I will be out of the office starting 11/22/2010 and will not return until
11/29/2010.
I will respond to your communication when I return.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@
Chris
> I think you have missed the point I was making about the WTO interface. I
do NOT advocate ditching formal interfaces in general.
Well, you thought wrong!
It's very clear to me and I would expect to the vast majority of readers that
what I said
>> I feel prompted to suggest a step furt
Mike,
I took your advice and set the MANAGEMENT CLASS AUTO BACKUP=Y.
As a test I created a new dsn using the same HLQ's and Management Class. I
tried the MIGRATE command via batch (using wild cards) it went to ML1 instead
of ML2 which was NOT happening before I changed the AUTO BACKUP from
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 04:38:37 -0600, Chris Mason wrote:
>
Sheesh! Talk about trolling for a religious argument. Well,
I won't bite.
I haven't coded a WTO lately. IIRC (much of) the cruft mentioned
arises from the unforgivable misdesign of placing options after a
variable-length text argument.
Does anybody know of an online and FREE training course for IBM's TWS
for z/OS? I've installed it before, but I have no experience in setting up
schedules. Thanks in advance.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive acces
Richard;
For a nominal fee, we can assist. SFI has several TWS experts...
Marc
heiml...@streamfoundry.com
--Original Message--
From: Richard Pinion
Sender: IBM-MAIN
To: IBM-MAIN
ReplyTo: IBM-MAIN
Subject: TWS/OPC training
Sent: Nov 22, 2010 9:18 AM
Does anybody know of an online and
Trying to create an ETR. Fill in the usual stuff and get this:
An error has occurred:
* The Comments field is not valid.
WHAT??? There is NO "comments field" visible anywhere!
WTF is going on with this POS now??
-
On 21 Nov 2010 17:42:19 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 22:42:10 -0800, Edward Jaffe
> wrote:
>
>>
>>According to the SHARE requirements data base, this requirement was
>submitted
>>nearly 18 years ago in March 1993. See what you can do...
>>
>
>Ed,
>
>The bigges
Hi Richard,
You may check the following links below as well in addition to online
redbooks and session documents which you may find when you do google them.In
general they have usefull resources in these websites These groups are
preparing "Ask the experts" webinars. They are organized a
I need to modify an ETR - getting same thing.
Larry
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Chase, John
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 7:51 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: IBMLink f*ed up again??
Trying to create an ETR. Fi
Phoned in and IBMLink support opened PMR #41831,122,000 on it.
-jc-
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Larry Dinwiddie
> Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 9:18 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
> Subject: Re: IBMLink f*ed u
After you have coded, assembled and linked your model(s).
Place the loadlib to where you linked it into the STEPLIB concatenation if you
have the ability or, as others have already stated, place use TSOLIB to
allocate it to your TSO session prior to invoking ISPF/PDF and subsequently
IPCS.
Once
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 10:57:34 -0400, Clark Morris wrote:
>>
>>The biggest challenge is likely to be the limited resource in TSO (the IKJ
>>component), but I'll see what I can do... It certainly wouldn't hurt to
>>resubmit
>>it as part of the SHARE requirements clean-up.
>>
>>W. Kevin Kelley -- IBM
Greetings all,
November Fixpack #5 went in this weekend on the site, according to earlier
IBMLINK posting. The site was down on Sunday around 02:00 EST when I tried
to open an ETR. Had to do it via 1.800.IBMSERV.
Regards,
Jihad K. Kawkabani
IT Systems Engineer Consultant
Voice: 440.395.0740
Networ
Hear, hear.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 6:08 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Potential heresy regarding E and L macros etc. (Was: WTO ABEND
D23 help)
On Mo
IBM has VTFM (which is diligent/copycross, etc). Why do we need this product
or use this product while we can directly intercept and direct
allocations to a particular storage group (such TMMGROUP) with disk volumes,
let's say a dedicated set aside pool from a storage device? With extended
datacla
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 04:38:37 -0600, Chris Mason wrote:
>
>Is there any impact whatsoever in having or in not having the macro in the
>source code on the reliability of the generated logic?:
>
>Of course not - but it's here that the timorous might allow themselves to be
>influenced by the FUD facto
Hello all,
a customer of ours has received a z/OS 1.12 Serverpac on two 3590 cartridges.
Cleverly, he does not possess such drives, only 3490 units.
Any ideas on how I copy the two 3590 volumes to 3490 output cartridges.
TIA
Andre
PS Cross-posted to the VM list Server
Paul Gilmartin writes:
I haven't coded a WTO lately. IIRC (much of) the cruft mentioned arises from
the unforgivable misdesign of placing options after a variable-length text
argument. It would have been so easy to do it right.
If this means what it appears to mean it reflects 'radical' ign
I think they should re-order for electronic delivery.
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 12:25 PM, Andre Massena
wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> a customer of ours has received a z/OS 1.12 Serverpac on two 3590
> cartridges.
>
>
> Cleverly, he does not possess such drives, only 3490 units.
>
>
> Any ideas on how I
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 18:25:38 +0100, Andre Massena wrote:
>
>a customer of ours has received a z/OS 1.12 Serverpac on two 3590 cartridges.
>
>Cleverly, he does not possess such drives, only 3490 units.
>
>Any ideas on how I copy the two 3590 volumes to 3490 output cartridges.
>
Alternative: re-orde
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 17:44:00 +, john gilmore wrote:
>
>
>I haven't coded a WTO lately. IIRC (much of) the cruft mentioned arises from
>the unforgivable misdesign of placing options after a variable-length text
>argument. It would have been so easy to do it right.
>
>
>If this means what it ap
Still not fixed..
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Jihad K Kawkabani <
jihad_k_kawkab...@progressive.com> wrote:
> Greetings all,
> November Fixpack #5 went in this weekend on the site, according to earlier
> IBMLINK posting. The site was down on Sunday around 02:00 EST when I tried
> to ope
W dniu 2010-11-22 17:30, techie well wisher pisze:
IBM has VTFM (which is diligent/copycross, etc). Why do we need this product
or use this product while we can directly intercept and direct
allocations to a particular storage group (such TMMGROUP) with disk volumes,
let's say a dedicated set asi
W dniu 2010-11-22 18:25, Andre Massena pisze:
Hello all,
a customer of ours has received a z/OS 1.12 Serverpac on two 3590 cartridges.
Cleverly, he does not possess such drives, only 3490 units.
Any ideas on how I copy the two 3590 volumes to 3490 output cartridges.
Don't go there! ServerP
On 11/22/2010 9:58 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
No, no, no! I was referring not to the syntax of the macro instruction,
but to the generated argument list to the SVC, which places options after
the variable-length text string, requiring convolutions to supply a
text string of unpredictable length i
Ed Gould wrote:
>He (president) did not have a clue what IEFBR14 really did.
Surrprize!;-D 8-D
> I was ordered to write a follow up memo explaining what it did.
Groan. You did that under some serious threat?
>Trying to dumb down (to the executive level) a memo explaining IE
Thank you all for your helpful response(s).
It would seem the customer will have to reorder and request the ServerPac in
electronic delivery format.
If they (IBM) have hard-coded the volume id's and file sequence numbers then
I had better leave things at that.
Silly me, I thought DITTO could do
Can you do a CL64'initial text' for the definition and have the
execute definition overlay the initial text as needed?
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 12:16 PM, Edward Jaffe
wrote:
> On 11/22/2010 9:58 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>>
>> No, no, no! I was referring not to the syntax of the macro instruction
The only time I've messed with IPCSPARM was to get previous versions of
CICS verbexits to work. For mapping structures, I just link into steplib
and it works just fine:
ASID(X'0249') ADDRESS(D0C0.) STORAGE
Command ===> ip cbf x model(sgcbm)
Andre,
Is it still possible to order on 3490 cartridges? It seems to me that you
can't order on that medium anymore, but I can't remember for sure. If you can,
you could just reorder it on 3490s.
--
Eric Bielefeld
Systems Programmer
Andre Massena wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> a customer o
Eric,
afraid not. Since the middle of October, it is bye bye to "old" media i.e.
3480 / 3490's etc.
I would have have preferred the customer to have ordered the ServerPac with
Internet Delivery. The customer is however a government agency and there is
gnashing of teeth and all sorts of politics
http://www.comco-inc.com/ibm-3590-h11-p29968.html
Advertising a 3592 (700GB) for 5,700, so a used 3590 (60GB) should be
much cheaper, but not quoted.
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Andre Massena
wrote:
> Eric,
>
> afraid not. Since the middle of October, it is bye bye to "old" media i.e.
> 348
In a message dated 11/22/2010 1:37:00 P.M. Central Standard Time,
andre_mass...@lavache.com writes:
I think he will have no choice but for Electronic Delivery or DVD.
>>
Might take the hint they need to upgrade tape hardware.
---
Not a valid assumption.
I have real 3490s to handle vendor tapes coming in, of which there are
fewer and fewer.
My "real" tape environment is fully virtualized. I could emulate a 3590
tape, but I could never read a real one.
Thanks
Bill Bishop
Specialist
Mainframe Support Group
Server Devel
What is not a valid assumption??
En réponse à William Bishop :
> -- Début du message d'origine
>
> Not a valid assumption.
>
> I have real 3490s to handle vendor tapes coming in, of which
> there are
> fewer and fewer.
>
> My "real" tape environment is ful
Thanks Marc, but this is something that I need to do. Hope all is well
with you and your company.
Richard, Vickie, and Randy Pinion
--- heiml...@streamfoundry.com wrote:
From: Marc Heimlich
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: TWS/OPC training
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 14:26:16 +
Ri
It seems this problem is going on a long time. Has anyone contacted IBM to see
what is going on?
Lizette
>
>Trying to create an ETR. Fill in the usual stuff and get this:
>
>
>
>An error has occurred:
>
>* The Comments field is not valid.
>
>WHAT??? There is NO "comments field" visible
FWIW, I was able to create an ETR by only entering minimal information in the
"Text" box - one sentence, as a matter of fact. I had tried several times to
cut-n-paste messages from the batch job, and enter some explanatory messages,
but kept getting the "comments field error" message when I tri
Just tried again. Appears to be working now.
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Greg Shirey wrote:
> FWIW, I was able to create an ETR by only entering minimal information in
> the "Text" box - one sentence, as a matter of fact. I had tried several
> times to cut-n-paste messages from the batch
IRTNOG. (Google it.)
-jc-
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
> Of Greg Shirey
> Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 2:45 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
> Subject: Re: IBMLink f*ed up again??
>
> FWIW, I was able to create a
On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 17:40:10, Mark Zelden asked:
>... What's wrong with this:
>
>FDR:
>
[...useful JCL removed for brevity...]
>
>DFSMSdss:
>
[...useful JCL removed for brevity...]
>
>BTW, for the other thread I saw start... this is a DFDSS logical dump. :-)
If you're weird, like us, is that
On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 15:53:29 -0800, Guy Gardoit
wrote:
>[...] I just do full volume copies of the staging resvols to the
>alternates and then do a series of IDCAMS commands to "rename" the staging
>$VERSION ROOT file to one with the first resvol as the last qualifier.
>Works simply and very well
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 12:39:58 -0600, Mike Schwab wrote:
>Can you do a CL64'initial text' for the definition and have the
>execute definition overlay the initial text as needed?
>
IIRC, the problem arose because the ROUTCDE and DESC must follow
snugly the message of unknown length. Yes, I could fak
You can copy by tracks, but you need to use FDRDSF, IIRC.
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Arthur Gutowski wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 17:40:10, Mark Zelden asked:
>
> >... What's wrong with this:
> >
> >FDR:
> >
> [...useful JCL removed for brevity...]
> >
> >DFSMSdss:
> >
> [...useful JCL
I have developed a genuine liking for these tennis match posts regarding
topics I don't remotely understand. The use of the King's English has
become the entertainment aspect that I find particularly challenging and
amusing. I keep having to google words with which I will then amaze my
circle
Amen, brother. This ain't 1964.
--
zMan -- "I've got a mainframe and I'm not afraid to use it"
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN I
As it appears in my last post the line
TEXT=((,)[,(,)]...
lacks a terminal right parenthesis. It should be
TEXT=((,)[,(,)]...)
John Gilmore Ashland, MA 01721-1817 USA
--
For IBM
Others may well elect to find WTO difficult: chacun à son gout; but, as Edward
Jaffe hinted, the
TEXT=((,)[,(,)]...
keyword parameter obviates the historical difficulties that Paul Gilmartin has
mentioned so persistently. Addresses are all the same length, and an
additional level of indire
On 11/22/2010 1:07 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 12:16 PM, Edward Jaffe wrote:
Have you tried using the TEXT= keyword?
That should have worked. Was it available in days of yore?
Depends on your definition of "yore". I don't remember it from (for example) MVS
3.8 or whe
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 14:57:15 -0600, Arthur Gutowski wrote:
>On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 17:40:10, Mark Zelden asked:
>
>>... What's wrong with this:
>>
>>FDR:
>>
>[...useful JCL removed for brevity...]
>>
>>DFSMSdss:
>>
>[...useful JCL removed for brevity...]
>>
>>BTW, for the other thread I saw start
HATS is a complete and utter POS. Who at IBM thought this product is even
worth anything? Do they still have a job? No file transfer support, you
can't cut and paste anything other than a single line, the HOME key doesn't
work, the arrow keys don't work, you have to tab or backtab to every fi
Radoslaw,
Disclaimer: I am a TMM bigot, and I agree 110% (one hundred and ten percent)
with the OP.
>
> TMM is disk cache backed with real tapes.
[Ron Hawkins]
I don't quite agree with your definition. TMM can be, and often is migrated
and stacked onto to tape but the disk caching does not need
On 11/22/2010 8:57 PM, Pinnacle wrote:
HATS is a complete and utter POS. Who at IBM thought this product is even
worth anything? Do they still have a job? No file transfer support, you
can't cut and paste anything other than a single line, the HOME key doesn't
work, the arrow keys don't work
Mike Schwab pisze:
http://www.comco-inc.com/ibm-3590-h11-p29968.html
Advertising a 3592 (700GB) for 5,700, so a used 3590 (60GB) should be
much cheaper, but not quoted.
AFAIK the price for Jaguar is approx. 4-5k$, but you also need
controller. J70 with FICON cards can be really expensive.
MA
55 matches
Mail list logo
