Power 6 and other new hardware

Good evening (at least here in Europe). The German 'Computerwoche' has a couple of interesting articles this week. IBM announced the Power 6 processor. http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/21580.wss Hitachi announced the successor to the Tagmastor. Universal Storage Platform

Re: Virtual tape limits (Was: OEM software electronic download report card)

> >>> It's one reason to try to keep all your tapes virtual. > > >> It's a small trade off for simplifying the > >> management of the environment (which is very large) and guaranteeing > >> to the business that we will have all the tape data in a disaster. > > >Well, it's safe, convenient,

BRLM and GRS (from z/OS Hot Topics)

Thank you Birger for the link to the new z/OS Hot Topics newsletter. I have a question concerning the byte range lock manager article. After reading about the various evolutions of the BRLM (single environment, shared, recovery considerations within a sysplex), I was wondering why the lock

Re: Back Doors (was: EXCP with a DEB)

-- snip -- > The presence of bank vaults in the world means that there must also be > locksmiths in it who can open them, and I suppose that there is a similar > rationale for the skills needed to breach z/OS, but this is a public forum > in which I for one do not think we should facilitate such op

Re: z800-002 compared to 9672-R36 with 2 SAPs

-- snip -- >SAP (now called IOP) History: 308x -- XDC: External Data Controller 3090 -- IOP: I/O Processor 9021 -- IOP: Integrated Offload Processor 9672 -- SAP: Service Assist Processor z800, z890, z900, z990, & z9 -- SAP: still the same. I do not believe IBM changed the name, again. But, I cou

Re: RMF Data & RMF Spreadsheet Reporter

--- snip --- Hi, I am just starting to get to grips with the RMF Spreadsheet Reporter. I need to do some analysis of some historical data that was created on a zOS 1.4 system on my current zOS 1.6 system. However, the RMF Post Processor is complaining about differing levels of Code &

Re: HDS backup process

--- snip --- The fact that ickdsf cannot clip the volser is because the hardware knows that this secondary disk is part of a suspended pair . When you suspend , ickdsf will tell you ICK30111I DEVICE SPECIFIED IS THE SECONDARY OF A DUPLEX OR PPRC PAIR ICK31024I UNABLE TO OPEN VOLUME. ICK30003I FUNCT

Re: HDS backup process

-- snip -- John, Not actually true. There is a bitmap merge as part of the resynch. Ron > > If you CLIP the secondary DASD, just remember that a subsequent RESYNC > will > not copy the label since that wasn't changed on the primary subsystem. You > may want to CLIP it back. > > John > -- snip

Re: Allocation request for a DB2 dump wants more than a MOD-3

-- snip -- > When DB2 wants to dump, specifically where do I get to specify the > primary and secondary space allocations for that dump? This part is well documented. Issue: DD ADD,SMS=(DATA=dataclas,STOR=storclas,MGMT=mgmtclas) to set the SMS classes that control dump data set size, placement,

Re: CFW and DFSORT

> Hi all > because of GDPS Hyperswap-Tests we want to disable Cache Fast Write. We > were wondering which jobs would be affected by this change and we found > out that DFSORT has an option CFW=Y, which is our default. > 1. how will DFSORT react if option CFW=Y is used and on the HW it is > disabled

Re: Backup of Offline Data (at a remote site)

-- snip -- Run z/os.e on a very small CPU with upgrade on demand at your BR site. The backup steps don't need a lot of CPU power, and z/os.e is cheap. Very cheap. Once you pull your DR trigger, upgrade the box and start recovering your LPARS. The z/os.e LPAR can remain active to assist as a 'floor'

Re: LPAR utilization more important than MVS utilization?

--- snip --- In LPAR mode, if a Logical Processor is not dispatched by PR/SM then it does not accumulate wait time even though it is actually waiting. This means that MVS % Busy is greater than actual time that LP within the LPAR were dispatched by PR/SM and busy. LPAR busy is the right number, th

Re: 3390-81

-- snip -- >I've come across a couple of references to a 3390-81. Now, we have -27 and >-54 devices. >Have I missed some announcement? > Never heard of it, and in our business we certainly would have. Don't forget that 3390-27 and -54 are fictional names, not official ones. Although IBM occasi

Re: Geoplex performance considerations

--- snip --- To all who have helped with our research into GDPS with SRDF/A, THANKS! What we've found is that virtually no one is running a GDPS with syncronous data replication, and we fould only one instance of active data sharing across sites. -- snip -- Since I'm curious, I took a look at