Very good question.
Related... Has it been detailed just exactly what the differences between
NUMPROC(MIG) and NUMPROC(NOPFD) are? And an even better question, what (if
any) differences are there in the end results?
From what I've observed by looking at the pseudo-assembler output.
IDUG runs the DB2-L list.
Most helpful people over there...
http://www.idug.org/p/cm/ld/fid=78
Cheers,
Jantje.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the
In
CAGx7iU0u=mgg3ztz3_cadorybuseauewzm8ulhv9yc7re5p...@mail.gmail.com,
on 04/20/2015
at 05:13 PM, Steff Gladstone steff.gladst...@gmail.com said:
How do I use the ISGENQ macro in such a way that the ENQ lasts for
the life of the entire job (or several job steps) and not just for
the life of a
In 8918505894176310.wa.m42tomibmmainyahoo@listserv.ua.edu, on
04/20/2015
at 03:11 PM, Tom Marchant
000a2a8c2020-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu said:
It is easy for us to fault the designers of System/360 and OS/360
for not considering the future requirement for more than 16 MB.
In 7935647633061500.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu, on
04/20/2015
at 09:39 AM, Paul Gilmartin
000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu said:
I'm a skeptic about Postel's Principle.
Google for MBZ. Your point on F zones is well taken, but given the
card heritage IBM may
In
caajsdjhnhdj9azcgh+hwmwm46xyxkwzkmpmrk_-9x1m6pul...@mail.gmail.com,
on 04/20/2015
at 10:09 AM, John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com said:
I wonder if it would be possible to do a directed ENQ of a SYSDSN
to the initiator TCB and then modify the SWA to generate the i
nternal
OK, but what are we talking about here, in performance terms? NUMPROC(MIG)
versus NUMPROC(NOPFD) offered some performance benefit in the past, but
Enterprise COBOL 5.x offers a performance benefit, too.
Basically, is this 2 steps forward 1 step back, or is it 1 step forward 2
steps back? The
From your other posts I understand that you don't want to change JCL,
but you are able to change the code of the relevant programs and you know
all the programs that are part of this operation and could do other
operations
or changes affecting your change management system operation.
So: have
Elardus Engelbrecht wrote:
Hmmm, I always wanted to ask on IBM-MAIN: Are there any non-IBM software which
enforces you to use SMF type number without giving you ability to override
that number in parms or exit? Something like 'Use *my* number or die'...
That list is indeed in Cheryl's SMF
On 21 April 2015 at 06:51, Timothy Sipples sipp...@sg.ibm.com wrote:
To pick another analogy, I don't think I've ever seen a rail system where the
locomotive is outsourced but the train cars continue to be run in-house, or
vice versa.
Well I imagine things are much different in Singapore.
I searched a little on MXG.com and found only ICFIDs for 202. In 12.227
circa 1994 there is an
update for FDR IAM support added.
In a message dated 4/21/2015 8:51:06 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
neil.e.er...@wellsfargo.com writes:
IAM??
Is there any other list of in-use User SMF record types in addition to
Cheryl's? (http://www.watsonwalker.com/SMFreference.pdf)
Is anyone aware of any product that generally uses Type 202?
(And yes, I know that generally programs that involve User SMF Record Types
allow the specification of a
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 8:37 PM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote:
In
caajsdjhnhdj9azcgh+hwmwm46xyxkwzkmpmrk_-9x1m6pul...@mail.gmail.com,
on 04/20/2015
at 10:09 AM, John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com said:
I wonder if it would be possible to do a directed
Karl,
If you are not aware - there are also a JES2 and JES3 list. If you would
like to join, go to these URLs
JES2http://listserv.vt.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=jes2-l
JES3http://www.listserv.uga.edu/archives/jes3-l.html
The biggest difference I see is that JES3 needs to know it owns resources
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Steff Gladstone steff.gladst...@gmail.com
wrote:
Even without modifying the SWA with information for the DD, as you
suggested earlier?
Yes, you can do the directed ENQ yourself without modifying the SWA.
Which, by the by, I _mentioned_, not _suggested_. At
IAM??
Neil E. Ervin
Mainframe Performance Analyst
Mainframe/Midrange Services
Wells Fargo Compute Platform Services l North Carolina (Eastern Time Zone)
MAC D1112-023
Cell 910-477-2536 l Text Pager: 9104772...@vtext.com
neil.e.er...@wellsfargo.com
TOG Recognition
-Original
Charles Mills wrote:
Is there any other list of in-use User SMF record types in addition to
Cheryl's?
Cheryl is the only one person who is really kind enough to produce that handy
document. Thanks Cheryl! I can't live without those small booklets.
Is anyone aware of any product that
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 11:00:20 +0300, Steff Gladstone wrote:
how
does the operating systen itself maintain a continuous ENQ over several job
steps for a dataset allocated in the first step with disp=(mod,pass)?
It isn't so much a question of How as Who.
The Initiator performs the ENQ and ATTACHes
Hello JES experts,
My practical experience with JES3 is near zero, or even below zero.
The software we develop rarely ever has to take into consideration the
differences between JES2 and JES3. I can remember only 3 such cases in the past
more than 15 years I have been working here. Every
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 3:00 AM, Steff Gladstone steff.gladst...@gmail.com
wrote:
Thank you all for for help. The obvious question that remains is: how
does the operating systen itself maintain a continuous ENQ over several job
steps for a dataset allocated in the first step with
Even without modifying the SWA with information for the DD, as you
suggested earlier?
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 2:50 PM, John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 3:00 AM, Steff Gladstone
steff.gladst...@gmail.com
wrote:
Thank you all for for help. The
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 11:20:24 -0400, Robert A. Rosenberg wrote:
... a IMO major design flaw in the ENQ process
the Initiator can be forced to hold an ENQ for subsequent steps where
it is no longer needed. The case I am talking about is there is no
way to convert an EXC ENQ into a SHR one.
What
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 10:20 AM, Robert A. Rosenberg hal9...@panix.com
wrote:
At 06:50 -0500 on 04/21/2015, John McKown wrote about Re: ENQ for the life
of the job:
ŠThe initiator (in general terms) is what reads the Šparsed JCL and
creates
the SWA control blocks which represent the job.
At 06:50 -0500 on 04/21/2015, John McKown wrote about Re: ENQ for the
life of the job:
ÐThe initiator (in general terms) is what reads the Ðparsed JCL and creates
the SWA control blocks which represent the job. This code then knows the
DSNs in the job and issues a single ENQ for _all_ of them
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 11:20:24 -0400, Robert A. Rosenberg wrote:
... due to a IMO major design flaw in the ENQ process
the Initiator can be forced to hold an ENQ for subsequent steps where
it is no longer needed. The case I am talking about is there is no
way to convert an EXC ENQ into a SHR one.
In
CAGx7iU1q55ZSw_pYRWmnMEs0DB1GYHnC28k7MJP_cHe=clv...@mail.gmail.com,
on 04/21/2015
at 11:00 AM, Steff Gladstone steff.gladst...@gmail.com said:
The obvious question that remains is: how does the operating
systen itself maintain a continuous ENQ over several job steps for
a dataset
We are currently operating a Grid configuration with four clusters.
Unfortunately some of the tapes that were inserted into our local cluster went
into the wrong catagory code. Also unfortunately we cannot get the entry exit
disabled on the remote host so of course it's possible that any host
MVS Solutions' Thruput Manager product is able to dynamically add limiting
agents to JCL based on a set of rules, so that might be worth looking at.
Jonathan Eosze | Sr Computer Sys Engr | IT Operations
Mainframe Management 1 (IMS), Information Technology, USAA
-Original Message-
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 11:05:51 -0500, John McKown wrote:
The ability to atomically downgrade an ENQ from EXC to SHR is now/soon to
be available in z/OS. I don't remember if it is a PTF or release 2.1.1 .
In:
z/OS 2.1.0z/OS MVSz/OS MVS JCL ReferenceJOB statementDSENQSHR
parameterOverrides
If I were in the position to decide which option to use,
I would clearly vote for MIG.
NOPFD does unnecessary fix-ups in certains cases, which causes
some performance penalties, and I personally don't like the use of
CLC for the comparison of decimal values, even if the lengths are the
same, for
At 10:49 -0500 on 04/21/2015, Paul Gilmartin wrote about Re: ENQ for
the life of the job:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 11:20:24 -0400, Robert A. Rosenberg wrote:
... a IMO major design flaw in the ENQ process
the Initiator can be forced to hold an ENQ for subsequent steps where
it is no longer
My following suggestions may be missing the desired goal. But, what the heck
here they are:
1. Use IEFBR14 with the required dsn and disp=old in step1 and in the last
stepx after all required steps
2. Use IEHPROGM to rename the dsn(member)
3. Use IDCAMS alter dsn(member)
4. Use RACF batch step1
On the other hand the window cleaning in this building is
done by a window cleaning company, but other external and internal
cleaning is done either in-house or by other companies who don't do
exterior windows.
Sure, but the point is that it's possible to establish clear lines of
management
Timothy Sipples wrote:
Sure, but the point is that it's possible to establish clear lines of
management responsibility and control when separating in that way. Most
commercial buildings have sealed windows, so exterior window cleaning is
typically a separable service. Mopping and sweeping within
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 18:01:10 -0500, Walt Farrell wrote:
Yes, but only for abnormal termination of the Initiator TCB, or for failure of
the entire address space. In normal or abnormal termination of the jobstep
task those resource managers won't help the OP, and the ENQ would remain
outstanding
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 16:39:00 +, Rob Scott rsc...@rocketsoftware.com wrote:
No matter what you fiddle about with in SWA, these GRS resource manager
routines will enable GRS to cleanup any underlying
resources obtained by the task or address space.
Yes, but only for abnormal termination of
Don Grisnell wrote:
We are currently exploring the option of outsourcing our
mainframe environment.
I know you asked for feedback offline, but I'd like to offer an important
bit of online feedback.
In my personal view, I do not think mainframe-only (or any
platform-specific) outsourcing is a
The Video is awesome. Thanks All for your help..
Is there any other alternate way to Transfer the scartX,zip file directly
to Mainframe PDS member and apply the CAR2014 for CA1 instead of
transferring to USS directory and then unzip the file and apply the CAR.
I'm facing a problem with CAUNZIP
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Steff Gladstone steff.gladst...@gmail.com
wrote:
Sorry, John. My question was unclear. It was referring to your earlier
remarks above:
Thinking about it a bit more, given what Mr. Relson
said about RTM, doing this _should_ work even if the
I think it is worth pointing out the most likely cleaning up logic used for
enqueues (note that I do not have access to GRS source - but this is how I am
guessing things work).
GRS will establish a TYPE=ADDRSPC and a TYPE=TASK resource manager routine to
cover all address spaces and all tasks
40 matches
Mail list logo
