A bit late on this maybe but:
Determine the SU per second of your machine
You can get this with the following REXX code
CVT = STORAGE(10,4)
RMCT = STORAGE(D2X(C2D(CVT)+604),4)
SU = STORAGE(D2X(C2D(RMCT)+64),4)
SU = 1600/C2D(SU)
Hi Group! I need to implement GCL for two LPARS in a Sysplex on a single
footprint z9.
The two LPARs are Production (P) and TEST (T). The P LPAR should always be
able to use spare capacity from the T LPAR but not vice versa.
>From my research, I can achieve this by soft-capping the T LPAR at it
Thanks a lot for the considered reply. Thsoe book references are also welcome
as I couldn't find much on redbooks or the Internet in general
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists..
On Jan 26, 6:38 pm, a...@sherkow.com (Al Sherkow) wrote:
> Answer cross-posted to LPAR-PRICING-L and IBM-MAIN
> As I understand your question you want LPAR P to use the excess capacity
of
> LPAR T but not vice versa.
> Does this have anything to do with Software Pricing??
My understan
On Jan 27, 4:48 pm, allan.stal...@kbm1.com (Staller, Allan) wrote:
> It seems to me that ordinary LPAR weights will do the trick. They will
> allow excess capacity to be used by any/all LPARs, but enforce a max
> proportional to the LPAR weight when the CEC reaches full utilization.
> Set the
n Jan 27, 5:00 pm, a...@sherkow.com (Al Sherkow) wrote:
> I did not see any mention in this thread of more than two LPARs, or "many
> LPARs and many different customers on the Processor complex", or that you
> were using softcapping on any LPAR "LPAR P typically gets soft-capped
about
> midd
>Greg is correct, that SCRT reports the maximum simultaneous 4HRA for each
>product. That the LPARs have individual peaks at separate times during the
>month is not an issue.
>
>I also agree with Hal that soft capping and group capping are more business
>related than technical related. (I have a f
Fine Bob,
GCL is a feature provided by IBM. I am trying to found out what its
implications are, as the detail available out there is a bit sketchy. I would
have loved some feedback from the IBMers as to all the potential benefits.
Is this not what this group is about?
Errol,
Pardon me for ju
Errol,
>The best source for "detailed,specific information" about GCL is IBM, not IBM-
>Main nor LPAR-Pricing. If you've noticed, not one person replying to this
>thread was an IBMer. Your local IBM software pricer should be able to get
>you all the answers you need that aren't covered in the S
Hi group! I am trying to gen some CTC connections on FICON for three LPARs
on a single machine. All the existing ESCON channels are full up, so I am
trying
to gen the CTCs using FICON without going through a switch (no cabling
requirements).
I am using a channel with CUs 4020 4030 and 4040 on
Hi I replied yesterday on the Google group forum for IBMMAIN but saw no
posting when reading the Listserv postings today
What I have to say is if the VSAM is definitely uncataloged then the following
will work
) Run an IEHLIST LISTVTOC of the volume on which the VSAm DS resides
2) Check that t
has anyone noticed a trend in IBMs strategy in shifting the focus of the
mainframe to very large users such as outsourcers etc? I am talking about
features such as IRD, group capacity limits, and sysplex aggregation pricing
benefits. Could they be bolstering though outsourcing wing for the futur
My reason for saying what I did is that outsourcers can offer major price
benefits to a company (ABC) running it's own system by bringing ABC on board
it's huge Processing complex and then (if needed) aggragating the sysplex
MSUs together and thus reducing the licence fees of ABC (as well as its
Does anyone out there know whether two LPARS in A capacity group, would
steal resource from each other first, or form "white space" if it were
available?
Let's assume LPAR Prod = 200 MIPS LPAR Dev =100 mips. There is white space
available of 100 MIPS.
Prod reaches 100% and starts sneaking above
Thanks Rick and Chris.
maybe I should rather look at a networking solution such as Enterprise
Extender on APPN to avoid the CTCs for LPAR to LPAR communication
altogether. Messing around with duplicate addresses on unattached LPARs on
HCD is probably too risky.
Thanks again
Errol
--
Hi List. has anyone recently written an ADRUIXIT exit to set the default tape
blocksize to 32760 for ADRDSSU (instead of 65520). My assembler is a bit rusty
but I think it would look this
ADRUIXIT CSECT
ADRUIXIT AMODE 31
Hi John! We thought that the default tape BLKSIZE has been changed to 65k
from 32k in zOS 1.4. Our DR site which has an older zOS can not read the 65k
BLKSIZE tapes. We want to write the tapes at 32K.
My latest research into the problem shows that APAR OA13742 changed the
way the output tape is
On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 07:15:28 -0700, Andrew N Wilt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Hello Errol,
> I hope this can allay your fears. The default tape blocksize of 64k
>was done in 1988 in APAR PL18193. Your DR site should be able to read
>DFSMSdss dump tapes with that block size. What OA13742 did w
Hi List. Does anyone know whether or not the z/OS 1.8 new feature which
enables a group of LPARs to be managed at a defined capacity, would require
the elligable LPARs to all be in the same Sysplex, or not
--
For IBM-MAIN subscr
I was kinda hoping it would not require all the LPARs to be in the same
Sysplex, as that can be achieved by a combination of soft capping and IRD
(same Sysplex) now anyway.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access in
Hi List. Does anybody have a utility or know how to recreate a deleted dataset
(possibly by using the VTOC entry) Our storage administrator accidently
deleted all the SMF dumped data from a system and it has major SCRT
implications for workload usage.
---
21 matches
Mail list logo
