Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 7:11 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: z/OS 1.4-1.7 gotchas
I may be drafted to do a 1.4 to 1.7 migration. I'm concerned both about
any gotchas in the migration itself and about anything that might impede
a
later migration to a supported[1
@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OS 1.4-1.7 gotchas
???
AFIAK there is no fix, microcode or otherwise, for the segmentation offload
problem. I think the default has since been changed been changed to off.
Also, it did not affect old OSA cards, it affects ALL OSA Express cards.
There was also
.
For further help with these commands, contact software support.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Scott Rowe
Sent: 09 April 2008 20:40
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OS 1.4-1.7 gotchas
???
AFIAK there is no fix, microcode
Sorry, should have made that clearer - by 'device' I meant the actual OSA
itself, not the MVS devices. We did CONFIG CHP(xx),OFFLINE on all LPARs that it
was defined to.
You got me doubting myself for a moment there though, so I just pulled back our
archived SYSLOGs for that day, and they
Hmmm, and you configured if offline to all of the LPARs before you brought it
back on to any of them? Sounds strange indeed. I have done this a couple
times, and the only problem I have had is when one or more of the LPARs is
inactive, then you have to go in though the HMC to take them off.
-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: z/OS 1.4-1.7 gotchas
I may be drafted to do a 1.4 to 1.7 migration. I'm concerned both about
any gotchas in the migration itself and about anything that might impede
a
later migration to a supported[1] release. There are two LPAR's in a
sysplex and a third LPAR
I may be drafted to do a 1.4 to 1.7 migration. I'm concerned both about
any gotchas in the migration itself and about anything that might impede a
later migration to a supported[1] release. There are two LPAR's in a
sysplex and a third LPAR in a monplex.
Is there anything critical that the
to
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
To
IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
cc
Subject
z/OS 1.4-1.7 gotchas
I may be drafted to do a 1.4 to 1.7 migration. I'm concerned both about
any gotchas in the migration itself and about anything that might impede a
later migration to a supported[1
One that got us was the TCPIP profile default for the SEGMENTATIONOFFLOAD
changed from NO to YES. This attempts to offload some of the TCPIP packet
handling from the processor to the OSA card. If you have an old(ish - ours was
from 2006/2007) version of the OSA Express/Express2 card, it will
Were unable to do any SPUFI commands due to RACF authorization.
This fixed that.
//STEP1 EXEC PGM=IKJEFT01,DYNAMNBR=20
//SYSTSPRT DD SYSOUT=*
//SYSTSIN DD *
SETROPTS GENERIC(DSNR)
RDEFINE DSNR ** UACC(READ)
Can be done in advance on z/OS 1.4
Don't forget JES2 $ACTIVATE command on
???
AFIAK there is no fix, microcode or otherwise, for the segmentation offload
problem. I think the default has since been changed been changed to off.
Also, it did not affect old OSA cards, it affects ALL OSA Express cards.
There was also no need to POR, or even IPL, to recover the card,
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Scott Rowe
???
AFIAK there is no fix, microcode or otherwise, for the
segmentation offload problem. I think the default has since
been changed been changed to off. Also, it did not affect
old OSA cards, it
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 11:11:12 -0300, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
I may be drafted to do a 1.4 to 1.7 migration. I'm concerned both about
any gotchas in the migration itself and about anything that might impede a
later migration to a supported[1] release. There are two LPAR's in a
sysplex and a
But I seem to recall a firmware refresh fixing this - Config OSA off/on. I
don't recall needing a POR to change this parameter.
POR shouldn't be required, at all.
Like the old IRMA cards, the microcode is loaded everytime the card is
refreshed.
-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!
I just did this last year and as others have said the JES changes were a
biggie, as well as going to goal mode with WLM. The other issue was the
console rewrite and some of our RACF rules and the subsystems. The ever
increasing size of the ROOT keeps amazing me. In general, it's relatively
going to goal mode with WLM.
I must be misunderstanding your context.
COMPAT Mode hasn't been supported since either 1.2 or 1.3.
We had to convert going from 2.10 to 1.4.
-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!
--
For IBM-MAIN
16 matches
Mail list logo
