>On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 17:32:53 -0500, Tony Harminc wrote:
>
>>Samba is an implementation of SMB for UNIXy systems. IBM had an independent
>>implementation of SMB in z/OS, but has dropped it in favour of NFS.
>>
>Correct. I was referring to "z/OS Samba" - DFS/SMB. Removed with z/OS 2.4.
>NFS
On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 17:32:53 -0500, Tony Harminc wrote:
>On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 at 17:13, Farley, Peter <
>031df298a9da-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
>> Question: When you say "SMB (no longer supported at all on z/OS)", are you
>> referring to VSAM SMB = "VSAM System Managed Buffering"?
It would be cool if IBM published the JZOS Jar on Maven central. We have
a centralized company Artifactory server and have uploaded the z/OS
specific Jars like JZOS, RACF etc which is so much better then uploading
to your PC.
On 2/12/22 19:12, Steve Austin wrote:
Thanks Kirk,
The
Thanks, that was kind of what I thought it was, I just didn't remember the
meaning of SMB in that context.
Peter
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Tony Harminc
Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 5:33 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OSMF
On
On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 at 17:13, Farley, Peter <
031df298a9da-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> Question: When you say "SMB (no longer supported at all on z/OS)", are you
> referring to VSAM SMB = "VSAM System Managed Buffering"? As in the JCL
> parameters AMP='ACCBIAS=DO,etc.'?
>
> Or
Question: When you say "SMB (no longer supported at all on z/OS)", are you
referring to VSAM SMB = "VSAM System Managed Buffering"? As in the JCL
parameters AMP='ACCBIAS=DO,etc.'?
Or were you referring to the old Samba (I think that's what it was called) file
sharing protocol?
Peter
On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 16:38:05 -0500, Justin Esposito
wrote:
>Hey Mark,
>
>Thanks for these -- this was at an old shop so I can't confirm. I want to
>say we did have it set, but I'm not sure. It would sure make sense if it
>wasn't enabled, so you're probably spot on!
>
>I'm actually in the process
Hey Mark,
Thanks for these -- this was at an old shop so I can't confirm. I want to
say we did have it set, but I'm not sure. It would sure make sense if it
wasn't enabled, so you're probably spot on!
I'm actually in the process of setting up sysplex filesharing at my current
shop...I'll make
On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 15:19:52 -0500, Justin Esposito
wrote:
>Actually, I take it back -- I can't confirm, but I want to say we had it
>enabled. IBM did suggest to just change ownership though.
>
You should be able to check with one of these commands:
F OMVS,PFS=ZFS,Q,FILESETS or F
http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/ibm/370/OS_VS2/Release_3.0_1975/
Joe
On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 5:42 AM David Spiegel <
0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> Hi Leonard,
> You said: "... That computer center had MVS 3.0 running in the mid
> 1970s. ..."
> Is "MVS 3.0" a typo? (I do
Actually, I take it back -- I can't confirm, but I want to say we had it
enabled. IBM did suggest to just change ownership though.
On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 2:16 PM Mark Zelden wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 13:15:26 -0500, Justin Esposito <
> esposito.just...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >A little tip:
> >
Yeah, I was really surprised by it too. Apparently, it's related to the way
the network configurator part stores the configurations (or so IBM told me
in a PMR, and their suggestion was to change the ownership of the
filesystem).
On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 2:16 PM Mark Zelden wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Dec
On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 13:15:26 -0500, Justin Esposito
wrote:
>A little tip:
>
>If you're moving your z/OSMF instance around from lpar to lpar with the
>same userdir (default /global/zosmf), it's not a bad idea to change the
>owning system of said filesystem with a chmount -D. I've run into some
Personally, I only recommend doing this if you're a heavy consumer of the
REST APIs and want them to be highly available. Otherwise, let one instance
service the plex, z/OSMF is enough of a resource hog as-is.
I'm going off of memory but this is how I did it at my old shop...purely
for HA REST
My recollection is that it didn't really become a viable alternative to SVS
until MVS 3.7. Soon after was MVS 3.8 and then IBM embarked on a series of
other versions and designations, starting, I think, with MVS SE1 later
renamed to MVS SE1.1
Lennie
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe
On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 10:07:33 -0600, Carmen Vitullo wrote:
>we do share zfs's but maybe my choice of SERVER options and the
>autostart group was flawed
>
>I really don't have a need to start multiple servers, for testing, I
>take the lazy route, shutdown the prod server for a while, and start the
Well, the way that it was originally is that you had to restore both foo and
bar, so the PE in foo had no relevance to RESTORE processing. If you want to
enhance RESTORE processing to allow a partial restore then it becomes an issue.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
That's certainly how it used to work, but a recent post suggested that it had
been enhanced. Thanks.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Tom
Marchant
Presumably OS/VS2 Release 3, the second release of MVS. The MVS releases of
OS/VS2 ran from 2.0 to 3.8, with a bunch of optional selectable units ("By the
pricking of my thumb, SU 7 this way comes.")
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
we do share zfs's but maybe my choice of SERVER options and the
autostart group was flawed
I really don't have a need to start multiple servers, for testing, I
take the lazy route, shutdown the prod server for a while, and start the
new instance on my test LPAR when I need to test.
Carmen
I could never get a single instance with multiple LPARs connecting to the
same server because we do not share our ZFS datasets, specifically, the one
mounted at /global.
Hopefully I was just doing something incorrectly. I use 1 server per LPAR
and each has its own autostart group.
On Fri, Dec
> We have z/OSMF active on one of ours LPAR's. Now we would like to add another
> LPAR.
> I know their were instructions on how to perform this - I am unable to find
> the instructions.
> If you have done this and would provide the documentation it would be
> appreciated.
I think this is the
I've only tried this once on my test LPAR when I'm installing a new OS
release or maint, not much success, I've followed the guide but I must
be missing something.
in the started task there's 2 start up options
SERVER=STANDALONE <- I use to test
and
SERVER=AUTOSTART <- i use from prod
Hi Leonard,
You said: "... That computer center had MVS 3.0 running in the mid
1970s. ..."
Is "MVS 3.0" a typo? (I do not recall ever hearing of MVS 3.0.)
Thanks and regards,
David
On 2022-12-02 02:15, Leonard D Woren wrote:
Bill Hitefield wrote on 11/30/2022 10:39 AM:
In college we had an
Thanks Kirk,
The ibmjzos.jar in my IDE was too back level to show those methods. Now
I'm using 2.4.10 I can see them.
Steve
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Kirk Wolf
Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2022 10:29 PM
To:
25 matches
Mail list logo
