I am curious to learn what he meant with the question. Either he has no idea
what he is talking about or he means something completely different.
Kees.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of scott Ford
Sent: 27 November 201
On Wednesday, November 27, 2019, 08:20:47 AM PST, scott Ford
wrote:
> My big issue I was at the mercy of CA code. Not blaming them,
> but it’s a CA product and I wished their doc was better.
If you are talking about the security exit samples, then they accomplished the
desired results by
Make sure you adjust your LPAR setup when you add capacity. Weights,
Logicalis, etc. You can probably automate that.
Cheers, Martin (bitten by a few experiences in this area)
Sent from my iPad
> On 27 Nov 2019, at 21:17, Laurence Chiu wrote:
>
> Just asking the list has anybody had experience
On Wednesday, November 27, 2019, 04:39:07 AM PST, John McKown
wrote:
> Total agreement that it is bad form in today's world. For subsystems, there
> is the SSCT to anchor things. And, as I do for my re-entrant code: a
> Name/Token pair (primary address space level) to hold a 64-bit pointer
Thanks for that. I think there might be a software deal in the mix also
based on Tailor Fit Pricing but it's good to know all the ramifications.
CBU won't work because the site is out of country.
On Thu, Nov 28, 2019, 10:24 AM Jerry Whitteridge
wrote:
> Be aware of using OOCoD that there is a d
Be aware of using OOCoD that there is a difference in the billing records
for Hardware and Software. We looked at this before I moved to IBM and had
to rule it out as the Hardware side only bills you for the Capacity by the
day activated (e.g. Use OOCoD for 7 days and get charged for the 7 days at
try jay.k...@gmail.com
Joe
On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 11:59 AM Mike Schwab
wrote:
> https://twitter.com/tronguy
>
> Pretty much ignores anything Hercules related, won't assign a replacement
> owner.
>
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 11:28 AM Seymour J Metz wrote:
> >
> > Does anybody have a valid e-mai
Just asking the list has anybody had experience using OOCod to double their
MIPS on their mainframes?
Looking at out of region (country) backup solution so cannot use CBU
records. So the idea is to buy half of what the MIPS might need to be and
then provision the other half capacity using capacity
If you have a requirement to share messages across members of a sysplex, and
the customer has a coupling facility, using notepad services might be something
to look at.
https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSLTBW_2.1.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r1.ieai600/oa3845078.htm
Sent from ProtonMail, Swis
Without knowing the specific requirements sounds like the CF would be the
ideal place to store this information.
https://www.ibm.com/downloads/cas/JZB2E38Q
On Thu, Nov 28, 2019, 6:32 AM Seymour J Metz wrote:
> The same applies to virtual machines in an LPAR; each has its own memory.
>
>
> --
https://twitter.com/tronguy
Pretty much ignores anything Hercules related, won't assign a replacement owner.
On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 11:28 AM Seymour J Metz wrote:
>
> Does anybody have a valid e-mail address for Jay Maynard? The two I have
> bounce.
>
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http:/
Well, IBM ha documented a lot of the rules for authorized code.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Michael Stein
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 12:20 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.U
The same applies to virtual machines in an LPAR; each has its own memory.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Charles Mills
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 12:29 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@
Each LPAR is from the OS's point of view another box on the other side of the
computer room. (Yes, you can quibble with that but it is a good way of thinking
about it for most practical purposes.) z/OS on LPAR A has almost no knowledge
of or visibility into LPAR B. LPAR B, after all, might not b
Does anybody have a valid e-mail address for Jay Maynard? The two I have bounce.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@
Hey R.S.,
Got it, a big thx that helps me a lot. I have worked SysPlexes but never
had to set them up.
Scott
On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 12:20 PM R.S.
wrote:
> SP231 is a part of address space. It is virtual memory. LPAR is
> "hardware", so LPAR memory is real memory with no concepts like subpool,
SP231 is a part of address space. It is virtual memory. LPAR is
"hardware", so LPAR memory is real memory with no concepts like subpool,
Common Area, PVT, etc. More: LPAR can host any operating system,
including zLinux, which has no address spaces, SP231, LPA, etc.
To repeat: NO z/OS MEMORY MAPP
David,
Yes sir, we building provisioning software for RACF, ACF2 and Top-Secret
Scott
On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 12:11 PM David Spiegel
wrote:
> Hi Scott,
> "... various ESMs ..."
> Does this mean: various External Security Managers?
>
> Regards,
> David
>
> On 2019-11-27 12:03, scott Ford wrote:
Hi Scott,
"... various ESMs ..."
Does this mean: various External Security Managers?
Regards,
David
On 2019-11-27 12:03, scott Ford wrote:
> We use one of the system subpool SP 231 for holding messages we build from
> various ESMs. The customer asked if we could share SP231 across LPARs.
> My tak
We use one of the system subpool SP 231 for holding messages we build from
various ESMs. The customer asked if we could share SP231 across LPARs.
My take was no because I understood sp231 was unique until each LPAR .
Scott
On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 11:56 AM Allan Staller
wrote:
> Each LPAR has th
Thanks everyone
This is great.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 26, 2019, at 5:23 PM, Charles Mills wrote:
>
> Yeah, sorry, I fully admit I have zero real-world experience with UUIDs on Z
> -- Japanese or otherwise. And relatively little elsewhere: I have used them
> for version signing on Visua
Each LPAR has their own.
SYSPLEX does not share (virtual or real) storage.
Selected information is shared by XCF using CTC or Coupling Facility.
HTH,
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
scott Ford
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 10:33 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@
W dniu 2019-11-27 o 17:33, scott Ford pisze:
I have a question related to storage subpool. If you running a sysplex do
you share one set of subpool, I.e., sp 1 ,,etc. or does each LPAR have its
own ?
I assumed the later.
I don't understand.
In Sysplex there is no shared memory. In Parallel Sysp
I have a question related to storage subpool. If you running a sysplex do
you share one set of subpool, I.e., sp 1 ,,etc. or does each LPAR have its
own ?
I assumed the later.
Scott
--
Scott Ford
IDMWORKS
z/OS Development
--
Fo
John,
Absolutely, my big issue I was at the mercy of CA code. Not blaming them,
but it’s a CA product and I wished their doc was better.
Scott
On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 7:39 AM John McKown
wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 2:40 PM Seymour J Metz wrote:
>
> > Of course it was reentrant, but was i
Does the list of exits in the SUBSYS specification overwrite all those in
SYS, that is, in this case, it reduces the list of exits from the ten in
the SYS specification to just the two that are explicitly listed?
For a subsystem identified by SUBSYS (STC in your case), yes.
For a subsystem n
On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 2:40 PM Seymour J Metz wrote:
> Of course it was reentrant, but was it good form? I prefer to protect code
> against wild stores by marking it as r/o.
>
Total agreement that it is bad form in today's world. For subsystems, there
is the SSCT to anchor things. And, as I do
27 matches
Mail list logo
