Re: Limiting quantity of tape drives used by user

There is a program on the CBTtape file 183 called UNITAFF, which executes as a step just before the step that uses all of the tapes. That program scans the SWA for the next step and changes some of the SIOT's fields (the tape ones) to force all input tape data sets to the same drive. I use thi

Re: IBM-MAIN Digest - 5 Nov 2022 to 6 Nov 2022 (#2022-306)

? -- *Willie* -- Alternate E-Mail -> *myblack...@gmail.com* My Website ---> http://WillieFavero.com/ My Bandmix Info > https://www.bandmix.com/willie_favero/ Kompoz Activity--> https://www.kompoz.com/music/artist/p-bas

Re: Limiting quantity of tape drives used by user

Maybe it was FILE500 > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On > Behalf Of Gibney, Dave > Sent: Monday, November 07, 2022 3:42 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Limiting quantity of tape drives used by user > > As I removed automation from my just recen

Re: Limiting quantity of tape drives used by user

As I removed automation from my just recently shutdown system, I installed a MPF exit from the CBT ( I think maybe file 882). This MPF2REXX just did a F AXR,msgid for the messages it was active for. I suspect I could have extended this to notice tape mount (requests, mounts, and releases) to

Re: Limiting quantity of tape drives used by user

A very long time ago at $previousjob-1 we used an MPF exit for messages such as TMS001, IEC101A, IEC501A, IEC501E, IEF233A and IEF233D. This exit looked at the tape UCBs for the job name of the newly allocated drive and if the job exceeded a defined limit the exit canceled the job. I do have th

Re: Limiting quantity of tape drives used by user

We encountered the exact same problem recently. In our situation, a batch job using the IBM DB2 DSNUTILB attempting to perform a DB2 Reorg of a partitioned DB2 Table with 500 partitions. The batch job was submitted by a TSO User, not our TWS job scheduler. The job slowly allocated about 470

Re: Limiting quantity of tape drives used by user

Classification: Confidential Option A - Thruput Manager (not recommended. $) Option B - Mangle the fingers -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Dave Jousma Sent: Monday, November 7, 2022 12:14 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Limiting quant

Re: Limiting quantity of tape drives used by user

In our shop we use AFF.  DEFER will mount the tape when requested (when the dsn is to be opened).  AFF will prevent multiple tapedrive allocations. On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 01:46:23 p.m. EST, Paul Gilmartin <042bfe9c879d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: On Mon, 7 Nov 202

Re: Limiting quantity of tape drives used by user

there's the easy way to control resource usage, IIRC this can still be done with WLM and workload resource definitions, been some time since I worked in a shop that had defined all the mainframe resources and used scheduled environments and BMC's CONTROL products to manage workloads based on wh

Re: Limiting quantity of tape drives used by user

On Mon, 7 Nov 2022 12:46:11 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote: >On Mon, 7 Nov 2022 12:24:21 -0600, Mike Schwab wrote: > >>We had that in production One step with a huge number of datasets, so >>allocates all available tape drives even though only 1 in use at any >>one time. >> >Does UNIT=(TAPE,,DEFER)

Re: Limiting quantity of tape drives used by user

On Mon, 7 Nov 2022 12:42:24 -0600, Mark Zelden wrote: >On Mon, 7 Nov 2022 12:13:49 -0600, Dave Jousma wrote: > >>All, >> >>In many years, I haven’t seen this problem, really since the days pre-VTS, or >>even in early VTS days where tape drives were physical devices.Today we >>had a user a

Re: Limiting quantity of tape drives used by user

On Mon, 7 Nov 2022 12:24:21 -0600, Mike Schwab wrote: >We had that in production One step with a huge number of datasets, so >allocates all available tape drives even though only 1 in use at any >one time. > Does UNIT=(TAPE,,DEFER), or perhaps AFF, make a difference? JES2 or JES3? -- gil

Re: Limiting quantity of tape drives used by user

On Mon, 7 Nov 2022 12:13:49 -0600, Dave Jousma wrote: >All, > >In many years, I haven’t seen this problem, really since the days pre-VTS, or >even in early VTS days where tape drives were physical devices.Today we >had a user allocate all 500 tape drives pulling data in Prod for whatever

Re: Limiting quantity of tape drives used by user

We had that in production One step with a huge number of datasets, so allocates all available tape drives even though only 1 in use at any one time. On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 12:14 PM Dave Jousma <01a0403c5dc1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > All, > > In many years, I haven’t seen this

Limiting quantity of tape drives used by user

All, In many years, I haven’t seen this problem, really since the days pre-VTS, or even in early VTS days where tape drives were physical devices.Today we had a user allocate all 500 tape drives pulling data in Prod for whatever reason. It would sure be nice if there were some “controls”

Re: Need info

Actually, that isn't relevant to my point. 😊 My point was that the wording was intended to mean "body" where it says "message." I wouldn't even start to disagree about the wording needing to be clearer since I agree. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of

Re: Need info

Actually, "Message content includes the message header section and the possibly structured message body.". The footer inserted by listserv is improperly worded. From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Eric D Rossman Sent: Monday, November 7,

Re: Need info

On Mon, 7 Nov 2022 13:38:25 +, Eric D Rossman wrote: >If you look at the footer: > >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send >> email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > LISTSERV ought to make that a "mailto:"; URL that readers could si

Re: Need info

If you look at the footer: > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Terminology has changed somewhat, but "message" means "body". It will not work if you put it only in the subject. You will get a

Re: Batch to extract scratch tape listing

Try this //FSCRREP EXEC CTTRPT,REGION=32M //SYSINDD * EXTRACT PATH=DATASET/ALLVOLUMES INCLUDE VOLSTAT=ACTIVE EXCLUDE

Re: Need info

AFAIK, it still works, but you have to send it to the listserv, not to the list. From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Mike Schwab Sent: Sunday, November 6, 2022 11:31 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Need info Not sure if that go