: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: IBM BLSR subsystem
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Texas Comptroller's email
system.
DO NOT click links or open attachments unless you expect them from the sender
and know the content is safe.
When change means being able to more co
Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Pommier, Rex
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2022 9:31 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: IBM BLSR subsystem
At some sites, the most gargantuan thing about making a change like this is
getting past the politics of getting managers who don't want
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: IBM BLSR subsystem
Excuse me, what is gargantuan in moving to extended format?
Note: we are talking about *application* datasets, not ICF, SyS1.MANx, system,
VVDS or whatever.
Note2: it need NOT to be big bang approach, you can change definitions
Jim - You forgot the "good day" in your closing! ;)
Steve Kocik
z/OS IOS Development
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
] on behalf of
Radoslaw Skorupka [r.skoru...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2022 7:52 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM BLSR subsystem
Excuse me, what is gargantuan in moving to extended format?
Note: we are talking about *application* datasets, not ICF, SyS1.MANx,
system, VVDS
it is like walk to the park - the most gargantuan thing is to make
first step.
--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland
W dniu 19.05.2022 o 16:48, Michael Watkins pisze:
Thanks for the history and a definitive word on BLSR. From your (and others')
remarks, it seems obvious that BLSR has been supereceded
( = 'PO') SET ='NONEXT'
OTHERWISE SET ='EXT'
END
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Michael Watkins
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2022 11:31 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM BLSR subsystem
[External Email. Exercise caution when
format?
I don't mean to make a project for you, but any light you could shed would be
appreciated.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
PINION, RICHARD W.
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2022 10:04 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM BLSR subsystem
On
Behalf Of Michael Watkins
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2022 9:48 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM BLSR subsystem
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Texas
Comptroller's email system.
DO NOT click links or open attachments unless you expect them from
the sender
Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Michael Watkins
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2022 10:57 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM BLSR subsystem
[External Email. Exercise caution when clicking links or opening attachments.]
For the past few years, I've been looking
Of
Michael Watkins
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2022 9:48 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM BLSR subsystem
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Texas Comptroller's email
system.
DO NOT click links or open attachments unless you expect them from the sender
and know the content
Thanks for the history and a definitive word on BLSR. From your (and others')
remarks, it seems obvious that BLSR has been supereceded by SMB. So why not
just implement SMB?
Doesn't SMB only work if the clusters whose buffers you want to manage are
defined as extended format? In contrast, BLSR
BLSR was initially developed by Washinton System Center as an assembler
language
sample program to go along with a book they were writing about using the
Subsystem Interface. At the time,
IBM was desperately looking for "ESA Exclusives" in order to sell 3090 machines
vs
the PCM man
IIRC, Batch LSR was developed at IBM by the BCP team; SMB was later developed
by the DFdfp team. SMB is not BLSR under-the-covers, but it offers the same
advantages.
SMB is the more modern solution. It has worked wonders at my shop. Just mind
your REGION size. If you haven't converted some
equ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> BLSR is referenced on page 305 of 'Batch Modernization on z/OS' (July, 2012;
> z/OS V1R9):
>
> Implementing data in memory (DIM) techniques is a complex task, but one
> likely to yield good results. It means exploiting appropriately the various
BLSR is referenced on page 305 of 'Batch Modernization on z/OS' (July, 2012;
z/OS V1R9):
Implementing data in memory (DIM) techniques is a complex task, but one likely
to yield good results. It means exploiting appropriately the various software
facilities available to eliminate unnecessary I
ACCBIAS=DO provides much the same value as BLSR for a single VSAM
file (see
<https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?topic=buffering-processing-guidelines-restrictions>Processing
guidelines and restrictions - IBM Documentation). Both provide LSR
and can be optioned for deferred writes. A
Michael,
Reading the JCL manual, it almost seems to me like ACCBIAS=DO is calling BLSR
under the covers. If I specify DO, I can also specify a SMBDFR which defers
writes until the dataset gets closed or the buffers are needed.
If doing DEFERW, what happens if the job abends. Does the VSAM
AMP will be fine for setting BUFNI or BUFMD, but won't tell VSAM to
look-aside the data buffers. So, without a program product, either
the program needs to establish a LSR pool or use BLSR via JCL to get
look-aside.
I would urge caution in using deferred writes. Just be sure you
understand
Thanks, all responders.
Michael, so I'm not stuck in the mid '90s, just the BLSR documentation is. :-)
"First Edition, June 1994"
I have seen the references to BLSR in other documents, like a crypto manual and
some SMP/E references to it, but until I found the 1994 document, I coul
I should have mentioned that (as I recall) BLSR allows forcing pool
sharing so that if multiple VSAM files are being randomly processed,
there might be memory savings from forcing some to share the same LSR pool.
Michael
At 02:23 PM 5/16/2022, Michael Oujesky wrote:
PDF - http
PDF - http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/epubs/pdf/iea5j600.pdf
BLSR will help principally if the access is random and the locality
of reference of the data component is good. Otherwise, just
increasing the BUFNI and/or BUFND will suffice. Note that for
sequential access a BUFND of twice
e your sort, I am attempting that same project at my site.
Thank You
bill
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Massimo Biancucci
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2022 1:40 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [External Sender] Re: IBM BLSR subsystem
Hi,
we change
I would love to see your sort, I am attempting that same project at my site.
Thank You
bill
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Massimo Biancucci
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2022 1:40 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [External Sender] Re: IBM BLSR
Il giorno lun 16 mag 2022 alle ore 16:36 Pommier, Rex <
rpomm...@sfgmembers.com> ha scritto:
> Hi list,
>
> Is the BLSR subsystem (batch local shared resources) still a
> viable/valuable thing or has it been replaced by something
> bigger/better/faster? I seem to be stuck i
ools for the data and index. This becomes
> especially important when the index and data components have the same CI
> size. For that case, the data buffers are likely to wash out the index
> buffers.
>
> (b) If it is practical to choose enough index buffers to hold the entire
>
ist,
>
> Is the BLSR subsystem (batch local shared resources) still a
> viable/valuable thing or has it been replaced by something
> bigger/better/faster? I seem to be stuck in the mid-90s because the most
> current documentation I can find on it is from MVS/ESA 5.1 dated 1994. Is
&g
I agree with Mark, you can look up "system managed buffering" (SMB) in the JCL
Reference and JCL Users Guide manuals. AFAIK, BLSR documentation indeed has
not been updated since somewhere around OS390 times, so the documentation you
found is probably the most current.
That said,
---
On Monday, May 16th, 2022 at 10:36 AM, Pommier, Rex
wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> Is the BLSR subsystem (batch local shared resources) still a viable/valuable
> thing or has it been replaced by something bigger/better/faster? I seem to be
> stuck in the mid-90s because t
Hi list,
Is the BLSR subsystem (batch local shared resources) still a viable/valuable
thing or has it been replaced by something bigger/better/faster? I seem to be
stuck in the mid-90s because the most current documentation I can find on it
is from MVS/ESA 5.1 dated 1994. Is there more
Unless something has changed SMB requires the VSAM file to be in extended
format, but BLSR does not. From my understanding you can't influence as much
around index buffers and data buffers with SMB as you can with BLSR.
We actually use both. Some people like that with SMB you delete/define
We currently use the BLSR (Batch Local Shared Resources) SUBSYS for some of our
brutally randomly accessed files. Something today made me look at the AMP
parameter on the DD JCL statement and I saw that it allows you to specify many
of the options that BLSR allows, such as RMODE31, BUFND
Hi all,
I found a thread from 2012 discussing BLSR and whether or not it supports
dynamic changes via the SETSSI command. That thread indicated that BLSR had
been updated to support SETSSI, and that upon a SETSSI ACT, the subsystem would
be added and activated. That part appears to work
I found a thread from 2012 discussing BLSR and whether or not it
supports dynamic changes via the SETSSI command. That thread
indicated that BLSR had been updated to support SETSSI, and that
upon a SETSSI ACT, the subsystem would be added and activated. That
part appears to work, but now
This is just a curious question about how the JCL DD SUBSYS paramater works.
With BLSR you allocate a file to use BLSR with something like this:
//INETACC DD SUBSYS=(BLSR,'DDNAME=INETACC@ MSG=I',
// 'RMODE31=ALL BUFND=256 BUFNI=64 DEFERW=YES')
//INETACC@ DD DSN=DSNENV..INET.INETACC
This is just a curious question about how the JCL DD SUBSYS paramater
works.
With BLSR you allocate a file to use BLSR with something like this:
//INETACC DD SUBSYS=(BLSR,'DDNAME=INETACC@ MSG=I',
// 'RMODE31=ALL BUFND=256 BUFNI=64 DEFERW=YES')
//INETACC@ DD DSN=DSNENV
Makes sense. Thank you!
Frank
From: Jim Mulder d10j...@us.ibm.com
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 4:47 PM
Subject: Re: BLSR
This is just a curious question about how the JCL DD SUBSYS paramater
works.
With BLSR you allocate
On 30 December 2013 18:47, Jim Mulder d10j...@us.ibm.com wrote:
BLSR was originally written at Washington Systems Center as
an assembler language subsystem, which was going to be included
with the book The Subsystem Interface in MVS/SP Version 3
GC66-3131-00 August 1989 as a sample
38 matches
Mail list logo
