z/OS 1.11 on that machine took approxmiately 7 minutes
from start t
charl...@mcn.org (Charles Mills) writes:
> Um ... the Y2K "thingie" was real. Without the efforts of a lot of the
> people on this list data processing as we know it WOULD have come to an end.
Y2K remediation also contributed heavily to outsourcing uptik. Y2K
remediation was competing for resource
Timothy,
I saw your post talking about having an A01 warm standby with Z03 CBU.
That's similar to what my management is thinking, but without the warm
standby. We have EMC storage and it we do synchronous mirroring from
our main site to our DR site. Since that is all done via the EMC
control uni
Question answered off-list. - support.ca.com
Thank You,
Dave O'Brien
NIH Contractor
From: O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C]
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2010 7:05 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: CA.COM Server error?
Is anybody else having a problem with CA su
Is anybody else having a problem with CA support this morning?
Last week CA.com brought up the CA site now I get
Server Error in '/' Application.
Runtime Error
Description: An application error occurred on the serv
I will be out of the office starting 05/15/2010 and will not return until
05/24/2010.
I am out of the office and will have limited access to emails or
cell-phone calls during this time If you have an emergency, please call
the Hot Line on 1-800-510-3004 or contact don.brat...@mainline.com for
se
26 matches
Mail list logo
