Re: How Does Your Shop Limit Testing in the Production LPAR

On Jan 9, 2015, at 8:15 PM, Tom Brennan wrote: Ted MacNEIL wrote: > I'm one of those types. > The governor pretty well guarantees a re-submission. Me too. In just about every case where I've seen automatic cancels because of abuse, the user simply reruns the task after adding more of whate

Re: How Does Your Shop Limit Testing in the Production LPAR

Ted MacNEIL wrote: > I'm one of those types. > The governor pretty well guarantees a re-submission. Me too. In just about every case where I've seen automatic cancels because of abuse, the user simply reruns the task after adding more of whatever they ran out of (time, jobparm limits, etc.) I

Re: DB2 query estimator (was: How Does Your Shop Limit Testing in the Production LPAR)

There is a little topic drift, because the original post was about CPU problems on production LPARs due to test runs happening there, and DB2 is not the only reason for CPU consumption of test runs. In fact, we had problem with very CPU intensive workload (C++ and XML processing), which had nothin

Re: Young's Black Hat 2013 talk - was mainframe tribute song

A stitch in time saves nine. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) Sent: Friday, January 09, 2015 4:55 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Young's Black Hat 2013 talk - was mainframe

Re: Young's Black Hat 2013 talk - was mainframe tribute song

In <047801d0291f$5efb31f0$1cf195d0$@mcn.org>, on 01/05/2015 at 11:39 AM, Charles Mills said: >The fact is there have been several successful "real" hacks of >production mainframes, so some sort of real, present-day "hacker" >exposure is not unheard-of in the wild. The Devil is in the details.

Re: zOS 2.1 JCL Symbol Services

In , on 12/30/2014 at 08:26 AM, Donald Russell said: >Thanks for any suggestions... Does IEFSJSYM support (rname) or only (rnumber)? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see We don't care. We don't have to car

Re: Dataset PACK profile

In <54a2ddaa.2070...@acm.org>, on 12/30/2014 at 11:15 AM, Joel Ewing said: >I don't see any field so indicated in the basic PDS directory entry, It doesn't belong there. Have you compared the user data for two members, one packed and one not? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and

Re: Young's Black Hat 2013 talk - was mainframe tribute song

In <54aae54e.7060...@acm.org>, on 01/05/2015 at 01:26 PM, Joel Ewing said: >But, the password encoding in the RACF data base only becomes a >security issue if READ access to the RACF data base itself is not >properly restricted by RACF. The ironic thing is that while I have never seen unsec

Re: CANCEL TSO Logon?

In <874b151289704e46a874bf2ae6fdd8d12088e...@kl126r4b.cs.ad.klmcorp.net>, on 01/05/2015 at 03:45 PM, "Vernooij, CP (ITOPT1) - KLM" said: >What is the point in trying to find a valid userid, if the userid >will be suspended after trying 3 invalid passwords (in our >situation)? DOS attack. --

DB2 query estimator (was: How Does Your Shop Limit Testing in the Production LPAR)

Speaking as a developer. A few years back we used to pass all new (or troublesome) queries through "Visual Explain". We LOVED it. It dramatically improved our ability to tune queries before we implemented them. Then our internal "software police" took Visual Explain away from us and made us

Re: How Does Your Shop Limit Testing in the Production LPAR

Thank you all for your suggestions. We do have separate LPAR and DB2 subsystems for testing. This works for the most part. When they behave. We do have a WLM class that puts any non production job in a very low resource class. This helps too but still we can have batch jobs negatively im

Re: Requirements for use of RECORD parameter on SETRP macro

elardus.engelbre...@sita.co.za (Elardus Engelbrecht) wrote: Thanks John for this URL. Much appreciated. No problem...and no promises that it will be there forever (I don't own it, or know who does, I just knew it was there). -- John Eells z/OS Technical Marketing IBM Poughkeepsie ee...@us.i

Re: Requirements for use of RECORD parameter on SETRP macro

John Eells wrote: >I don't know the answer but I think you can find the other books here: >http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr/Shelves Hmmm, interesting archaeological find! There are lots and lots of interesting ancient scrolls in various languages. Even z/OS v2.1 books (in PDF forma

Re: Requirements for use of RECORD parameter on SETRP macro

On 2015-01-09 13:18, John Eells wrote: I don't know the answer but I think you can find the other books here: http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr/Shelves Thanks John...great link! -- Regards, Gord Tomlin Action Software International (a division of Mazda Computer Corporation) Tel:

Re: Requirements for use of RECORD parameter on SETRP macro

gt.ibm.li...@actionsoftware.com (Gord Tomlin) wrote: I don't have access to manuals for z/OS releases prior to 1.11. Does anyone know when this requirement changed? Gord, I don't know the answer but I think you can find the other books here: http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr/She

Re: Requirements for use of RECORD parameter on SETRP macro

On 2015-01-09 12:23, Tom Marchant wrote: It is in the list in the manual for z/OS 1.7, not in the 1.8 manual. The summary of changes doesn't mention it, so I wonder if it is just a doc change. If it's just a doc change, then it either corrected or introduced a doc error. -- Regards, Gord To

Re: How Does Your Shop Limit Testing in the Production LPAR

I never did say run it against prod. If someone else did, I missed it. My point about the governor still stands regarding test, though. - -teD -   Original Message   From: Farley, Peter x23353 Sent: Friday, January 9, 2015 11:37 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List

Re: Requirements for use of RECORD parameter on SETRP macro

On Fri, 9 Jan 2015 11:52:12 -0500, Tony Harminc wrote: >On 9 January 2015 at 10:09, Gord Tomlin wrote: > >> In the manuals for z/OS 2.1, 1.13, 1.12 and 1.11, RECORD does not appear >> in the list of parameters that require supervisor state or PSW key 0-7. >> Going back to the OS/390 2.10 manual, R

Re: Requirements for use of RECORD parameter on SETRP macro

I have the V1R10 Auth manual open. IT says Minimum authorization: Problem state and any PSW key. For the FRELOCK, SERIAL, RETRY, RETRY15, and FRLKRTY parameters, supervisor state or PSW key 0-7. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA

Re: Requirements for use of RECORD parameter on SETRP macro

On 9 January 2015 at 10:09, Gord Tomlin wrote: > In the manuals for z/OS 2.1, 1.13, 1.12 and 1.11, RECORD does not appear > in the list of parameters that require supervisor state or PSW key 0-7. > Going back to the OS/390 2.10 manual, RECORD is documented as requiring > supervisor state or PSW k

Re: How Does Your Shop Limit Testing in the Production LPAR

Simple - don't run it against the production database - that's what test/development LPAR's and test/development DB2's are for. And if you don't have a test/development environment set up, then someone isn't doing their job. Though I agree a better solution would be a "query time estimator" fun

GSE UK: Meeting Schedule and Call for papers

All, Trying to get organised for 2015 and I have agreed the following meeting schedule with the GSE UK LSG committee: * 25th Feb 2015 Virtual/Webex meeting * 22nd April 2015 Virtual/Webex meeting * 20th or 27th May for a face to face meeting, location TBC, but most likely IBM Southb

Requirements for use of RECORD parameter on SETRP macro

According to the documentation, at some point in time the requirements for the use of the RECORD parameter on the SETRP macro changed. The parameter is still only documented in the MVS Authorized Assembler Services Reference SET-WTO manual, but no longer appears in the list of parameters that r

Re: How Does Your Shop Limit Testing in the Production LPAR

Whose definition of naught? You can't fix it if it doesn't complete! - -teD -   Original Message   From: Martin Packer Sent: Friday, January 9, 2015 08:44 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List Subject: Re: How Does Your Shop Limit Testing in the Production LPAR It c

Re: How Does Your Shop Limit Testing in the Production LPAR

I'm one of those types. The governor pretty well guarantees a re-submission. Which means twice the resources (or more) spent to do nothing! How can they debug/tune something if we don't let complete? - -teD -   Original Message   From: Shane Ginnane Sent: Friday, January 9, 2015 07:10 To: IBM-MAI

Re: [IBMTCP-L] Logmode Setting - Screen Size for 3270

I know when using CA-TPX at my site, I had to add D4C32XX3 (IBM-DYNAMIC) as my session's "Modent name" before I could use dynamic screen sizes. So when TPX connects me to my app, it sends along the modent name of D4C32XX3. Otherwise it would default to a MOD2 once I got to my application. Myse

Re: Fw: BBC News - The ultimate email disclaimer footnote

YUP! >I know the topic of email disclaimer has been discussed here in the past, so I >thought this BBC blog article would be of interest to some. >http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-magazine-monitor-30728874 Hereby I disclaim that I ever read your post and that bbc article, simply because you forg

Re: How Does Your Shop Limit Testing in the Production LPAR

It chops "naughty" work off at the knees. :-) Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/myd

Re: How Does Your Shop Limit Testing in the Production LPAR

Shane Ginnane wrote: >On Fri, 9 Jan 2015 05:27:47 -0600, Scott Chapman wrote: >> Enabling DB2's governor is a good idea as well. >Have others found DBAs are averse to contemplating the governor ?. Uhmmm, I must have lost some precious braincells, but ... ... what is a 'governor' in terms of DB2

Re: Fw: BBC News - The ultimate email disclaimer footnote

Mark Regan wrote: >I know the topic of email disclaimer has been discussed here in the past, so I >thought this BBC blog article would be of interest to some. >http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-magazine-monitor-30728874 Hereby I disclaim that I ever read your post and that bbc article, simply beca

Re: How Does Your Shop Limit Testing in the Production LPAR

On Fri, 9 Jan 2015 05:27:47 -0600, Scott Chapman wrote: > Enabling DB2's governor is a good idea as well. Have others found DBAs are averse to contemplating the governor ?. Shane ... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archiv

Fw: BBC News - The ultimate email disclaimer footnote

I know the topic of email disclaimer has been discussed here in the past, so I thought this BBC blog article would be of interest to some. http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-magazine-monitor-30728874 Thanks, Mark Regan -- For IBM-MA

Re: How Does Your Shop Limit Testing in the Production LPAR

On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 14:38:40 +, Martin Packer wrote: >Here your multitenancy concerns seem to be at the DB2 subsystem level. I >don't think many would advocate sharing a DB2 subsystem between Prod and >Test. Nor would I, but it happens. Especially for off-platform things coming up via DDF.