In
,
on 10/06/2011
at 09:16 PM, Jim Mulder said:
>That require a bit more code in the AMDSADMP macro (in
>HLASM macro language, which is not my favorite
>programming language).
Could you contract it out? I'm quite proficient at the macro language,
and am far from the only one to be so.
--
>In the meantime, I recommend that you specify a
>device number which does not exist, or, if you are using
>all 65,536 device numbers, pick one which is unlikely
>to present an interrupt before you can click SEND on the
>HMC after you IPL SADMP.
In our case unit=1f isn't defined, so the default is
> > If your specify CONSOLE=(SYSC) with no devices, the default console
> >01F is automatically added. That seems undesirable (and I
> >have already received one customer complaint about it), but I
> >am not at liberty to incompatibly change the behavior, even
> >if it doesn't make sense.
> Yes, I
In <2447548503353976.wa.nitzibmgmx@bama.ua.edu>, on 10/06/2011
at 02:56 AM, Barbara Nitz said:
>Reminds me of the customer who complained after taking an sadump for
>a slip with a=wait that MVS wasn't restartable afterwards. :-)
Well, if IBM hadn't killed DSS , ...
>*You* know that and *
On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 02:56:20 -0500 Barbara wrote:
...
> > This will dump all paged out storage:
> >
> >DUMP=('DSP OF ASID(ALL) ALSO PAGETABLES OF DATASPACES X
> >ALSO SP(ALL) IN ASID(ALL) X
> >ALSO HIGH VIRTUAL IN ASID(ALL)'), X
> For performan
> For restartable wait states which are not in the WSAT,
>no AutoIPL action is taken.
>
> For nonrestartable wait states which are not in the WSAT,
>the current AutoIPL action from DIAGxx is taken.
>
> 0A2-104 is nonrestartable. So your AutoIPL action
>will be taken.
Ah. Then I misunderstood th
> > AutoIPL processing is driven by the wait state code/reason code
> >that ends up occurring, so the question is, what would that be in
> >the situation you are describing? If the system is alive enough
> >that XCF's status update task can get dispatched and read from
> >the couple data set, then
> When SADMP starts an IPL of MVS, it is essentially the same
>as if you did a Load Clear from the HMC. We don't know or care
>whether it is a new or old operating system.
Good to know.
But Mark has a good point, too:
>But then I realized that the next person who went to the
>HMC to IPL (that d
> When you IPL a new operating system via autoipl (does that work?),
> is there any gotcha other than to remember to always CLPA?
When SADMP starts an IPL of MVS, it is essentially the same
as if you did a Load Clear from the HMC. We don't know or care
whether it is a new or old operating sy
On Tue, 4 Oct 2011 14:48:15 -0700, Skip Robinson
wrote:
>When I run the AMDSADMP macro, I use options for zero operator
>intervention:
>
> ...CONSOLE=SYSC,REUSEDS=ALWAYS...
>
>This puts messages on the HMC operator console (no worry about device
>condition) and specifies that the new dump over
ices
Electric Dragon Team Paddler
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
626-302-7535 Office
323-715-0595 Mobile
jo.skip.robin...@sce.com
From: Barbara Nitz
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Date: 10/03/2011 09:51 PM
Subject: Re: AUTOIPL (was Re: Health Check
(IBMSVA,SVA_AUTOIPL_DEFINED)
Sent
>I'm not sure why Barbara is so opposed to AUTOIPL in principle, but I can
>see where critical production might be problematic.
*I* am not opposed to the function at all, just the opposite. My teamleader is.
It took quite some strongarming for me to get him to agree to even test this,
much less r
PM
Subject:Re: AUTOIPL (was Re: Health Check
(IBMSVA,SVA_AUTOIPL_DEFINED)
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List
On Fri, 30 Sep 2011 12:41:25 -0700, Skip Robinson
wrote:
>OK, I stand corrected on the 'separateness' issue. I remember now trying
>REIPL without ha
On Fri, 30 Sep 2011 12:41:25 -0700, Skip Robinson
wrote:
>OK, I stand corrected on the 'separateness' issue. I remember now trying
>REIPL without having AUTOIPL set up. It didn't work at all.
>
>However there is obviously a difference. A vanilla VARY XCF OFF does not
>invoke automatic IPL becaus
On 9/30/2011 1:04 PM, Jim Mulder wrote:
17C
Operator requested partitioning with the VARY XCF command and REIPL
AutoIPL option specified.
180
Operator requested partitioning with the VARY XCF command and SADMP
AutoIPL option specified.
184
Operator requested partitioning with the VARY XCF comm
> On 9/30/2011 12:41 PM, Skip Robinson wrote:
> > However there is obviously a difference. A vanilla VARY XCF OFF does
not
> > invoke automatic IPL because AUTOIPL is not triggered by WAIT 0A2.
'REIPL'
> > must override that exception.
>
> 0A2 with reason=4 is in the WSAT:
>
>
> 6.4.1 Wait st
On 9/30/2011 12:54 PM, Edward Jaffe wrote:
Oops. It's the x17C reason that performs the reIPL:
X'40A2'
X'1017C0A2' <--- Right Here!
X'201800A2'
X'301840A2'
X'200010B5'
X'200020B5'
X'A001'
X'A007'
X'A008'
X'A009'
X'A010'
X'A037'
On 9/30/2011 12:41 PM, Skip Robinson wrote:
However there is obviously a difference. A vanilla VARY XCF OFF does not
invoke automatic IPL because AUTOIPL is not triggered by WAIT 0A2. 'REIPL'
must override that exception.
0A2 with reason=4 is in the WSAT:
6.4.1 Wait state action table (WSAT)
/30/2011 12:19 PM
Subject: Re: AUTOIPL (was Re: Health Check
(IBMSVA,SVA_AUTOIPL_DEFINED)
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List
On Fri, 30 Sep 2011 11:29:22 -0700, Skip Robinson
wrote:
>
>Also to clarify: there is a REIPL option on the VARY XCF OFF command.
This
>is very use
On Fri, 30 Sep 2011 11:29:22 -0700, Skip Robinson
wrote:
>
>Also to clarify: there is a REIPL option on the VARY XCF OFF command. This
>is very useful when you just want to bounce a system for whatever reason.
>No delay, no switching sysres volume. This option is totally separate from
>AUTOIPL,
On 9/30/2011 11:29 AM, Skip Robinson wrote:
Also to clarify: there is a REIPL option on the VARY XCF OFF command. This
is very useful when you just want to bounce a system for whatever reason.
No delay, no switching sysres volume. This option is totally separate from
AUTOIPL, which is intended to
> Also to clarify: there is a REIPL option on the VARY XCF OFF command.
This
> is very useful when you just want to bounce a system for whatever
reason.
> No delay, no switching sysres volume. This option is totally separate
from
> AUTOIPL, which is intended to repair a sick system while gett
Co-Manager
626-302-7535 Office
323-715-0595 Mobile
jo.skip.robin...@sce.com
From: Edward Jaffe
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Date: 09/30/2011 10:42 AM
Subject: Re: AUTOIPL (was Re: Health Check
(IBMSVA,SVA_AUTOIPL_DEFINED)
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List
On 9/30/20
On Fri, 30 Sep 2011 10:41:13 -0700, Edward Jaffe
wrote:
>On 9/30/2011 10:17 AM, Mark Zelden wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2011 00:11:07 -0500, Barbara Nitz wrote:
>>
>>> Let's see if the rest of the autoipl function is as bad.
>> Use it, love it. Long time coming... VM has had a reipl option "fo
On 9/30/2011 10:17 AM, Mark Zelden wrote:
On Fri, 30 Sep 2011 00:11:07 -0500, Barbara Nitz wrote:
Let's see if the rest of the autoipl function is as bad.
Use it, love it. Long time coming... VM has had a reipl option "forever".
Just to clarify: although the results appear similar, what
On Fri, 30 Sep 2011 00:11:07 -0500, Barbara Nitz wrote:
>Let's see if the rest of the autoipl function is as bad.
Use it, love it. Long time coming... VM has had a reipl option "forever".
At first I tested without the SADMP option, but since the codes in the WSAT
that say to take an SADMP a
26 matches
Mail list logo
