on List [mailto:IBM-
> m...@listserv.ua.edu]
> >> On Behalf Of Miklos Szigetvari
> >> Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 3:31 AM
> >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> >> Subject: Re: DS6800 3390 quesation
> >>
> >> Hi
> >>
> >&
h 05, 2013 3:31 AM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: DS6800 3390 quesation
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Thank you
>> The guy installing this, insists to have a different control unit for
>> every size
>
> ---
Hire someone who knows what he is doing.
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
> On Behalf Of Miklos Szigetvari
> Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 3:31 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: DS6800 3390 que
In <5135d788.2010...@isis-papyrus.com>, on 03/05/2013
at 12:31 PM, Miklos Szigetvari
said:
>The guy installing this, insists to have a different control unit for
> every size
That sounds like cargo-cult engineering. Have you considered going
over his head and getting an answer from one of the
Hi,
In IOCP/IOCDS we didn´t define volume type (3390-1, 3390-2, 3390-3,
3390-9 etc...), just define 3390.
In DS6800 definition panels we define a runge of volumes with for
example 3339 cyls for model 3 and another range with 10017 (model 9).
Both ranges could be continuos addresses, 3390-3 from
Hi
Thank you
The guy installing this, insists to have a different control unit for
every size
On 05.03.2013 12:25, Mike Schwab wrote:
3390 is a device type. -1, -2, -3, -9, -27, -54, etc are different
sizes of 3390s.
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 12:21 AM, Miklos Szigetvari
wrote:
Hi
Thank
3390 is a device type. -1, -2, -3, -9, -27, -54, etc are different
sizes of 3390s.
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 12:21 AM, Miklos Szigetvari
wrote:
> Hi
>
> Thank you very much, I'm just wandering, but the technician says, every
> device type needs a separate control unit
> Try to look after this again
: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: DS6800 3390 quesation
Hi
We will got a DS6800, seems every model needs a separate control unit,
so one for 3390-3, one for 3390-9, one for 3390-27 .
Till now we had zDASD, we used over one control unit.
Is this co
M-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
> On Behalf Of Miklos Szigetvari
> Sent: Monday, March 04, 2013 5:22 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: DS6800 3390 quesation
>
> Hi
>
> We will got a DS6800, seems every model needs a separate control unit,
> so one for 3390-3, one for
Hi
We will got a DS6800, seems every model needs a separate control unit,
so one for 3390-3, one for 3390-9, one for 3390-27 .
Till now we had zDASD, we used over one control unit.
Is this correct ?
--
Kind regards, / Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Miklos Szigetvari
Research& Development
ISIS
10 matches
Mail list logo