W dniu 2013-04-05 08:32, suresh chacko pisze:
Hello R.S,
Thank you so much for this info. Can I have some info on how to configure a
CP as kneecapped or not full speed?
Read your machine capacity model.
For example: z196 2817-M15 605
605 means 5 CP, kneecapped. 7xx means full sped, 6xx, 5xx, 4
Hello R.S,
Thank you so much for this info. Can I have some info on how to configure a
CP as kneecapped or not full speed?
So IRD needs parallel sysplex and can be implemented in z/OS environment.
This means it can be shared in a LPAR of CP, zIIP and zAAP in sysplex...am
I right?
Regards,
Suresh
W dniu 2013-04-05 06:51, suresh chacko pisze:
Points we shared and learnt. Thanks to all for this knowledge share.
1. CP is kneecapped and expensive.
Not always kneecapped, especially not true in bigger installations!
Reason: kneecapped CPs can be configured in small machines (z10BC, z114)
Points we shared and learnt. Thanks to all for this knowledge share.
1. CP is kneecapped and expensive. Linux will run faster on IFL.
2. CP and IFL's can be shared in single LPAR
3. Proper sizing of Memory, Paging, SRN resources.
4. If still high usage caused by Linux instance - adding
Hi Tom,
I've also seen 100% usage on a shared IFL used by an LPAR where the "WAIT
COMPLETION" flag was set, i.e. the box called "Do not end the time slice if a
partition enters a wait state" was ticked. Kind of defeats the purpose of
shared PUs, but something to be aware of nonetheless. Later
Reply from Google :
You need to configure DB2 Connect properly (i.e. set up the DCS
directory properly). It sounds like you've defined the connection as
though it's running on DB2 UDB for LUW, not DB2 for z/OS.
http://bytes.com/topic/db2/answers/183050-bind-needed-remote-remote-pc-access-db2-os-
To list;
We have users that are working with DB2 Connect, trying to use the command
line function of it. They reported the following SQL error:
SQL0551N "SSSDM" does not have the privilege to perform operation "CREATE IN"
on object "DALLAS9.NULLID.SQLC2G13.()". SQLSTATE=42501
This object
IBM-MAIN down ?
No, they integrated it into Facebook today and your posting or BOTH
postings arrived in North Korea too.. still covered in some type of
Aussie wool
Kerneels
On 4/4/2013 2:50 PM, John Dawes wrote:
I posted a question sometime back but I haven't seen it in the Inboox. Is IBM
I posted a question sometime back but I haven't seen it in the Inboox. Is IBM
Main down?
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Hi,
Just show us your JCL And we can then fix it for you as in do re me fa
so la te do :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxAvhsIjA_s
Kerneels
On 4/4/2013 2:02 PM, John Dawes wrote:
G'Day All,
I am trying to write the output to disk when I launch ABACKUP. The problem I
am struggling with
G'Day All,
I am trying to write the output to disk when I launch ABACKUP. The problem I
am struggling with is the unit volser parm.
UNIT=3390 VOL(ZMAIL0)
Would anyone have an example output to disk?
--
For IBM-MAIN subscri
IBM Mainframe Discussion List wrote on
04/03/2013 09:09:31 PM:
> I searched for IBM Enterprise COBOL code movement and found nothing
> but I know that it is done from having looked at the procedure
> division maps. I can code a field as CONSTANT-ONE PIC 9 DISPLAY VALUE
> 1. and if the field is
W dniu 2013-04-04 16:49, John McKown pisze:
Not likely gonna be cheap to run Linux on a CP. The CPs on the machine are
likely kneecapped. And using them for Linux will probably drive up MSU
costs on non-Linux systems. And you can't have a single Linux system use
both an IFL and a kneecapped CP co
Hi Clark,
There is a easier way to find out the invalid records. Here is a JCL
which will split the records into 2 files, the good and bad. We
essentially copy the entire record at the end and then use FINDREP to
replace the known characters (A thru Z and 0-9). We will then only be
left is
>>> On 4/4/2013 at 10:24 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
-snip-
> Do I understand correctly that license terms do not allow the number
> of specialty processors to exceed the number of general processors?
No, there is no such restriction. IBM does and has sold IFL-only systems with
no CPs in them.
Sorry, www.mxg.com/newsletters
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Barry Merrill
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 11:03 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Question concerning Z/VM, Linux and General Processors
Wha
What data is 100% busy???
If you are using RMF PR/SM data, MXG TYPE70PR, and
the IFLs are Dedicated, they are always reported
as 100% busy in RMF 70 data, and z/VM MONWRITE data
must be used to report true utilization of the IFS.
SHARED IFL's utilization IS reported in TYPE70 data;
you can see a
You're right John, my management has already reached that conclusion.
-Original Message-
From: John McKown [mailto:john.archie.mck...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 10:50 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Question concerning Z/VM, Linux and General Processors
Not li
Not likely gonna be cheap to run Linux on a CP. The CPs on the machine are
likely kneecapped. And using them for Linux will probably drive up MSU
costs on non-Linux systems. And you can't have a single Linux system use
both an IFL and a kneecapped CP concurrently. So if it is a single Linux
instanc
Thank you to all who have responded. We have a conference call with IBM
scheduled. Hopefully we can sort this out then.
-Original Message-
From: Joel C. Ewing [mailto:jcew...@acm.org]
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 10:42 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Question concerning Z/
Or the transaction rate or application complexity has simply grown from
the original design and has finally exceeded their IFL engine(s)
capacity and they are now trying to determine the cheapest alternative
for increasing the CPU power available to z/VM and Linux.
JC Ewing
On 04/04/2013 09
Correct. Restriction is only for zIIP and zAAP processors, not IFL. You
could have a single, severely kneecapped, CP and n IFLs on a single CEC.
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Bob Shannon wrote:
> > Do I understand correctly that license terms do not allow the number of
> specialty processors t
> Do I understand correctly that license terms do not allow the number of
> specialty processors to exceed the number of general processors?
I don't think this restriction applies to IFLs. I believe some zLinux-only CECs
are configured with no CPs.
Bob Shannon
Rocket Software
-
On Thu, 4 Apr 2013 18:02:53 +0400, suresh chacko wrote:
>I agreed with Tom. GCP is set run at low speed though Linux can be hosted
>natively on it. There may be something went wrong in initial planning of
>Memory, storage sizing etc. Otherwise there should not be any high CPU
>usage on IFL.
>
If
Thank You Suresh,
Improper sizing of Memory, Paging and SRN parameters is a definite possibility.
-Original Message-
From: suresh chacko [mailto:surecha...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 10:03 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Question concerning Z/VM, Linux and Ge
I agreed with Tom. GCP is set run at low speed though Linux can be hosted
natively on it. There may be something went wrong in initial planning of
Memory, storage sizing etc. Otherwise there should not be any high CPU
usage on IFL.
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Tom Marchant wrote:
> On Thu, 4
The (new) abend/reason code happens to be 306 reason x'44'. In most (but
not all) cases, it is unimportant to understand in advance what the abend
code is going to be when something bad happens.
What is important generally is that if you get that abend you can easily
understand what the problem
Hi Tom, Thanks for responding.
I'll pass your comments along to my manager.
Since the original post, I've found there is also a pricing consideration that
will affect any decision.
As to your question, ' High CPU usage in the IFL?'. I was only repeating what I
was told. I have not seen where t
On Thu, 4 Apr 2013 13:38:41 +, O'Brien, David W. wrote:
>Can a workload such as Linux which is currently running on an IFL, run on a
>General Processor?
Yes, it can. Remember that IFL processors run at maximum speed, while general
processors
may have been set to run at a slower speed, dep
The following question comes from my manager:
Can a workload such as Linux which is currently running on an IFL, run on a
General Processor?
We seem to be experiencing high CPU usage and management seems to feel
switching the workload off of the IFL might be beneficial.
Thank You,
Dave O'Brien
On Wed, 3 Apr 2013 21:58:24 -0700, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
>Now, what is SVC X'22' where the ABEND codes like 322 come from?
Many of the System Xnn abend codes, where X is in the range
from 1 through E are associated with SVC nn, but AFAIK, that is
not documented. There are certainly except
(1) In the smp/e “cross-zone query”screen (panelid GIMQU2PO),
if you leave BOTH the “Entry Type” and “Entry Name” fields blank,
and hit enter, you get a long (757 long) laundry list of Entry Types.
Where can one go, what book/source consult to find out what these
things are?
Check out
In <20130404045824.f3f42404c...@minthe.ugcs.caltech.edu>, on
04/03/2013
at 09:58 PM, glen herrmannsfeldt said:
>As well as I remember, the SFxx codes are when an SVC is issued
>and no SVC routine is there to service it.
Not every SFxx indicates a missing SVC.
>Now, what is SVC X'22'
MGCR a
On Wed, 3 Apr 2013 16:48:55 -0500, Mike Schwab wrote:
>With this change, when the JCL interpreter sees the PARMDD=, it
>allocates the buffer of 32768 bytes
Did you see that documented somewhere? I would have expected
that it allocates a buffer large enough to hold the long parm, which
might be
34 matches
Mail list logo
