Hi all
Is there any performance benefit of compiling our frequently REXX execs?
Kind regards
Kostas
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO
Dear Listers,
We are thinking to implement storage tiering using some SSD volumes for some of
our very active DB2 tablespaces. Is there any way to measure performance
improvements for both CPU and IO utilization? Do you have any experience on
tiering with SSD in DB2 environment?
Kind regards
Hi,
Yes if you have a lot of rexx-pure executing code. If you have a many host
commands intermingled with the code it's probably not much benefits.
It depends of how much of the processing is done in the rexx code.
Regards
Thomas Berg
___
Agree with Thomas
On the REXX compiler installation, you find some compute intensive samples.
Here we got the CPU speed 1 - 7 for the compiled REXX code
I didn't see any "official" performance compare between compiled and
interpreted code.
Maybe a point would be to minimize the called exte
What tools do you have? Do you have SAS SAS/MXG SAS/MICS, Omegamon (Tivoli),
DISK Magic, etc...
What version of z/OS, DB2?
What hardware is used? EMC (VMAX, other), HDS, IBM?
RMF which creates the Type 70 records, should contain some of the information
you are looking for. Do you have exp
Yes, but modest.
Others have pointed out the issue of external calls. I would also point out the
issue of "potential gain." If the Rexx exec currently takes .1 seconds to run,
exactly how much are you likely to gain from compiling it?
Also note that unlike what your expectations may be, compile
I thought there were 2 versions of the runtime system for REXX.
One that was free and one you paid for and therefore licensed.
If this is still true, I suspect the differences between the two versions is
related to either tighter code, more functions or both. I've truly never
checked it out.
I wa
On 8/7/2013 7:21 AM, Hardee, Chuck wrote:
I thought there were 2 versions of the runtime system for REXX. One
that was free and one you paid for and therefore licensed. If this is
still true, I suspect the differences between the two versions is
related to either tighter code, more functions or b
On Tue, 6 Aug 2013 12:39:09 +0800, David Crayford wrote:
>
>I've always liked the nice abstraction with the z/OS C/C++ FILE I/O
>implementation. fopen() is a factory function which returns a
>semi-opaque structure with two function pointers to read/write routines
>(methods) which handle all
>the di
On 07/08/2013, at 9:34 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Aug 2013 12:39:09 +0800, David Crayford wrote:
>>
>> I've always liked the nice abstraction with the z/OS C/C++ FILE I/O
>> implementation. fopen() is a factory function which returns a
>> semi-opaque structure with two function pointe
This is from the REXX user guide:
The performance improvements that you can expect when you run compiled REXX
programs depend on the type of program. A program that performs large
numbersof arithmetic operations of default precision shows the greatest
improvement. Aprogram that mainly issues
You know, IMHO IBM blew it when the 31-bit thing came along and they came up
with a bunch of "design patches" to QSAM like the DBCE. They should have
gone the "file handle" route where the control blocks were hidden from the
using programmers. You could continue to use 24-bit DCBs as-is for as long
I compiled the ISPF DTL compiler which is written in REXX. It ran significantly
quicker. I have EXECIO benchmarks where compiled REXX was actually slower.
http://users.tpg.com.au/crayford/rexx-lua-c-io-benchmark.htm.
On 07/08/2013, at 10:08 PM, Dave Salt wrote:
> This is from the REXX user gu
On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 10:26:56 -0400, Charles Mills wrote:
>You know, IMHO IBM blew it when the 31-bit thing came along and they came up
>with a bunch of "design patches" to QSAM like the DBCE. They should have
>gone the "file handle" route where the control blocks were hidden from the
>using program
Right you are.
Parenthetically, no need for a 24-bit API because the whole point would be to
allow QSAM to exploit 32-bit.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 10:47
Hello group,
Does anyone know of a method to resume a RACF revoked ID without having an SMF
record be written?
We produce a daily listing of RACF commands from our SMF type 80s (using
RACFRW) and we list ADDUSER ADDGROUP ALTUSER ALTGROUP CONNECT DELUSER DELGROUP
PASSWORD PERMIT RALTER RDEFIN
Greg Shirey wrote:
>I dumped the SMF records for both July 7 and July 8 and ran a RACFRW to list
>all the records and there is no reference to this User ID.
From what LPARs are you collecting your records? Do you have RRSF? Do you have
an IRREVX01 exit (RACF command processor exit)
Do you h
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTQzMDM
Kind of interesting. Hope people don't mind the fact that it is not about
the z.
--
As of next week, passwords will be entered in Morse code.
Maranatha! <><
John McKown
--
Ah, that is interesting. If I'm reading this correctly, I should see a type 7
record when the system loses other SMF records. So, seeing no type 7 record
indicates that no records were lost. And there is no type 7 in the dump for
that day.
We converted to logstream recording of SMF data ba
Just a stab but maybe the below applies
Record Type 7 (07) - Data Lost
z/OS V1R12.0 MVS System Management Facilities (SMF)
SA22-7630-22
If all SMF buffers become full (either a result of no available output data
sets for SMF to write to OR the system generating records at a rate fast
On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 12:04:51 -0400, Charles Mills wrote:
>
>Parenthetically, no need for a 24-bit API because the whole point would be to
>allow QSAM to exploit 32-bit.
>
Underreacher. While 32-bit may be twice as good as 31-bit, it's not
nearly as good as 64-bit. Anyone who designs a new contro
Elardus,
I have but one LPAR, we do not use RRSF, and we have no exits. We do use RRDF
to allow for some password synchronization for those users who have multiple
logons. This ID did not have a PEER, however.
I tried a few experiments with the IRRADU00 utility. I haven't found any
refere
On 7 August 2013 12:33, Greg Shirey wrote:
> Does anyone know of a method to resume a RACF revoked ID without having an
> SMF record be written?
Sure - just about anything can be done with the RACF macros. But they
require authorization, of course.
> We produce a daily listing of RACF commands
On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 11:55:07 -0500, John McKown wrote:
>http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTQzMDM
>
>Kind of interesting. Hope people don't mind the fact that it is not about
>the z.
>
Hmmm. Vaguely reminiscent of Amdahl, Fujitsu, Power Computing, and
DayStar.
But they probably
Especially z/OS won't run on POWER. AIX, Linux, and "i/OS" (the IBM
version, not Apple's!) are a possibility. But I doubt that IBM will license
the i/OS system either.
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 11:55:07 -0500, John McKown wrote:
>
> >http://www.ph
>Especially z/OS won't run on POWER
It won't run natively but could certainly run under an emulator.
Bob Shannon
Rocket Software
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv
OK. Legally licensed? I know of only two emulators for z/Architecture. One
is Hercules/390. The other is IBM's which is used on the zPDT machine (this
is a guess on my part). I guess that IBM could license the zPDT, ported to
POWER (AIX or Linux?). But I really doubt that they will. Futher discussi
I was not sure if this had been sent out to the list. Only PDF no BOO
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/epubs/pdf/e0z3m100.pdf
The Migration PDF from z/OS V1.12 and V1.13 to V2.1 is out
Lizette
--
For IBM-MAIN
john.archie.mck...@gmail.com (John McKown) writes:
> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTQzMDM
>
> Kind of interesting. Hope people don't mind the fact that it is not about
> the z.
Folklore is that Apple moved to Intel because IBM decided to focus on
servers and weren't keeping u
On 7 August 2013, 13:34 Tony Harminc wrote:
>> We produce a daily listing of RACF commands from our SMF type 80s (using
>> RACFRW) and we list ADDUSER >>ADDGROUP ALTUSER ALTGROUP CONNECT DELUSER
>> DELGROUP PASSWORD PERMIT RALTER RDEFINE REMOVE.
>>
>> We also produce a daily listing of our CICS
> OK. Legally licensed?
Processor speed increases have slowed and emphasis is being placed on more
concurrent processes. This raises the possibility of emulating zArchitecture
on Power and eliminating z-specific hardware, something that's been speculated
about for years. With the hardware fur
Get used to it!
IBM announced EOS for BookManager Read yesterday. EOS date 11/2014.
ISTR, No CD/DVD's in .boo format was announced a couple of months back
Cheers,
I was not sure if this had been sent out to the list. Only PDF no BOO
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/epubs/pdf/e0z3m100.pdf
The M
is that lpar mirrored? any chances of command replication on this lpar?
On Aug 7, 2013 10:03 PM, "Greg Shirey" wrote:
>
> Hello group,
>
> Does anyone know of a method to resume a RACF revoked ID without having
an SMF record be written?
>
> We produce a daily listing of RACF commands from our SMF
Too true. Looks more like an Intel vs. ARM future. I'm not enough of a
computer scientist to know which is "better". I stopped learning the Intel
architecture in the i568 time frame. I did _not_ like it. I have looked a
bit at ARM and I would likely have been a RISC bigot back in the day.
On Wed,
On Aug 7, 2013, at 4:08 PM, John McKown wrote:
> Too true. Looks more like an Intel vs. ARM future. I'm not enough of a
> computer scientist to know which is "better". I stopped learning the Intel
> architecture in the i568 time frame. I did _not_ like it. I have looked a
> bit at ARM and I would
On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 20:14:06 +, Bob Shannon wrote:
>>Especially z/OS won't run on POWER
>
>It won't run natively but could certainly run under an emulator.
>
OK. And I had been misled by chatter I had heard, possibly about
the ECLipz endeavor, the rebuttal of which I failed to notice, to
mis
Group,
I took out all the x'70' stuff. It looks like it works if you have the
right terminal settings. I had to adjust the width to get it to format
correctly.
/* REXX */
address ISPEXEC "CONTROL ERRORS RETURN"
S = '0123456789ABCDEF'
H = ''
do i1 = 1 by 1 to 16
do i2 = 1 by 1 to
On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 11:33:24 -0500, Greg Shirey wrote:
>Does anyone know of a method to resume a RACF revoked ID without having an SMF
>record be written?
An APF-authorized program can use ICHEINTY or RACROUTE
REQUEST=EXTRACT,TYPE=REPLACE to resume a user ID, and neither will cut an SMF
reco
>Yes if you have a lot of rexx-pure executing code. If you have a many host
>commands intermingled with the code it's probably not much benefits.
I wanted to ask, where is EXECIO in the picture and how is it compares with
using stream
Thanks
ZA
---
That is only one issue of screen scraping which we have talked on
here before.
Its like trying to take an IDCAMS listing and parse it out to be more
user friendly.
It works great until IBM changes it. IOW its not a programmed
interface that IBM is willing to advertise.
Ed
On Aug 7, 2013, a
I agree, even though we have code which is similar. If I wrote it today,
I'd use IRRXUTIL to get that data using a REXX program.
On Aug 7, 2013 11:32 PM, "Ed Gould" wrote:
> That is only one issue of screen scraping which we have talked on here
> before.
> Its like trying to take an IDCAMS listi
41 matches
Mail list logo
