On Fri, 2010-08-20 at 16:01 -0700, Norman Hollander on DesertWiz wrote:
> I seem to remember all 80 was available after 1.11.
> Although why you would ever want to do that, and give up
> all those MIPS to the MP effect, is beyond me...
Wot like LSPR says ...
701 - 150 MSUs
780 - 6140 MSUs
I'll
I didn't have to check the Technical Guide; but I seem to remember all 80
was
available after 1.11. Although why you would ever want to do that, and give
up
all those MIPS to the MP effect, is beyond me...
zNorman
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@ba
From the PR/SM Planning Guide (SB-7155)
Maximum number of central processors
The maximum number of CPs that can be defined depends on:
v The number of CPs that are available.
The maximum number of logical CPs available for definition in a single LP
is the
total number of CPs achievable via con
On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 13:31:30 -0600, Steve Comstock
wrote:
>Mark Zelden wrote:
>> On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 12:51:42 -0600, Steve Comstock
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Now that the z196 provides us with a CEC with up to 80
>>> processors, and since a Parallel Sysplex can include
>>> up to 32 systems, does that mea
My bad.
I forgot the 64 CP limit per LPAR when I responded.
Sorry.
But, I'm still curious about the largest SYSPLEX out there.
-
I'm a SuperHero with neither powers, nor motivation!
Kimota!
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff /
Mark Zelden wrote:
On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 12:51:42 -0600, Steve Comstock
wrote:
Now that the z196 provides us with a CEC with up to 80
processors, and since a Parallel Sysplex can include
up to 32 systems, does that mean that Parallel Sysplex
now supports 32 x 80 = 2560 active CPs, or are we stil
On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 12:51:42 -0600, Steve Comstock
wrote:
>Now that the z196 provides us with a CEC with up to 80
>processors, and since a Parallel Sysplex can include
>up to 32 systems, does that mean that Parallel Sysplex
>now supports 32 x 80 = 2560 active CPs, or are we still
>software bound
>Parallel Sysplex can include
up to 32 systems, does that mean that Parallel Sysplex
now supports 32 x 80 = 2560 active CPs, or are we still
software bound to 2048 CPs per Parallel Sysplex?
Does anybody need that many, yet?
I'd love to know (academic interest) how big (CP's) the largest SYSPLEX i
Now that the z196 provides us with a CEC with up to 80
processors, and since a Parallel Sysplex can include
up to 32 systems, does that mean that Parallel Sysplex
now supports 32 x 80 = 2560 active CPs, or are we still
software bound to 2048 CPs per Parallel Sysplex?
--
Kind regards,
-Steve Co
>should be a very short interval indeed, one of some few hours, not one of days
>or weeks.
In your dreams!
We've been lucky to get one IPL of one LPAR a month.
>Toleration schemes, which attempt to make the non-incidental compresence of
>two versions of some component in the same MAS possibl
Domenic
The sample code should be in SYS1.SHASSAMP probably a member name like HASX
Lizette
"Cifani, Domenic Wrote >Hello
>
> I looking for the IBM source code for the following exits, 2, 46 and 47. I
> need to add the following code change, can someone assist with the location
> and how
>In my judgment anyway, the presence of even two and certainly of three
>different levels of JES2 in the same MAS is 1) avoidable and 2) desirably
>avoided without compromising 24/7 availability, etc., etc.
I disagree.
Especially in a large shop, with multiple LPARS in the same SYSPLEX/MAS.
You
Hello
I looking for the IBM source code for the following exits, 2, 46 and 47. I
need to add the following code change, can someone assist with the location and
how to add this logic?
o Installs JES2 Exits 2, 46 and 47 plus User Control Blocks $NJHI and $JCT
o During Jobcard vali
Tom Marchant wrote:
> Thanks for the clarification, John. When I read your previous comment:
>> the presence of even two and certainly of three different
>> levels of JES2 in the same MAS is 1) avoidable and 2) desirably
>> avoided without compromising 24/7 availability
> I took that as meani
Thank you Lizette
I found them for some reason I forgot all about that library, it's been
awhile Does anyone know how to add the logic to perform that function
listed below:
Installs JES2 Exits 2, 46 and 47 plus User Control Blocks $NJHI and $JCT
During Jobcard validation at
Yes, I would agree.
>>> Joe D'Alessandro 8/20/2010 11:54 AM >>>
I recall MVSCP coming into usage with MVS/SP 2.2.0 .
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the
I recall MVSCP coming into usage with MVS/SP 2.2.0 .
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.e
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of John P Kalinich
>
> -jc- of the IBM Mainframe Discussion List wrote
on
> 08/20/2010 08:39:17 AM:
>
> > Here's a weird one for you:
> >
> > We recently upgraded two LPARs from z/OS 1.9 to z/OS 1.11. One of
those
> >
On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 14:57:40 +, john gilmore wrote:
>Moreover, conceding its necessity, a set of rolling IPLs in
>which version i and version i + 1 of JES2 or whatever are very
>briefly compresent in a MAS is not at all the same thing as
>their extended concurrent use in that MAS.
Thanks f
I agree that further discussion would be unproductive.
That said, my last post emphasized the importance of sandbox-testing regimes.
It did not deprecate them, and I an interpretation of what I wrote as
deprecation would be hard to come by on the principles of English syntax.
Moreover, conc
On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 08:39:17 -0500, Chase, John wrote:
>Here's a weird one for you:
>
>We recently upgraded two LPARs from z/OS 1.9 to z/OS 1.11. One of those
>LPARs is our "sandbox", which is pretty well "crippled" (one CPU, 3GiB
>central storage, on a z9-BC). My "standard" tn3270 emulation is
On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 13:35:15 +, john gilmore wrote:
>Mark Zelden wrote:
>
>
>Huh? 3 levels are supported and have been. At least for a short time before
the older one goes unsupported (or if you pay for one of the extended
support offerings). How would one ever get a new release into product
On Fri, 2010-08-20 at 08:51 -0500, Staller, Allan wrote:
> You might also try this query on the TCP/IP list. Chris Mason, the font
> of all Comm Server knowledge usually hangs out over there.
Been known to contribute several discourses here as well. I'm sure he'll
contribute should he feel he has
-jc- of the IBM Mainframe Discussion List wrote on
08/20/2010 08:39:17 AM:
> Here's a weird one for you:
>
> We recently upgraded two LPARs from z/OS 1.9 to z/OS 1.11. One of those
> LPARs is our "sandbox", which is pretty well "crippled" (one CPU, 3GiB
> central storage, on a z9-BC). My "stand
TCP/IP default's?
TN/3270 defaults?
Unformatted Systems Services?
DLOGMODE in VTAM?
SDSF bug?
Does the 62x160 display work for other than SDSF?
You might also try this query on the TCP/IP list. Chris Mason, the font
of all Comm Server knowledge usually hangs out over there.
HTH,
We recently u
>In my judgment anyway, the presence of even two and certainly of three
>different levels of >JES2 in the same MAS is 1) avoidable and 2) desirably
>avoided without compromising 24/7 >availability, etc., etc.
I would prefer to run all JES's at the same level, but agree with Mark that
unless one
One way round the 'esoterics' problem for catalog entries is to implement a
system managed MTL. All your tape volume mountable on the tape drives in
your MTL would be in the TCDB, and those entries, rather than the catalog
device type would be used for allocation.
MTL implementation does require a
Mark Zelden wrote:
Huh? 3 levels are supported and have been. At least for a short time before the
older one goes unsupported (or if you pay for one of the extended support
offerings). How would one ever get a new release into production via rolling
IPLs if it weren't (ever hear of parallel s
Here's a weird one for you:
We recently upgraded two LPARs from z/OS 1.9 to z/OS 1.11. One of those
LPARs is our "sandbox", which is pretty well "crippled" (one CPU, 3GiB
central storage, on a z9-BC). My "standard" tn3270 emulation is the
3290 screen size (62x160), and I specify LOGMODE(D4C32XX3
Greg,
All the answers so far have mainly focused on the IOCDS and hardware.
Your other concern is with the order of the esoteric. I do not know of
any way of discovering the original order (there may be one). But, even if an
esoteric was used for the UNIT, if the dataset was cat
Hi Folks,
CBT Tape File 830 contains 926 articles (with their code, as an
EBCDIC pds) from Xephon's MVS Update magazines, ranging from July 1987
thru December 1996. The material covered is very wide-ranging, and it
is very possible to search for coding examples there. Xephon does not
pu
One thing to be aware of is that this will stop you from making changes
dynamically.
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 8:22 AM, Craig Pace wrote:
> Greg,
>
> The IODF has two parts, the "Hardware" and the "Software". The hardware
> part of the IODF (IOCDS) is what is known to the CPC, what LPAR, if an
Greg,
The IODF has two parts, the "Hardware" and the "Software". The hardware
part of the IODF (IOCDS) is what is known to the CPC, what LPAR, if any,
has access, etc. The software part of the IODF is what is defined and IPL
at the LPAR or system level. This is where each I/O device is defin
I will be out of the office starting 08/19/2010 and will not return until
08/23/2010.
I will be out of the office until 7/19. If you need assistance prior to
then please contact Ryan Evans at 216-471-2669.
This communication may contain privileged and/or confidential information. It
is intende
On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 02:13:54 +, john gilmore wrote:
>
>Downward/backward compatibility does not preclude the the elimination of
>objectionable requirements. I have not put a continuation character in column
>72 of a continued-from JCL-statement card image since before some of you were
>born
35 matches
Mail list logo
