I mean CF links.
Thanks to all who replied.
db
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Scott Rowe
Sent: Monday, December 24, 2007 11:35 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FICON vs ESCON CTC's
Obviously #2 is going
Subject
.EDU> Re: FICON vs ESCON CTC's
Can we use the same CTC definitions in VTAM for FCTC's i.e can be just
activate the FCTC definitions exact;y like CTC
**See AOL's top rated recipes
(http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop000304)
--
nooy, C.P. - SPLXM
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:38 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FICON vs ESCON CTC's
"Mark Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> Is there any advantage in migrating CTC's from ESCON to FI
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 12/21/2007
at 10:39 AM, Matthew Stitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>BSC NJE is needed if you are communicating with a system which does not
>support (or is not configured) SNA NJE.
No; you can use a CTCA or TCP/IP link.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:28:18 -0500, Dave Barry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Job A on system A issues static SQL query to DB2 on system B. Which is
>faster:
>
>1) DDF call to DB2 on system B via APPC over FICON CTC
>
>or
>
>2) Local call to DB2 member of datasharing group w/ FICON CF links?
>
>Cons
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:38 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FICON vs ESCON CTC's
"Mark Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> Is there any advantage in migrating CTC's from ESCON to FICON?
>
> --
>
BSC NJE is needed if you are communicating with a system which does not
support (or is not configured) SNA NJE. I currently have one with a VM RSCS
system. < :-( >
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 14:53:49 +0100, R.S. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Skip Robinson wrote:
>> Just to clarify: if GRS is part of a b
CON vs ESCON CTC's
Is there any advantage in migrating CTC's from ESCON to FICON?
--
Mark Jacobs
Time Customer Service
Tampa, FL
--
The primary purpose of the DATA statement is to give names to
constants; instead of referring to pi as 3.141592653589793 at
every appearance, th
Mark Zelden wrote:
[...]
I was at a Parallel Sysplex and Performance training earlier this month
and the teacher told us, that CTCs ourperform CF signalling paths,
because of the multiple step (write, notify, read) approach for the CF
path versus the single step (what is written is synchronously
"Mark Zelden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 08:54:51 +0100, Vernooy, C.P. - SPLXM
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> >>
> >> Yes - of course with a shared CF engine. But with current
hardware
> >(link
> >> technology, z9 engines) the link
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 08:54:51 +0100, Vernooy, C.P. - SPLXM
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Yes - of course with a shared CF engine. But with current hardware
>(link
>> technology, z9 engines) the links are once again faster. YMMV.
>>
>> Mark
>
>I was at a Parallel Sysplex and Performance train
Skip Robinson wrote:
Just to clarify: if GRS is part of a basic sysplex, it uses the same
PATHIN/PATHOUT CTCs that XCF uses. SCTC or FCTC is required.
With GRS ring directly over CTC (not XCF) you can have GRSplex >
sysplex. In other words you can have out-of-sysplex systems in GRSplex.
Or mu
"Mark Zelden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:30:09 +0100, Vernooy, C.P. - SPLXM
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >"Mark Zelden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >> On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:17:20 -0500, Ma
n List
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject
.EDU> Re: FICON vs
On the plus side, the unit address limitation with ESCON is greatly increased.
On the negative side, you cannot have a BCTC device, which is required for
GRS and JES2 BSC NJE connections.
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:19:36 -0600, Mark Zelden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:17:20 -05
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 14:17:21 -0600, Patrick O'Keefe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:19:36 -0600, Mark Zelden
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>...
>>better response times with MIM, VTAM and XCF CTCs ...
>>...
>
>
>However, be aware that there has been a recovery issue in VTAM's
>s
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:19:36 -0600, Mark Zelden
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>...
>better response times with MIM, VTAM and XCF CTCs ...
>...
However, be aware that there has been a recovery issue in VTAM's
support of FICON CTCs - APAR OA22059. INOP rather than PENDING
after 1st activation. (Fi
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:30:09 +0100, Vernooy, C.P. - SPLXM
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Mark Zelden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:17:20 -0500, Mark Jacobs
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Is there any advantage in migrating CTC's f
"Mark Zelden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:17:20 -0500, Mark Jacobs
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >Is there any advantage in migrating CTC's from ESCON to FICON?
> >
>
> Of course. But I guess it could depend on the application. We
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:17:20 -0500, Mark Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Is there any advantage in migrating CTC's from ESCON to FICON?
>
Of course. But I guess it could depend on the application. We saw much
better response times with MIM, VTAM and XCF CTCs when we migrated
to FICON. Of c
"Mark Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> Is there any advantage in migrating CTC's from ESCON to FICON?
>
> --
> Mark Jacobs
> Time Customer Service
> Tampa, FL
> --
SPEED!!!
XCF signalling via Ficon CTC links well outperform CF structures. Others
wil
Is there any advantage in migrating CTC's from ESCON to FICON?
--
Mark Jacobs
Time Customer Service
Tampa, FL
--
The primary purpose of the DATA statement is to give names to
constants; instead of referring to pi as 3.141592653589793 at
every appearance, the variable PI can be given that
23 matches
Mail list logo
