In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on
11/21/2007
at 11:22 AM, "McKown, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>Shmuel tends to not explain his answers.
That depends on the question, and on the resources I have available at the
time. For a suggested code/design change, I do tend to give yes-or-no
answers, but fo
On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 13:55:07 -0600 Ed Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>Thanks... I was under the misunderstanding that TPUT would not work
:>in batch. They have apparently fixed it.
TPUT "works" in batch, in that you can send a message to a logged on TSO user.
TPUT does not go to SYSTSPRT.
Ed Gould wrote:
Thanks... I was under the misunderstanding that TPUT would not work in
batch. They have apparently fixed it.
That was *never* the issue. The problem was that the TPUT was being
issued from an MPF on the system where the contention message was issued
... not necessarily the sys
On Nov 21, 2007, at 11:22 AM, McKown, John wrote:
--SNIP---
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 11/16/2007
at 06:49 PM, Ed Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Point of curiosity here. Why not just change it to PUTLINE ?
Because then it would no longer work.
That should fix the proble
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 4:41 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Dataset-held message to TSO user
>
>
> In &l
BAMA.UA.EDU
Mainframe cc
Discussion List
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject
.EDU> Re: Datase
On Nov 16, 2007, at 5:12 PM, Lucymarie Ruth wrote:
Too bad that SYS1.SAMPLIB(ISGECMON) also uses TPUT.
Point of curiosity here. Why not just change it to PUTLINE ?
That should fix the problem, no?
Ed
--
For IBM-MAIN subscrib
nframe cc
Discussion List
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject
.EDU> Re: Dataset-held me
Thanks as well to Mr Jaffe for pointing to the thing right under my
nose. It looks as if running the task on every sysplex member
may do the trick because contention is visible to all around. I'll
play with it.
I could be wrong, but if memory serves me correctly, ISGECMON
Maybe you're supposed to run ISGECMON on each LPAR where
TSO users might be? Otherwise, I would imagine it would be
relatively simple to convert to issuing a z/OS console SEND
command to communicate with users wherever they may be
Yes, that's the idea. Run ISGECMON on
Discussion List
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject
.EDU> Re: Dataset-held message to TSO
Brian Peterson wrote:
Maybe you're supposed to run ISGECMON on each LPAR where TSO users
might be? Otherwise, I would imagine it would be relatively simple to convert
to issuing a z/OS console SEND command to communicate with users wherever
they may be
You are definitely supposed to r
Shane wrote:
"RO *ALL,C U=??" should do the job.
If only ... :-D
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800
Los Angeles, CA 90045
310-338-0400 x318
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/
--
Maybe you're supposed to run ISGECMON on each LPAR where TSO users
might be? Otherwise, I would imagine it would be relatively simple to convert
to issuing a z/OS console SEND command to communicate with users wherever
they may be
Brian
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 17:12:44 -0600, Lucymarie Ruth w
Too bad that SYS1.SAMPLIB(ISGECMON) also uses TPUT.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/a
Skip Robinson wrote:
For many years we have run an MPF exit called DSNHELD, apparently
contributed to the CBT by INTEL (!) in the distant past. The exit sends a
message to a user who owns a data set needed by a batch job. The program,
last modified by us in the early 90's, does a fine job except
On Fri, 2007-11-16 at 14:09 -0800, Skip Robinson wrote:
> In a sysplex we need to send the message to the user wherever he's logged
> on in the GRSplex. Does anyone have a more modern mechanism to accomplish
> this goal?
"RO *ALL,C U=??" should do the job.
May even SEND ...
Sounds perfect f
17 matches
Mail list logo
