Re: Cobol and PreCompile for CICS and DB2

I'm not quite sure what you are asking. Do you mean, which release of COBOL first included the integrated CICS translator within the compiler itself? Or are you asking something else? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff /

Re: VSAM: Why MAXLRECL?

With the paucity of information in your original post it definitely seemed an... odd... idea. I hate being "near" limits. To give an example, you have found something that says your can have 32761 for your data in VSAM (before extending yourself), and yet you can't have that amount of data for

Re: Who's using Java 8

Have you looked at Liberty Profile yet? Your customers with CICS TS 5+ for z/OS or WAS 8.5+ for z/OS licensing already have Liberty Profile licensing, and some of them probably already use Liberty. If you think one or more of your target customers won't have any of those products then just ask IBM

Re: Freeware SMP/E installable product

Here are some more no additional charge IBM candidates for SMP/E installation practice: 5655-J51 - XML Toolkit for z/OS 5655-Y30 - CICS Transaction Server for z/OS Developer Trial 5655-TY6 - Enterprise COBOL Developer Trial 5665-IMZ - IBM Installation Manager for z/OS 5697-Q05 - DB2 Accessories

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

Hi Jesse, I checked the 3.12 manual and that one is a little less strict then the 3.13 one. Have a look at GDPS/PPRC V3R12 Installation and Customization Guide Chapter 2.10.7, where is explained what the LOGR recommendations are, how you can prevent starting LOGR and that GDPS indeed

Re: [SURVEY] Who's using Java 8

On 12/01/2017 1:17 AM, Kirk Wolf wrote: Jetty has always been nice in terms of how you can customize and embed it. That's right. Jetty has a pluggable architecture which makes it perfect for embedding. You can also strip it back to the bare bones. Don't want servlet sessions? Strip out the

Re: VSAM: Why MAXLRECL?

Why? As I said, in order to allow for "expansion" of the length of records without a requirement to take the file offline in order to alter it. Does no one else run in to this issue? We generally have 'filler' space defined, but sometimes even that gets used up and you still have to 'expand'

Re: SDB and Program Object Library

So maybe something in your ACS routines is causing your trouble? Yes, I did the allocation with 0 specified in the BLKSIZE and BLANK. Worked fine.. Lizette > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of Lizette Koehler >

Re: SDB and Program Object Library

I just used Option 3.2 and allocated a PDSE with LRECL 80 and Blksize 0 with Version 2 (z/OS V2.1) No issues - it took it fine and the Blksize is 32760. Lizette > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin

Re: VSAM: Why MAXLRECL?

No problem provided you define 32K LSR pools (from memory, 3) in CICS and monitor their (E)DSA usage. But why define MAXLRECL=32760 at all? On 11/01/2017 22:53, Greg Dyck wrote: > On 1/11/2017 3:30 PM, Frank Swarbrick wrote: >> Is there a downside to always defining VSAM files with a MAXLRECL of

SDB and Program Object Library

In order to copy a load module library to a progam object library I used ISPF Data Set Utility to allocate the new library with DSNTYPE=LIBRARY. Believing that "SDB knows best," I left BLKSIZE blank. ISPF warned me. I told it, "Trust me." I went to Move/Copy Utility and tried the copy. It

Re: VSAM: Why MAXLRECL?

Haha, maybe so, but we generally use VSAM for "non-business" related type data. Configuration files, logs, and the like. It doesn't happen often enough that we'd want to use DB2 to solve the issue. It only happens enough to bug me when it does happen. :-) For example, in the particular

Re: VSAM: Why MAXLRECL?

On 1/11/2017 3:30 PM, Frank Swarbrick wrote: Is there a downside to always defining VSAM files with a MAXLRECL of 32761, which seems to be the largest value for this parm for an UNSPANNED dataset? I believe it will force your CI size to be 32K which is not something I would want to do unless

Re: VSAM: Why MAXLRECL?

Sounds like you need a DB2/IMS database rather than a VSAM database. However, does the record length change that much that this is a frequent process of expanding the records? IMO, I do not see a reason it would not work. How would that solve your issue? Lizette > -Original Message- >

Cobol and PreCompile for CICS and DB2

Does anyone remember when the Cobol Compiler could do the PreCompile function for CICS or DB2 without running the actual standalone step for Precompile? Thanks Lizette Koehler statistics: A precise and logical method for stating a half-truth inaccurately

VSAM: Why MAXLRECL?

Is there a downside to always defining VSAM files with a MAXLRECL of 32761, which seems to be the largest value for this parm for an UNSPANNED dataset? I always hate having to do a backup/delete/define when adding new data to a file. Especially for a file defined to a CICS region that is up

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

On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 10:12:30 -0700, Paul Gilmartin (000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu) wrote about "Re: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? A crazy thought?" (in ): > On 2017-01-10, at 17:46, David W Noon wrote: >> >>> And how would you preserve

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

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 07:27:12 -0600, John McKown wrote: >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

TMP (was: DAIR?)

On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 17:47:30 +, David W Noon wrote: >>> >> History question: Didn't DAIR, with similar function, antedate MVS/370? > >I assume you mean IKJDAIR. That was more limited than SVC 99, but did >basic dynamic allocation quite well. It was part of the TMP and its use >was limited to

Re: DAIR?

On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 10:22:01 -0700, Paul Gilmartin (000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu) wrote about "DAIR? (was: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? ...)" (in ): > On 2017-01-10, at 17:46, David W Noon wrote: >> >>> And how would you preserve one

DAIR? (was: "task level" TIOT & XTIOT? ...)

On 2017-01-10, at 17:46, David W Noon wrote: > >> And how would you preserve one of the aboriginal design objectives of OS/360: >> the ability to ENQ all needed resources before job initiation to avoid >> deadlocks. > > That went out the window with the arrival of MVS/370, which introduced >

Re: [SURVEY] Who's using Java 8

Hi Ed, Jetty has always been nice in terms of how you can customize and embed it. That's its niche (with system integrators), whereas Tomcat is more recognized as the de-facto reference open source Servlet container for web app developers. Prior to IBM's acquisition of JZOS, we used to include

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

On 2017-01-10, at 17:46, David W Noon wrote: > >> And how would you preserve one of the aboriginal design objectives of OS/360: >> the ability to ENQ all needed resources before job initiation to avoid >> deadlocks. > > That went out the window with the arrival of MVS/370, which introduced >

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

Exactly. DD's were invented as a method of virtualizing dataset references. You can write a program to read and write FILEIN, and later someone can decide FILEIN is really SYS1.FOOBAR.DATA. They were invented specifically to AVOID having every language or every application program need to devise a

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

We have been running GDPS for DR since around 2000. Currently on V3R12. My copy of Installation and Customization Guide ZG24-6704-25 contains no reference to IXGLOGR. I did a Google search on 'IXGLOGR GDPS' and found some (even quite old) hits that seem to imply that IXGLOGR is a no-no on GDPS

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

On 2017-01-10, at 17:46, David W Noon wrote: > ... > But we are really discussing COBOL ... > John M. started this thread using COBOL only as an example. He clearly envisioned, even as in the Subject: a system layer enhancement, not compiler, not application. I echoed agreement. Charles M.

Re: [SURVEY] Who's using Java 8

On 12/21/2016 7:18 AM, David Crayford wrote: We're currently developing a product with a web UI that uses a Java application server running on z/OS, either Tomcat or Jetty. We use Tomcat 8.5.6 on top of Java 8, which gives us RACF keyring and TLS 1.2 support. Is Jetty a good alternative to

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

Re: Freeware SMP/E installable product

I would suggest downloading Standard Packaging Rules for z/OS-Based Products SC23-3695-10 On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 17:36:40 +0530 Nathan Astle wrote: :>Just for my new team member practice purpose :> :>On Jan 11, 2017 4:22 PM, "Binyamin Dissen"

Re: Convert Device and Link statements to Interface statements

Agreed, it would be nice!​ *George Rodriguez* *Specialist II - IT Solutions* *IT Enterprise Applications* *PX - 47652* *(561) 357-7652 (office)* *(954) 415-7586 (mobile)* *School District of Palm Beach County* *3348 Forest Hill Blvd.* *Room B-251* *West Palm Beach, FL. 33406-5869* *Florida's

Re: Convert Device and Link statements to Interface statements

Thanks It would have been nice if there was a tool to do this. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of George Rodriguez Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 2:16 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Convert Device and

Re: Convert Device and Link statements to Interface statements

I found this on the web: Converting to INTERFACE Statement ​ *George Rodriguez* *Specialist II - IT Solutions* *IT Enterprise Applications* *PX - 47652* *(561) 357-7652 (office)* *(954) 415-7586 (mobile)* *School District of Palm

Re: Freeware SMP/E installable product

Just for my new team member practice purpose On Jan 11, 2017 4:22 PM, "Binyamin Dissen" wrote: > On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 21:46:35 +0530 Nathan Astle > wrote: > > :>Are there any freeware product which uses SMP/E to install. > > What is the purpose

Re: General question about address space

I was referring to the REUSASID=YES parameter on the z/OS start command. See : https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSLTBW_1.13.0/com.ibm.zos.r13.ieaa500/asidre.htm -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Peter

Re: Freeware SMP/E installable product

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 21:46:35 +0530 Nathan Astle wrote: :>Are there any freeware product which uses SMP/E to install. What is the purpose of your question? -- Binyamin Dissen http://www.dissensoftware.com Director, Dissen Software, Bar & Grill

Re: Convert Device and Link statements to Interface statements

Afaik, you could take a dump of TCPIP ASID and use the IPCS TCPIPCS PROFILE CONVERT to convert the current active device/link statements to interface. https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSLTBW_1.13.0/com.ibm.zos.r13.hald001/profile.htm I've personally never used it.

AW: Re: General question about address space

>There are other external factors to consider as well, for example a program >that does a CAF connect to DB2 or MQ cannot come from a re-usable address >space. I'm no DB2 specialist, but I seem to understand that you can use the (elder) Call-Attach-Facility (CAF) or the (newer) RRSAF to

AW: What is subsystem function code No. 39 and what does it do?

SYS1.MODGEN(IEFSSAG) is the related macro for this function code. HTH -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] Im Auftrag von Giliad Wilf Gesendet: Mittwoch, 11. Januar 2017 10:16 An: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Betreff: What is

Convert Device and Link statements to Interface statements

Hi, Does anyone know of a utility to convert TCP/IP Device and Link statements to Interface statements? We are using z/OS v2.1 Thanks Gadi לתשומת ליבך, בהתאם לנהלי חברת מלם מערכות בע"מ ו/או כל חברת בת ו/או חברה קשורה שלה (להלן : "החברה") וזכויות החתימה בהן, כל הצעה, התחייבות או מצג מטעם

What is subsystem function code No. 39 and what does it do?

It is being described as "Alloc group subsystem requests", but the "Using the Subsystem Interface" manual, SA38-0679, does not say a word about it. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to

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 11:58 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: COBOL5 and ceedump > > > >> And as for the "standard way" to cheat the Cobol