Re: Parallel Sysplex Online Training

hi Saurabh, did you have chance to check TechSol india? regards, Amit On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Lizette Koehler wrote: > At share there was an IBMer who was requesting what classes we need for > mainframe. So we provided a large list. > > Also, there will be in the Share.org Proceedings

Re: X86 server

> The elimination of batch which seems > to be feasible on non-mainframe architectures alone is a killer. There is no elimination of batch, anywhere. It might go by another name, it might be 'hidden', but there's always batch. Remember to remind the auditors of that next time they come around a

Re: X86 server

On 26 Aug 2012 14:00:54 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main zman wrote: >Good lord! Can you PLEASE try to post *vaguely* relevant material? This >makes you look like a troll. Looking at this material (in the three postings from Lynn) which I consider highly relevant, I am wondering about the long ter

Re: What size memory object backs an IARCP64

Primary and secondary cell counts are not provided on IARCP64 simply because the value of providing such a thing is far less (if there was any at all) than the cost of providing it. It makes sense for CPOOL because GETMAIN (STORAGE OBTAIN) is in 8-byte increments. But storage above-2G is in 1M

Re: X86 server

Good lord! Can you PLEASE try to post *vaguely* relevant material? This makes you look like a troll. On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: > scott_j_f...@yahoo.com (Scott Ford) writes: > > I saw the same exercise in a pharm. company trying to go from MVS, > > multiple Lpars

Re: "execs" or "scripts"

John, Ty I didn't realize REXX, was a PL/1 dialect. Very interesting I wrote PL/1 under OS/VS2 many many moons ago, in the 70s. I hadnt heard of a SLPL..so I find this also interesting..and would like to know more. Scott ford www.identityforge.com On Aug 26, 2012, at 2:55 PM, John Gilmore wr

Re: X86 server

scott_j_f...@yahoo.com (Scott Ford) writes: > I saw the same exercise in a pharm. company trying to go from MVS, > multiple Lpars to unix. Several millions of $$$ and it was a > bustsome applications were difficult to convert in the 90s, one of the biggest efforts was by the financial industr

Re: X86 server

cfmpub...@ns.sympatico.ca (Clark Morris) writes: > Are there any benchmarks available comparing a z series against a > blade configuration doing the same work and comparing the cost per > benchmark unit? Given the complexity of instruction sets for both > Intel and the z series and the different n

Re: "execs" or "scripts"

REXX is a statement-level procedural language (SLPL). I qualify it in this way because the term 'language' properly embraces a great many usefully distinguished things. The title of one of the great classics of 20th-century biology is von Frisch, Karl. Tanzensprache und Orientierung der Bienen.

Re: X86 server

shmuel+...@patriot.net (Shmuel Metz , Seymour J.) writes: > Only if you're talking about the same instruction mix. When one system > has instructions like MVCL and the other doesn't, MIPS truly means > "meaningless indication of processor speed". A comparison of FLOPS > ratings might be more meani

Re: "execs" or "scripts"

I feel it's a language. Since it not only is interpreted but compiled. The difference for me is language functions and calls. The difference between exec or exec2 and rexx is pretty major to me. A lot of differences. I learned rexx in 1984 .but I feel each language has advantages and disadv

Re: Was: X86 server - Competitive economic advantage of System z plus z/OS compared with x86 plus (Linux or windoze)

I saw the same exercise in a pharm. company trying to go from MVS, multiple Lpars to unix. Several millions of $$$ and it was a bustsome applications were difficult to convert Scott ford www.identityforge.com On Aug 26, 2012, at 1:57 PM, Ed Gould wrote: > On Aug 26, 2012, at 6:06 AM, A

Re: Was: X86 server - Competitive economic advantage of System z plus z/OS compared with x86 plus (Linux or windoze)

On Aug 26, 2012, at 6:06 AM, Arthur Fichtl wrote: SNIP- OTOH, if you look at the global big new companies (e.g. Google, Amazon, Facebook), nobody of them is running MF systems because these companies are not captivated by legacy systems. Instead

Re: X86 server

On 26 Aug 2012 07:59:31 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: >paulgboul...@aim.com (Paul Gilmartin) writes: >> What's impressive here is that they don't buy off-the-shelf hardware >> systems; they design their own. > >at hundreds of thousands blades in a megadatacenter and multiple >megadata

Re: What size memory object backs an IARCP64

Shmuel, Very wise, I feel the way only because I have customers who have seemed to forgotten how to read a manual. There are questions raised by reading the manual or by installations doing implementations. After working for IBM consulting we had a SOW , anything above and beyond aw billable. T

Inappropriate Postings: ISPF Panel and LPAR name

Inappropriate postings on this list will NOT be tolerated. We are supposed to be professionals! If the parties involved want to exchange emails privately, fine. But I won't allow unprofessional postings on this list. If it continues, I will start removing subscribers. Darren -

Re: ISPF Panel and LPAR name

On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: > In <503996a6.8030...@bcs.org.uk>, on 08/26/2012 >at 04:23 AM, CM Poncelet said: > >>What's your problem, Metz? > > Dealing with hypocritical fools. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ivUOnnstpg -- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL

Re: ISPF Panel and LPAR name

In <503996a6.8030...@bcs.org.uk>, on 08/26/2012 at 04:23 AM, CM Poncelet said: >What's your problem, Metz? Dealing with hypocritical fools. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT Atid/2 We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress

Re: X86 server

In <2174580136452535.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu>, on 08/24/2012 at 10:31 PM, Paul Gilmartin said: >On Thu, 23 Aug 2012 22:13:49 -0400, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: > >> ... >>max configured z196 with 80 processors is rated for 50BIPS and goes for >>$28M (about $560,000/BIPS) ... >>

Re: What size memory object backs an IARCP64

In , on 08/25/2012 at 09:03 AM, John Gilmore said: >These things said, I agree with Shane that those of us who have >used and know something about the above-the-bar facilities that >IBM is making available have an obligation to be helpful to >colleagues who have less experience with them.

Re: ISPF Panel and LPAR name

In <50382f4e.6000...@bcs.org.uk>, on 08/25/2012 at 02:50 AM, CM Poncelet said: >>As your interpretation seems to be the only one that matters How is that not a lie? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT Atid/2 We don't care. We don't hav

Re: "execs" or "scripts"

In <5159fdfc-4063-4acb-969a-95c03fc7d...@yahoo.com>, on 08/25/2012 at 12:41 AM, Scott Ford said: >They consider REXX a language Given that substantial applications have been written in REXX, why would you not consider it to be a programming language? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysPro

Re: "execs" or "scripts"

In <8e52b561-1103-4189-b592-52719bae5...@yahoo.com>, on 08/24/2012 at 08:56 PM, Scott Ford said: >Maybe the usage of execs or rexx in writing or speaking might be >based on whether you learned iron VM or z/OS. Both CMS and TSO have an EXEC command. Given that TSO does *not* have a CLIST comma

Re: X86 server

paulgboul...@aim.com (Paul Gilmartin) writes: > What's impressive here is that they don't buy off-the-shelf hardware > systems; they design their own. at hundreds of thousands blades in a megadatacenter and multiple megadatacenters spread around the world ... they claim that they can build their o

Re: ShopzSeries problem?

Ignore this post. After 60 minutes, it finally was available for download. Bob -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Richards, Robert B. Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2012 9:40 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: ShopzSerie

ShopzSeries problem?

I submitted an order last Thursday morning for UK78546 and all day it had a status of "Final Packaging". After 72 hours, it still indicated the same status. I deleted and re-ordered UK78546 and am now back in "Final Packaging" status for the last 30 minutes. Is anyone else experiencing difficul

Re: Was: X86 server - Competitive economic advantage of System z plus z/OS compared with x86 plus (Linux or windoze)

On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 13:06:13 +0200, Arthur Fichtl wrote: > >OTOH, if you look at the global big new companies (e.g. Google, Amazon, >Facebook), nobody of them is running MF systems because these companies >are not captivated by legacy systems. > >Instead, Google (as known to the public) is running

Was: X86 server - Competitive economic advantage of System z plus z/OS compared with x86 plus (Linux or windoze)

Just an additional comment to the past discussions. I agree that a big MF installation (e.g. running a number of sysplexes of z10 EC CECs or z196 with a number of say 10 to 50 LPARs) has in fact no reason to migrate to Intel based machines. I was working for a Bavarian manufacturing company a

Re: How to retain volumes by days when VOLUME VRS is used in DFSMSrmm

Hi Wood-san, Thank you very much for your support. > Is this volser range in a specific library and the only range in that library? At this point the volser range in a specific library. (They only have one SMS library). But in the future, volser Ax, Bx are in Library-A and Xx, Yzzz

Re: How to retain volumes by days when VOLUME VRS is used in DFSMSrmm

Wood-san, Thank you for your explanation. What I like to know is following: When I use specific (full 6 character) volser in VOLUME VRS parameter, why the COUNT become for DAYS. And the volser is generic, why the COUNT is treated as # of volumes. This is what I'm looking for in the manual. You