Re: COBOL5 and ceedump

>> And as for the "standard way" to cheat the Cobol table restriction (I'm no -- Peter Hunkeler >> Cobol programmer, sorry): Cheating is cheating. Shudder But it explains >> at >> least why IBM agreed to change the code. Thanks. >> > >Not cheating, accomplishing a business need despite

Re: Confusing info about System Logger and GDPS K-systems

Maybe it depends on the GDPS level you are running, but in the V3.13 (and several previous) manuals, appendix D states: "As a consequence, and to avoid use of the System Logger on the Controlling systems and any associated allocation of offload or staging data sets that must be PPRCed for

Re: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?

I was only giving thoughts on how COBOL might support something similar to the PL/I example. Beyond that I have not given the issue a moment of thought, as I don't have my own personal use case(s) in mind to consider. If you have a better way at another "implementation layer" you are very

Re: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 17:23:18 -0600, Paul Gilmartin (000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu) wrote about "Re: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?" (in <1554048328241551.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu>): > On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 20:18:04 +, David W Noon wrote: [snip] >> So,

Re: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?

On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 00:07:19 +, Frank Swarbrick wrote: >I personally don't have a particular use for it, and thus would not myself >create an RFE requesting it. But based on what I've seen discussed here I was >thinking they were looking for something like ... > Tunnel vision! The feature

Re: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?

I personally don't have a particular use for it, and thus would not myself create an RFE requesting it. But based on what I've seen discussed here I was thinking they were looking for something like the following example: select my-file assign using my-file-name. 01 my-file-name pic x(8).

Re: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?

And what would you want in data-name-1? A DDNAME,like the PL/I? A data set name? A partial data set name (with some magic for full expansion)? Something else? What do you feel, with your selected option for data-name-1, would be some example uses for this? Again, for me, just because

Re: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 20:18:04 +, David W Noon wrote: >On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 13:06:14 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote: >>> >>> Simply use PL/I with the TITLE() option on the OPEN statement. ... >>> >>> If you really are wedded to COBOL, ask for the language to offer a new >>> facility in the

Re: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?

For whatever its worth, the latest COBOL Standard offers the following syntax, which I believe meets this requirement at the language level: SELECT file-name-1 ASSIGN USING data-name-1. "3) The ASSIGN clause specifies the association of the file connector referenced by file-name-1 to a

Re: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 09:30:40 -0800, Charles Mills wrote: >Agree, agree, agree! >The single TIOT is a limit to "virtualization." ... > >To give a practical example, it might be nice to write an executive that would >ATTACH multiple FTP clients, so one could run a bunch of related file >transfers

Re: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 13:06:14 -0600, Paul Gilmartin (000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu) wrote about "Re: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?" (in <2517422968801667.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu>): [snip] > On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:26:27 +, David W Noon wrote: >> >>

Re: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 12:38:22 -0600, John Mckown (john.archie.mck...@gmail.com) wrote about "Re: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?" (in ): > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:26 PM, David W Noon < >

Re: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 11:57:05 -0600, Greg Dyck wrote: >On 1/10/2017 11:30 AM, Charles Mills wrote: >> The single TIOT is a limit to "virtualization." > >Certainly the function could be useful. While conceptually it seems >easy to do, where the rubber meets the road in allocation, access >methods,

RMM question

Most of our tape are logical volumes residing in an IBM VTS and they are SMS managed. Our RMM EDGRMMxx parm of RETAINBY is set to volume and we use RETENTION METHOD of VRSEL. I want a certain set of volumes to be managed by RETAINBY SET. Can this be done? FIRST TENNESSEE Confidentiality

Re: Stupid pax -rf problem

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 11:32:27 -0600, John McKown wrote: >On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:12 AM, R.S. wrote: > >> Of course I can (and I do) "cd /yyy/target/dir" before pax -r, but I can't >> believe it's the only option to skin the cat. > >​You only want a clew (older English)? The clew is: look at the

Re: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:26 PM, David W Noon < 013a910fd252-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 07:27:12 -0600, John Mckown > (john.archie.mck...@gmail.com) wrote about ""task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A > crazy thought?" (in >

Re: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 07:27:12 -0600, John Mckown (john.archie.mck...@gmail.com) wrote about ""task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?" (in ): [snip] > So, have you ever wanted to run multiple, concurrent, executions of some >

Re: COBOL5 and ceedump

> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] > On Behalf Of Peter Hunkeler > Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2017 2:28 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: AW: Re: COBOL5 and ceedump > > > >A frequent, even standard way to get past the

Re: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?

On 1/10/2017 11:30 AM, Charles Mills wrote: The single TIOT is a limit to "virtualization." Certainly the function could be useful. While conceptually it seems easy to do, where the rubber meets the road in allocation, access methods, SMF accounting, and more, it would be a very

Re: Stupid pax -rf problem

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:12 AM, R.S. wrote: > The following scenario: > pax archive created in some directory, let's say /aaa/bbb (many files and > subdirectories here) > the resulting archive is /TEST.pax > > I'm able to restore the archive using the following

Re: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?

Agree, agree, agree! The single TIOT is a limit to "virtualization." I could write an "executive" to run multiple application programs simultaneously as a single jobstep with separate TCBs. The usefulness of a general such solution is limited by the lack of independent DD's for each program.

Re: Confusing info about System Logger and GDPS K-systems

I'm confused and mystified. We run GDPS for DR on a standalone sysplex. I'm not sure what (if anything) we do with logger there, but the task is definitely running on the K system. IXG601I 09.19.25 LOGGER DISPLAY SYSTEM LOGGER STATUS SYSTEM SYSTEM LOGGER STATUS --

Stupid pax -rf problem

The following scenario: pax archive created in some directory, let's say /aaa/bbb (many files and subdirectories here) the resulting archive is /TEST.pax I'm able to restore the archive using the following command: pax -r -peW -f /TEST.pax However the command above restores the archive in a

Re: General question about address space

The case I know best is JES2, which now includes tasks JES2AUX and JES2MON. The classic single-task JES2 problem was a hang on one member of a MAS. All other systems complained about access to the checkpoint, while the hung system couldn't even respond to simple commands. It's hung, after all.

Re: Hidden Figures

On Jan 10, 2017, at 10:36 AM, Clark Morris wrote: > > 7070 was decimal. Do you mean 7090 which was 36 bit word binary? Yes, I mistyped it. -- Pew, Curtis G curtis@austin.utexas.edu ITS Systems/Core/Administrative Services

Re: Hidden Figures

[Default] On 10 Jan 2017 05:48:59 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main curtis@austin.utexas.edu (Pew, Curtis G) wrote: >My wife and I saw the movie “Hidden Figures” last Saturday, and I highly >recommend it. Mentioning this here seems appropriate, since an IBM 7070 and >FORTRAN play a

Re: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 07:27:12 -0600, John McKown wrote: > >So, have you ever wanted to run multiple, concurrent, executions of some >program which does not accept an alternative DD name list? For instance, >some in-house COBOL program. Wouldn't it be kind of nice to be able to >specify some

Re: Freeware SMP/E installable product

Potentially usermods that are in the public domain could qualify if you interpret "install" loosely. :-) Bob -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of R.S. Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2017 11:25 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

Re: Freeware SMP/E installable product

Hi There was a freeware scheduler which uses SMP/E but I don't remember. Does anyone know ? On Jan 10, 2017 9:56 PM, "R.S." wrote: > W dniu 2017-01-10 o 17:16, Nathan Astle pisze: > >> Hi >> >> Are there any freeware product which uses SMP/E to install. >> >

Re: Freeware SMP/E installable product

W dniu 2017-01-10 o 17:16, Nathan Astle pisze: Hi Are there any freeware product which uses SMP/E to install. There are several IBM products which are free of charge. While it's not the same as freeware, every legal z/OS user can download it and install. Majority of the products are available

Re: Freeware SMP/E installable product

Nathan Astle wrote: Hi Are there any freeware product which uses SMP/E to install. Please point me Nathan Java for z/OS fits this description. You can order it from Shopz and get it over the net, on DVD, or on tape. -- John Eells IBM Poughkeepsie ee...@us.ibm.com

Freeware SMP/E installable product

Hi Are there any freeware product which uses SMP/E to install. Please point me Nathan -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IPLing z/OS 2.2 from 1.13 for first time getting JES2 catastrophic error

Pommier, Rex wrote: >No I didn't need to use TOLerate. I'm assuming you meant TOL(ENQF). Ok. thanks, I was not sure what type of COPY you used, but thanks. > If I would need to use TOL(IOER) I have bigger problems. :-) Indeed. To tolerate IO errors is asking for trouble... I will not

Re: General question about address space

Liz you understood it correct On Jan 10, 2017 7:56 PM, "Lizette Koehler" wrote: > If I understand your question. > > Take DFHSM. It can be one address space or multiple Address Spaces > (MASH). The benefit to multiple address spaces is you could use WLM to > control

Re: Hidden Figures

I had to explain the "HAL" name in 2001 A Space Odyssey, legend says it was a one-letter shift from IBM, but that was denied by the writers :-) We're so old the young generation can't even appreciate our fiction :-) Len Rugen University of Missouri Division of Information Technology Systems

Re: General question about address space

If I understand your question. Take DFHSM. It can be one address space or multiple Address Spaces (MASH). The benefit to multiple address spaces is you could use WLM to control which one gets more or less priority in the system. So rather than one large DFHSM address space, you could have,

Re: IPLing z/OS 2.2 from 1.13 for first time getting JES2 catastrophic error

Elardus, No I didn't need to use TOLerate. I'm assuming you meant TOL(ENQF). If I would need to use TOL(IOER) I have bigger problems. :-) And I just looked it up, it appears that TOL(ENQF) isn't even a viable option on a COPY FULL command. Rex -Original Message- From: IBM

Re: General question about address space

Peter Historically there was an immediate expansion of the total amount of 31-bit private storage available to the product - these days with 64-bit storage functionality, the reason for horizontal private expansion (or use of dataspaces) is much reduced. There is also lots of architectural

Hidden Figures

My wife and I saw the movie “Hidden Figures” last Saturday, and I highly recommend it. Mentioning this here seems appropriate, since an IBM 7070 and FORTRAN play a significant role in the narrative. -- Pew, Curtis G curtis@austin.utexas.edu ITS Systems/Core/Administrative Services

"task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?

OK, I know that there can be multiple TIOTs in a single address space. I know this because the documentation the IEFUJI says that it can do I/O to a data set either by doing a DYNALLOC on it, or by putting the DD in the initiator procedure. So, have you ever wanted to run multiple, concurrent,

Re: COBOL5 and ceedump

Last I heard, SSRANGE was deprecated for production use due to high overhean. Yes, a deliberate area left specifically to catch any overflow and for no other purpose, similar to a patch-area. Technique arises before SSRANGE exists. If SSRANGE were subsequently used, it would/could catch the

General question about address space

Hi A product having one address space for monitoring various components like network, Db2, CICS and multiple address space to monitor a single component Is there any advantage on having multiple address space compared with sjngle address space ? Peter

Re: [SURVEY] Who's using Java 8

Kirk, We currently use your Tomcat 7 port for dev but we're going to move to Jetty for technical reasons. Java 8 gives us better options WRT libraries. We can ditch Joda for the JRE datatime package and use modern techniques like lamdas. Not to mention the other reasons others have posted

Re: Confusing info about System Logger and GDPS K-systems

Hi Steve, Thanks fort the hint. The 2 apars seem (to me) to solve a situation caused by the new ALLOWACCESS(NO) parameter. Kees. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Steve Horein Sent: 10 January, 2017 12:58 To:

Re: COBOL5 and ceedump

Yes, a deliberate area left specifically to catch any overflow and for no other purpose, similar to a patch-area. Technique arises before SSRANGE exists. If SSRANGE were subsequently used, it would/could catch the problem, but it is not as simple as the APAR text makes out (from memory of the

Re: AW: Re: COBOL5 and ceedump

There is a conflation of two issues, with the first being in two parts. Issue 1) Part a) Can't define enough storage for a table due to COBOL limits. This is only an issue for "old" programs, where limits for table-size were imposed by the compiler. The "expedient" approach was to define

Re: Confusing info about System Logger and GDPS K-systems

These new function APARs may shed some light: OA50781 and OA50775 They talk about secondary controlling systems (KSYS) being present within the SYSPLEX, and IPL order. I hope this helps! On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 5:24 AM, Vernooij, Kees (ITOPT1) - KLM < kees.verno...@klm.com> wrote: > Hello, > >

Re: Confusing info about System Logger and GDPS K-systems

Hi Kees - While I don't have an answer for your question, I do see a very similar question posed to the "GDPS User Community" forum. Any GDPS questions I have, I ask there. You should be able to search for that community from here: https://apps.na.collabserv.com/communities It is restricted, so

Confusing info about System Logger and GDPS K-systems

Hello, We run GDPS V3R13 and z/OS V2.2. I am reading the GDPS recommendations (in the GDPS/PPRC V3R13 Installation and Customization Guide) about System Logger, which, as seems usual with each GDPS release, have changed again. Now I read some confusing and/or contradicting information (Ch

Re: KC: www-03.ibm.com vs. www.ibm.com

Paul Gilmartin wrote: >(Trying again; trying not to fumble the links this time.) That is all right. Only *after* I clicked, then I see this 'Make sure the web address http://http is correct.' Nasty habit of mine to click without looking! ;-) ... the same as putting your hand in a hole to see

AW: Re: COBOL5 and ceedump

>A frequent, even standard way to get past the size limit of a COBOL array, or >more appropriately table, was to define more "empty" space after it. Since >subscript bounds checking was always turned off for performance reasons, you >could effectively address substantially larger than the

Re: COBOL5 and ceedump

Gibney, Dave wrote: >A frequent, even standard way to get past the size limit of a COBOL array, or >more appropriately table, was to define more "empty" space after it. Since >subscript bounds checking was always turned off for performance reasons, you >could effectively address substantially

Re: COBOL5 and ceedump

A frequent, even standard way to get past the size limit of a COBOL array, or more appropriately table, was to define more "empty" space after it. Since subscript bounds checking was always turned off for performance reasons, you could effectively address substantially larger than the size