shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net (Shmuel Metz , Seymour J.) writes:
> It was 16 ;-)
>
> At the time, IBM was shipping 2-way[1] MP systems. I don't know
> whether the limit was still 16 by the time MVS/XA came out. I'd be
> willing to be that both 64 and whatever number replaces it will be
> lifted inte
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Frank Swarbrick
Sent: Friday, May 21, 2010 7:44 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Getting "BIND/LINK" date out of load module members
In VSE I can do this:
// EXEC LIBR
LISTD SUBLIB=U
In <4bf72750.5010...@ync.net>, on 05/21/2010
at 07:37 PM, Rick Fochtman said:
>IIRC, the lked IDENTIFY statement was close to, if not after, the
>demise of OS/360.
It was present in OS/360. I vaguely recall that it may have been added
around Release 20.
>IDENTIFY statements are used by ALL
In , on 05/21/2010
at 07:46 AM, Paul Gilmartin said:
>The clean way forward was devised by [I]SPF some time ago in the
>SPFEDIT ENQ.
No.
>I believe it assures data integrity;
It doesn't.
>NFS server and FTP server (others?)
>use the technique to cooperate with ISPF.
K3wl. What if it isn'
In , on 05/21/2010
at 03:10 PM, Paul Gilmartin said:
>POSIX rename() has some properties remarkably suited to this purpose:
And some not so suited.
>o rename() is atomic.
FSVO atomic. The old name does not go away immediately if someone else
is using the file. That's often what you want, b
In <4bf6d4bc.6f0f.008...@efirstbank.com>, on 05/21/2010
at 06:44 PM, Frank Swarbrick said:
>I am not interested in it being in the load module (or program
>object), though that may be useful for things other than what I am
>specifically concerned about.
Then you have not accurately described
In , on 05/21/2010
at 03:10 PM, Binyamin Dissen said:
>So it was smart enough to know that it needed 3 digits for the end
>part of the year, but then it concatenated the string '19' in front?
No, it was dumb enough to ignore a standard that said that they year
in a Posix timestamp was an *off
In , on
05/19/2010
at 10:50 AM, zMan said:
>ISTR that both z/VM and z/OS had limits on the number of CPUs they
>could address, though I thought it was 32,
It was 16 ;-)
At the time, IBM was shipping 2-way[1] MP systems. I don't know
whether the limit was still 16 by the time MVS/XA came out.
In <4bf7df8b.6f0f.008...@efirstbank.com>, on 05/22/2010
at 01:42 PM, Frank Swarbrick said:
>Anyway, as far as I know, these are the only two methods of placing a
>member in a VSE library.
Don't they apply only to a CIL?
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position;
In <1274405791.3591.20.ca...@mckown5.johnmckown.net>, on 05/20/2010
at 08:36 PM, John McKown said:
>(ANSI --> antsy, just in case it is just too weird for some). I know,
>if I have to explain it, it isn't really funny.
And when it isn't true it also isn't funny. ANSI isn't ANSI and
ISO-8859-1
On Sun, 23 May 2010 08:51:15 -0500, Arthur Gutowski wrote:
>On Sun, 23 May 2010 15:12:44 +1000, Shane Ginnane m...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
>
>>In the unlikely event a filesystem is unmounted uncleanly *AND* the
>>subsequent mount is changed from R/W to R/O, the
>>decision not to run the journal should
>From the manual:
Specifying Whether to Back Up Only Changed Data Sets -
When DFSMShsm is first installed, you might have many data sets on your volumes
with the data-set-changed indicator in the data set VTOC entry off (such as
data sets for which the bit has been turned off by some other prog
On Sun, 23 May 2010 15:12:44 +1000, Shane Ginnane wrote:
>In the unlikely event a filesystem is unmounted uncleanly *AND* the
>subsequent mount is changed from R/W to R/O, the
>decision not to run the journal should be the customers.
Has anyone out there quantified the so-called performance ben
13 matches
Mail list logo
