I appreciate all your input. That large number have probably *not* worked Java
into the mainstream. Again, I had my problems but we were willing to take the
initiative to move non traditional work to the mainframe in the hopes that it
would spur more movement over and make the mainframe a more
Come on Ed, the doc is out there, in fact there is so much doc it's sometimes
hard to find exactly where something is. Well, strategically WAS makes sense.
Why would they, IBM, not position themselves to take advantage of this
application technology. Not having WAS available for z/OS would just
I would tinker with the policy but not use resource groups. I would only use
resource groups to cap unruly tasks not guarantee. Are you running WLM Managed
Initiators? Do you have control over the initiators and batch work or are
people resetting service classes and starting inits along the
. Your throughput benefits from more than
one, cpu bound work benefits from faster engines. Your quandry is now figuring
out just how fast an engine you really need if you have more than one.
On Thu, 6 Dec 2007 04:27:48 -0800, Patrick Falcone
wrote:
I would be reluctant to move to a 2 way from
I can sympathize Ed. We were on the edge with WebSphere on z/OS when I believe
the freeware, v3.02, came out in 2001 and we had quite a time with problems and
support on all sides including my own due to lack of practical experience. When
I recommended, in a call to developers at our corporate
Interesting concept Shane. :-) Add storage controls along with CPU Crit. to WLM
and we'll have a hybrid WLM/IPS/ICS. Maybe we can call it WIPS.
Shane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just make storage a WLM managed resource.
Then we (customers) can set our own goals, and (resource) cap if
necessary,
I would agree with you Mike. In our case, and this was single instance
WebSphere, I was unable to do any precise predetermination of storage
requirements prior to implementation. We had IBM WAS, vendor software and CTG.
Not that CTG was going to kill us from a requirements viewpoint. Before I
I would be reluctant to move to a 2 way from a uni and potentially cut my
rating by CP by half. I wouldn't want to be taking the calls when peak hits.
I'm not comfortable with taking a .2 second CPU transaction and making it
possibly a .4 second CPU transaction. Most likely there is also some
I lobbied against getting rid of Roscoe, Wylbur was already gone, for the COBOL
developers a while back when management wanted to go purely TSO. At that time,
with storage resources at somewhat of a minimum, I just could not see getting
rid of Roscoe. We kept it but I still had my trials and
We have had some problems lately since cutting over to z/OS 1.4 in 64 with
CA/Dispatch V6.0 with IDMS V10.2. I've just started to look at the problem
and it seems there may be something amiss with journaling. A problem has
been opened but if anyone has hit this. I don't have a lot of access to
me to...
Darren Evans-Young [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
11/29/2007 10:57 AM
Please respond to
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
To
IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
cc
Subject
ADMINISTRIVIA: IBM-MAIN Archives
IBM-MAIN-ARCHIVES
If you have the CP's and the speed for short bursts maybe not an issue. If
you don't - well - I remember the recommendation by IBM to put our WAS
version 5 cell group in SYSSTC on a small 2 way G5 machine running 31 bit.
I remember the faces here when we started the cell group up, 7 address
I seem to remember this as TCP/IP version 3.2 with 3.3 having the fixes
for optimization. Weren't there twin stacks being managed or some such
thing. I'm not too TCP/IP literate. We had this original version
implemented because I remember doing a pre/post resource impact analysis
finding
You should be able to get at least 32 virtuals online. We are currently
running a way back leveled B18 with LM 531.11B and VTS 2.23.38.05 w/FP11
and have 32 virtual drives on 2 logical controllers. Our TVC is 72 GB and
so our FC is less than what would be required to run 64 virtuals. I'm not
If you download the iso file from Ken's site you can use a demo from
dvdSanta to burn it in DVD format.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET
I need to pull out my WLM Managed Initiators to prepare for the
outsourcer. In preparation, in testing, when we issue a $TI or $SI for
initiators after initiator 99 I get $HASP650 IA0 INVALID OPERAND OR
MISPLACED OPERAND. Anyone hit a similar problem or have a solution, we
are at z/OS
Man, I hate replying to my own questions. Our ops guys figured that you
need paren's around the actual initiator *after* initiator number 99.
Hopefully the formatting of the commands below comes out.
$SI99
$HASP892 INIT(99)
$HASP892 INIT(99) STATUS=STARTING,CLASS=,
$HASP892
That Max is the only reader of these papers at this site? Sounds like it.
I think Tom mis-read it.
Personally I'd start by working WLM from top down, with regards to
importance, to try to make sense of the situation. If WLM is just spinning
its wheels due to unobtainable goals that could be
CA OPS/MVS.
Jim McAlpine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
09/11/2007 05:45 AM
Please respond to
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
To
IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
cc
Subject
meaasge OPS3731E
Anyone recognise the above message and
In our case with emulated 3380 and Adabas the customer opted to run
unsupported since they told us they would be off the mainframe in the 2nd
quarter of 1997. Most of their work was migrated off last year, July,
except one application that is still in inquiry mode only. I still see TSO
and
Ah err, well, we have an old Adabas application with 3380 emulation on
2105. This will be moot after 11/30/07. It's been a shame they could not
resolve to get the application off our platform sooner. This was one of
those app's we really wanted to go as it wasted an array due to the
emulation
From a personal perspective I believe that IBM was late to the game with
GUI and WAS capability for the mainframe. Our mid-range counterparts were
working on web alternatives, in test, just prior to Y2K. We didn't take
delivery of WAS 3.02 until sometime in 01 if memory serves. By this time
it
You might want to also check the code levels on the hardware in question.
(IBM Mainframe Discussion List) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
06/06/2007 10:06 AM
Please respond to
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
To
I believe it's WAD or feature.
But why next, I would think random would be best in spreading out the
pain. And, if you don't do a lot of mounts, or you hit a lull, then you're
always using the low order UCB's.
Thomas Conley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
Yes, head of string, 3350-A2 (contains controller circuits, and is the
first in a string of 3350 units) or 3350-A2F same as A2 has fixed as well
as movable heads. Again from the facts folder.
Rick Fochtman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
I don't remember any 3350 problems as this device type was my first
performance charge with doing internal pathing/volume placement based on
performance metrics at timeshare NVIP back in the early 80's. I do however
remember the 3350 to 3380 migration project which turned ugly when we were
IBM 3880 - 1 or 2 (IBM DASD and Control Units Facts Folder G520-3075-2)
William Donzelli [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
05/21/2007 02:02 PM
Please respond to
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
To
IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
cc
Subject
assistance. This group is awesome and I'll miss it.
I can be reached at Patrick dot Falcone at verizon dot net for those of
you that might need to contact me for any reason.
Take care...
- Forwarded by Patrick Falcone/US/Combined on 05/08/2007 10:08 AM
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: IBM
I've never had a problem with CICS and velocity. We do about 3/4 of a
million trans./day and get a couple of tenths to a half second response. I
attended a Share WLM free for all about 3 - 4 years ago where CICS
transaction goals vs. velocity goal management almost turned into a free
for all
IBM 3350A2/B2 modules on IBM 3830 Controller? Not sure about IBM 3375, I
was told we had them and most IBM DASD at that time, 1979 or so, at NVIP
but I was not aware of all we had back then. I think the IBM 3380 had 4
internal path selection.
Mark H. Young [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: IBM
I thought that the zIIP was proprietary to IBM, I guess not anymore. A
couple of snippets from the DBTA 5 Minute Briefing.
Among the CA solutions announced today is Unicenter NetMaster Network
Management for TCP/IP, which offloads statistical analysis of packet flows
by its Packet Analyzer
Even the acronym finder isn't quite sure..but does agree with
most. I seem to remember Output back in my earlier ops daze.
http://www.acronymfinder.com/af-query.asp?Acronym=spoolstring=exact
J R [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
12/14/2006
This would seem to imply JBB772S for z/OS 1.7. Probably z/OS 1.7 with 1.8
presentation.
CP is general purpose CP, AAPCP is % of a GP CP used by work eligible to
run on a zAAP, IIPCP same as AAPCP insert zIIP. AAP and IIP are % of a
zIIP/zAAP CP consumed. Yes, if AAP and IIP are used then you
Posted with Don Deese's permission at the request of Mark Zelden with
thanks to Dave Thorn for following this topic up with Don as part of a
discussion at a recent Philly CMG meeting.
Chapter 1.7: Discretionary Goal Management
A problem existed when using discretionary goals prior to OS/390
Posted with Don Deese's permission.
Don Deese has provided the below snip from his CPExpert WLM Component
Manual, since the snip provides a more comprehensive explanation.
Chapter 1.7: Discretionary Goal Management
A problem existed when using discretionary goals prior to OS/390 Version 2
I think that's the rub. How much can you afford in discretionary, if any.
I played with disc. early on and found that since I different requirements
for production batch workloads based on time zone and importance, and
there was very little if any cycles left for test, I had to end up putting
Compression is done from the channel interface card to the VTS cache.
Compression is then done again from the VTS cache to the back end drive
without much, if any, gain in compression. Check the SMF 94's for these
values.
Victor Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion
Syslog(?). I just altered our JOBCLASS(A) on our tech LPAR through SDSF
and it shows up like any other JES message on the log. Gives the TSU
number and the ID with the time stamp.
Jon Brock [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
09/07/2006 02:55 PM
In our environment Shark 800 w/ficon it's 2 ms or less into the hundreds
of mic's with cache hits in the 90 - 100% range. When we supported RVA
T82, w/escon w/3390 emulation I seem to remember 4 - 7 ms with same cache
hit ratio. I also found some old doc from out site that showed STK 8890
with
Thanks, Larry, Aaron.
It's a fairly complex, at least to this simple mind, application.Desktop
- Citrix - possible calls to one, two or all) AS/400, SQL Server, z/OS.
We have at least 3 different locations where the Users come in from. We're
currently running WAS V4 (3.5 lightweight mode)
I'm currently tasked with investigating the persistent time-out value
defined in WAS. At this point our time-out value is 60 seconds but what
we're seeing is that 2/3's of the connections hit the 60 second time-out
and then need to be potentially re-established. I'm looking for what
others
I have a default OMVS Service Class that is multi-period with IMPS 2, 3
and 4. I get all kinds of spawned stuff and the like that falls into it.
If there is a complaint and it's justified I put the task into a more
rigorously defined SC for Unix tasks. I have the FTP task defined to
STCHI.
Have you given thought to the capacity/performance implications of going
from a 63 MIPS uni to a 26 MIPS uni? You realize that , theoretically,
you'll downgrade the speed by approx. 2.4 times.
Mark Neal [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
05/26/2006
I can assure you that you can connect more than 1 ESCON channel to 3590
B's. A few weekends ago at DR our set-up was 16 3590 B's with 2 ESCON
per/module or 4 UCB's (I don't know, are they still called a module?).
This was verified by looking at RMF on the floor system, and well before I
He should be seeing about 9 MB's/sec on that single ESCON setup. Adding an
ESCON channel should half the backup time with a total throughput of 18
MB/sec with the 2 ESCON's. I just did some prep work prior to our DR with
regards to a similar setup, ESCON and 3590 B's.
Eric N. Bielefeld
Murphy? About 3 - 4 years ago we had a UPS filter blow during a cut-over
to the UPS, the failover side of the UPS filter blew as well. You should
have seen the faces of the UPS vendor.
Ed Finnell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
05/11/2006 11:24
No.
Ed Finnell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
05/12/2006 09:11 AM
Please respond to
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
To
IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
cc
Subject
Re: An unexpected lights out operation
In a message dated
Agreed, and this *could* be the publicity that just blows up the whole
notion (more than a notion as far as I'm concerned) that the mainframe is
dying/dead and with the recent z9 BC announcement it may not come at a
better time. It would be nice to envision all those suits reading about
the
Does this help?
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/cicsts/v3r1/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.cics.ts.doc/dfht3/dfht3b00377.htm
Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
04/10/2006 08:00 PM
Please respond to
IBM Mainframe Discussion List
I have the same problem. We're running WAS V4 also on z/OS 1.4. I'm not
aware of any freeware tools for this. A few years back I would display the
thread via D OMVS,PID=. After a few displays I could usually find the
thread taking most of the CPU. I would then terminate the thread. This
Comments interspersed below.
Timothy Sipples [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
03/29/2006 07:21 AM
Please respond to
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
To
IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
cc
Subject
Re: Bringing the fun back to z/OS - new
I would agree with Barbara on this. We run a mix of traditional work along
with a Domino Change Management System with about 400 registered Users and
WAS V4 in lightweight mode with about the same amount. Both applications
can kill performance to our traditional workloads on our small 2 way.
I'm sorry. Our WAS environment is running WAS V4 (in 3.5 compatibility
mode or lightweight mode) which is single server or single task. This
environment uses much less resources than a full blown WAS heavyweight
environment where a cell group in support of an application(s) can consist
of 7
Same here in Southeastern Pa. area, Bucks County/Philly. This use to be a
hotbed of mainframe activity and I talk to enough IBMers from around here
who can say without doubt that the mainframe has been going away for
years. I personally don't believe that the mainframe will ever *go away*,
I
Thanks for taking the time to put this together.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at
There is no requirement for DB2 that I'm aware of for WAS V5 and probably
not for V6 as well. There was a somewhat of a requirement in WAS V4 but we
got around that by going to lightweight or 3.5 compatibility mode under
V4. I seem to remember a lot of discussion prior to GA for V4 where some
Mark,
We should all be thanking you for all you've done on the list.
I went out to your web site and found myself in the pool area and checking
out your family. You seemingly have a lot to be grateful for. I also
appreciate all the help you have given me over time. You seem to be a real
First, sorry for the rant yesterday and the shot at EG, I agree not
necessary. I've been very frustrated with this migration. I've learned
quite a bit though so there are some positives.
Secondly our migration to WAS V5.1 has shown how it can be difficult for
small shops on tight purse strings
Comments interspersed below. Warning Rant Mode On and no this is not EG
rant mode - I do like IBM.
Timothy Sipples [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
10/18/2005 11:27 AM
Please respond to
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
To
What's the actual disconnect time at peak? What are your read hits versus
read misses?
Itschak Mugzach [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
10/06/2005 11:00 AM
Please respond to
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
To
I was in one of the many meetings that still go on, although our WAS 5
conversion is basically on hold pending an upgrade, and heard that WAS V5
is not 64 bit compliant. I guess I was asleep at the wheel to some extent
but this poses some concern from my perspective when we do get an upgrade.
Well, I wasn't paying close enough attention and just *assumed* that WAS
V5 was there, 64. As we have not sized the upgrade for additional HATS
related applications we're back to the drawing board to some extent, at
least with regards to memory. Should the upgrade happen we'll realize a
zAAP
I'd be interested to see what Dave's capture ratio is? In our case the
problem manifested itself, on a small 2-way, by one of our WAS V5 servants
using excessive CPU along with a dramatic drain of CPU, to dispatchable
work, by a uni-swap loop which was basically being done by 3 swappable WAS
I'm sorry, I missed some of this. What model type is this? That should
explain it.
We run 9672 RB6 and while I understand that it's a 2-way I also understand
that this model type can be upgrade coded to an RD6 or 4-way. I'm not sure
what the annoyance is. I believe that you are just seeing
Can you share the product? Is it WAS? You say you've checked paging, how
about swapping? What is the capture ratio during the problem time frame?
Also, Mark makes a good point about enclave tracking, unfortunately it may
not be obvious with traditional monitoring.
Kopischke, David G.
Curious what hardware you are on. Also, is z/OS 1.4 in 64?
Clark, Kevin D, HRC-Alexandria/EDS [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
09/22/2005 04:00 PM
Please respond to IBM Mainframe Discussion List
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
cc:
I haven't worked with EPILOG for a while but I don't believe that you can
get that kind of detail unless it has changed. You could hiper-link to
generic aux. storage information from specific screen sets but I don't
remember seeing the detail you may need to shoot this.
I currently use
Well, I guess when we used this product it was for OS/390 since this was a
while back, 98'. There was an STC called SOTFAUDT that also ran with a
couple of batch jobs, SOURCER and SURVEYOR, that took some considerable
CPU resources. I'm fairly sure that these batch jobs were report jobs and
Your welcome. Well, I really don't know all that much about HSM and I hate
to sound simplistic but what I would do if tasked with this exercise is
use our sandbox to turn compaction off and then force ML1 action and
measure CPU. I would then turn compaction on and then force ML1 action and
The data included is a bit dated, 1998. I found that the average CPU time
used, as part of HSM's total CPU used, during the month was proportioned
as follows. Primary space used 17%, secondary used 6%, backup space
management used 64% and other used 13%. I should state that none of the
Not sure I understand. I was able, with irfanview, to take a JPEG and
associate it with a PIF and print the file with no problems. Are you
saying you did the reverse - you took a PIF and associated it with a JPEG
and it didn't work or work as well (?)
cdmaslo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: IBM
You may want to dowload irfanview and try to create/new the pif extension
and associate it with jpeg.
My computer/pictures/tools/folder options/file types/new/(in box file
extention put) PIF/advanced/associated file type (jpeg)
Ed Finnell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: IBM Mainframe
This past weekend IBM applied LM code 530.11 with FP 11B to correct the
situation where the SMF94VEC value is zero and the GUI interface for the
VTS when looking at the active data screen shows no free cartridge scratch
space available.
- Forwarded by Patrick Falcone/US/Combined on 08/02
101 - 173 of 173 matches
Mail list logo
