ce company to
depreciate your automobile to $1000 and yet if you tried to buy the
equivalent...
<\Friday Rant>
Later,
Steve Thompson
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PRO
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Thompson, Steve
>
>
>
> I love beer consumers. They drink my beer as fast as I can make it.
>
> I love computer consumers. The eat my computers as fast as I
> can make them.
>
> I love compiler consumers. They eat
Rant of the day...
This isn't the first and I'm sure it won't be the last... but why do I have to
go
and delete GRS and XCF health checks on my monoplex LPARs??? Sure
I can add AUTHQLVL(2) to GRSCNF00, but I pick up the default from
IBM.PARMLIB. We don't need no stinkin' XCF transport classe
Mark Zelden wrote:
>Rant of the day...
Rant of the month? :-D
>but why do I have to go and delete GRS and XCF health checks on my monoplex
>LPARs??? Sure I can add AUTHQLVL(2) to GRSCNF00, but I pick up the default
>from IBM.PARMLIB. We don't need no stinkin' XCF transport classes on these
On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 08:36:50 -0500, Elardus Engelbrecht
wrote:
>Mark Zelden wrote:
>
>>Rant of the day...
>
>Rant of the month? :-D
>
>>but why do I have to go and delete GRS and XCF health checks on my monoplex
>>LPARs??? Sure I can add AUTHQLVL(2) to GRSCNF00, but I pick up the default
>>fr
Hi,
The XCF signalling services are available in all sysplex
environments, including monoplex. The rationale that motivates the
defining of transport classes applies to them all.
Mark A. Brooks
z/OS Sysplex design and development
845-435-5149 T/L 8-295-5149
Poughkeepsie, NY
mabr...@us.i
Mark Zelden wrote:
>>What about making [persistent] changes to HZSPRMxx to get in 'good feel
>>better' mode? :-)
>That's what I was referring to.
I did not see it, but Ok...
>What good would it have been to just issue a "P" command in SDSF.But I
>wouldn't have to do stuff like this if
On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 10:24:54 -0400, Mark Brooks wrote:
>Hi,
> The XCF signalling services are available in all sysplex
>environments, including monoplex. The rationale that motivates the
>defining of transport classes applies to them all.
>
>Mark A. Brooks
>z/OS Sysplex design and developm
On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 10:28:23 -0500, Mark Zelden wrote:
>On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 10:24:54 -0400, Mark Brooks wrote:
>> The XCF signalling services are available in all sysplex
>>environments, including monoplex. The rationale that motivates the
>>defining of transport classes applies to them a
Hi,
Your point about whether it is worth defining the second class for 2%
of the traffic applies to all sysplexes, not just monoplex. As is the case
for many of our health checks, they are designed to incorporate
principles/experiences gained over the years. Installations with at least
th
And, as more than a few members of this list are already aware, you can now
also enjoy the pleasures of HC on Linux.
Primarily aimed at those of you with zLinux ... ;-)
Shane ...
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive a
W dniu 2012-03-30 16:24, Mark Brooks pisze:
Hi,
The XCF signalling services are available in all sysplex
environments, including monoplex. The rationale that motivates the
defining of transport classes applies to them all.
What for?
The classes are for traffic on sysplex links, are the
"R.S." wrote in message
news:<4f776fe9.80...@bremultibank.com.pl>...
> W dniu 2012-03-30 16:24, Mark Brooks pisze:
> > Hi,
> > The XCF signalling services are available in all sysplex
> > environments, including monoplex. The rationale that motivates the
> > defining of transport classes appl
Hi,
Transport Classes are all about segregation of message traffic by
size. Such segregation is beneficial regardless of whether messages are
being sent between XCF members on the same system (which would always apply
in the case of a monoplex) or between members that reside on different
s
experiencing degraded or inefficient signaling?
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On
> Behalf Of Vernooij, CP - SPLXM
> Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 2:40 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
> Subject: Re: New z/OS 1.13 Heal
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
> > Subject: Re: New z/OS 1.13 Health Checks - Friday Rant
> >
> > "R.S." wrote in message
> > news:<4f776fe9.80...@bremultibank.com.pl>...
> > > W dniu 2012-03-30 16:24, Mark Brooks pisze:
> > > > Hi,
> > >
To all participating in this thread
>...> The XCF signalling services are available in all sysplex environments,
>including monoplex.
> There are TCPIP Hipersocket links, but as far as I know, XCF is not aware of
> these links.
Based upon these two comments I wonder if it is worth pointing out
Dave, see Mark Brooks' responses.
While I see this as more of a cosmetic change than anything, based on
this thread, my 2% of messages that didn't fit, wanting to satisfy the
health check without deleting it and lastly - because it can't hurt...
I have added transport class definitions to m
With regard to GRS, ENQs also apply to monoplexes. Through RNL processing it
is largely the installation that determines an ENQ's scope. AUTHQLVL(2) is the
means to migrate to a larger list of Qnames that are considered Authorized by
the system.
Bryan Childs
GRS Development
-
On Mon, 2 Apr 2012 10:47:44 -0500, Bryan Childs wrote:
>With regard to GRS, ENQs also apply to monoplexes. Through RNL processing it
>is largely the installation that determines an ENQ's scope. AUTHQLVL(2) is
>the means to migrate to a larger list of Qnames that are considered Authorized
>by
The list of authorized Qnames applies to all scopes of ENQs, regardless of
RNLs, regardless of mode. Whether an ENQ's resolved scope is SYSTEMS, SYSTEM,
or even STEP, only authorized programs can use authorized Qnames. In fact we
recommend that authorized programs ALWAYS use authorized Qnames.
21 matches
Mail list logo
