Still some manager wants the taste of cloud.
I remember one of the Indian company who were supporting a ISV. One of
their VP wanted to get rid of Mainframe and invest more on cloud...(atlast
that company got sold)
On Wed, 19 Jun, 2019, 7:51 AM Paul Gilmartin, <
On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 00:35:53 +, Bill Johnson wrote:
>I would only trust the cloud (and suppliers) with my music and photos. My
>financial stuff is on the mainframe.
>
Who's paying for that?
-- gil
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe
I would only trust the cloud (and suppliers) with my music and photos. My
financial stuff is on the mainframe.
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
On Tuesday, June 18, 2019, 8:25 PM, Mark Regan wrote:
>From the article:
...
Fuchs said the company, which he founded in 1977, originally had its
>From the article:
...
Fuchs said the company, which he founded in 1977, originally had its own
IBM mainframe that served AMCA’s purposes “well for many years.” But
changes in technology (most notably, the shift to cloud computing) made it
clear, he said, that continued reliance on the office
We use OPS/MVS to send SNMP to our BMC ESM (Truesight) solution which then
does the opening of Service now tickets.
Jerry Whitteridge
Delivery Manager / Mainframe Architect
GTS - Safeway Account
602 527 4871 Mobile
jerry.whitteri...@ibm.com
IBM Services
IBM Mainframe Discussion List wrote on
Who has taken the whole process a step further by raising problem tickets,
sending alerts to "Single Pane of Glass" (for example)?
I'm especially interested to hear if anyone is using TBSM...
Regards; Phil
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Mark Jacobs
Hi,
FWIW, we use OPS/MVS facilities for this. Not sure if other automation
packages have that functionality.
Thanks!
BobL
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Longnecker, Dennis
Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2019 12:16 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
If you have an automation product or something that can send emails externally,
then something like opsgenie works nicely.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Mark Jacobs
Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2019 2:56 PM
To:
Yes. Your automation product, in concert with your production scheduling system
should be able to send emails to any interested party and their cellphones.
Mark Jacobs
Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email.
GPG Public Key -
I'm guessing by the responses that not too many shops are using this WLM
feature.
I'm not sure why you would use this approach and not just use the 'normal'
controls that we have in WLM and let the dispatcher do its job. I understand
that reducing the R4HR is a good thing and preventing any
Curious what people are using, if they are anymore, to send
pages/text's/notifications/etc. from z/os to people on call. The software we
have been using runs on a Windows 7 box, which I need to get rid of and/or
replace. Rather than continue what we have been doing for 25 years, curious
as
No they are not terminated with CR or LF or anything. They are just different
length records with no length prefix or any suffix at all in a RECFM=U file.
I was the one who suspected that the original source file from the vendor was
from Unix somewhere due to the content. Goal here was to get
Peter,
I was scanning through this thread. It sounds like the records are
terminated with a 'CR' or 'CRLF' , i.e.; x'0d' or x'0d0a' , is this correct
Scott
On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 10:14 AM Paul Gilmartin <
000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jun 2019 03:43:18
On Tue, 18 Jun 2019 03:43:18 +, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
>Very interesting. Collapsing the two steps and eliminating the intermediate
>Unix file also works, but I do have explicit DCB information in the JCL for
>both SYSUT1 and SYSUT2, so maybe that's what makes the IEBGENER process
014ab5cdfb21-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu (Mike Wawiorko) writes:
> Remember back in 1980 there was no sysplex. Each machine was a
> stand-alone system with a single operating system - if we ignore VM
> guests.
>
> There was a proliferation of 4341s, 4361s(?), 4381s and even a bit
> later
True, relative to the zIIP workload. But if that zIIP workload is relatively
low importance and crossing over to the GCPs and raising your R4HA, it may make
sense to restrict the low importance work instead of increasing the R4HA,
depending on what your business requirements are. And keeping
Remember back in 1980 there was no sysplex. Each machine was a stand-alone
system with a single operating system - if we ignore VM guests.
There was a proliferation of 4341s, 4361s(?), 4381s and even a bit later 9370s
running MVS. OS/VS1, OS/VS2, VM, DOS (the mainframe one not the PC one), TPF
Annual GSE UK Conference 2019 - 5th, 6th and 7th November 2018
It is a pleasure to invite you to submit a user presentation for the 2019
Network Stream at the GSE Annual conference.
The conference is organized by GSE UK and will take place at Whittlebury Hall
on the 5th, 6th and 7th November
18 matches
Mail list logo
