On the HMC, (can not do remote) ViewsConsole ActionsConfigure 3270
Emulators Edit Keymap
Online help (which can be accessed HMC remote) has syntax rules and suggests
additional reading at
http://x3270.bgp.nu/ for General Information
http://x3270.bgp.nu/Keymap.html For documentation on how to
There is most definitely a MP factor with IFLs, just like there is
with CPs, and just like there is with every other SMP architecture
that exists today. There is no significant difference between an IFL
and a ***full speed*** CP when it comes to the MP effect and capacity
planning.
--
Jay
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Robert J Brenneman bren...@gmail.com wrote:
There is most definitely a MP factor with IFLs, just like there is
with CPs, and just like there is with every other SMP architecture
that exists today. There is no significant difference between an IFL
and a ***full
Why would you even, for a second, doubt your sanity?
David Wakser
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of David Boyes
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 10:53 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Philosophical
I think I know the answer but.
We are getting hit with some sort of new law, that was suppose to go in effect
Nov 1, we found out about it Jan 2, but is now delayed until May 1. Doesn't
matter anyway, as we can't comply by then anyway G.
It's about sealing up the data transmission and
On 2/3/09 10:55 AM, Wakser, David david.wak...@infocrossing.com wrote:
Why would you even, for a second, doubt your sanity?
Vendor is trying to invoke ³not tested configuration² clauses and doing
other assorted whining to avoid providing a fix. I want to get a consensus
response from the
Software, as a matter of principle, should install cleanly and without
disrupting the operating environment. The vendor is clearly in error.
Peter
-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of David Boyes
Sent: February 3, 2009
Absolutely not.
David Boyes wrote:
Background:
Upgrading a system to current level. Have a vendor product that insists
on the installation of a backlevel component application that causes the
configuration and service management system to report errors in the
configuration. Vendor insists
You're saying a vendor should update their product just to accommodate
service updates to some other critical portion of the infrastructure?
Come on, David... that's just crazy talk. ;-)
Bad Vendor. No biscuit!!!
-dan.
David Boyes wrote:
Background:
Upgrading a system to current level.
David,
It sounds like you have encountered a vendor that has a niche product
and is the only one that has this application or the vendor is not
wanting to sell very many packages!
Loren Charnley, Jr.
IT Systems Engineer
FAMILY DOLLAR
(704) 847-6961 Ext. 3327
(704) 814-3327
Is this the vendor's long-term answer, requiring old code to support their
app?
If the app is critical to that site, and the situation is short term, then
perhaps *maybe* it's OK. But I would want a clear, concise written
agreement that the vendor is diligently working on an upgrade to
David Boyes wrote:
On 2/3/09 10:55 AM, Wakser, David david.wak...@infocrossing.com wrote:
Why would you even, for a second, doubt your sanity?
Vendor is trying to invoke “not tested configuration” clauses and
doing other assorted whining to avoid providing a fix. I want to get a
I'd have to agree with the others on this issue.unless the vendor can provide you with
a clear and detail explanation for why this must be so, then I'd say the vendor is
incorrect and you are correct.
DJ
Mike Walter wrote:
Is this the vendor's long-term answer, requiring old code to
You are not wrong. The only way we could empathize with the 3rd party vendor
is if the back-level component is needed as a work-around for a defect or
design flaw in something external to their product, like the operating system.
David Boyes wrote:
Question:
I believe the maker of the
On 2/3/09 11:19 AM, Mike Walter mike.wal...@hewitt.com wrote:
Is this the vendor's long-term answer, requiring old code to support their
app?
Yes, or at least a modified code package that uses the same name as a
package supplied with the OS. They also recommend bypassing dependency
checking to
Hello David Boyes,
I agree with you.
BUT.. (having said that) this sound like a NON-z/VSE, NON-z/VM
system only. And then only when the VENDOR will not
Certify the system using the new levels.
IE. ORACLE and levels of UNIX, and products that have be
tested/debugged on a Certain level
On 2/3/2009 at 10:57 AM, Tom Duerbusch duerbus...@stlouiscity.com wrote:
-snip-
Can an encryption processor be shared between a 390 LPAR and an IFL LPAR?
I don't see why not. I don't believe you assign them to any particular LPAR,
they're just available.
Mark Post
What's the big deal? Microsoft does it all the time. But I digress...
For our platform I need to ring in with all the rest, you should expect the
product to install/work properly.
-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu]on Behalf
Of Edward
On 2/3/2009 at 10:53 AM, David Boyes dbo...@sinenomine.net wrote:
Background:
Upgrading a system to current level. Have a vendor product that insists on
the installation of a backlevel component application that causes the
configuration and service management system to report errors in
On 2/3/2009 at 11:27 AM, David Boyes dbo...@sinenomine.net wrote:
On 2/3/09 11:19 AM, Mike Walter mike.wal...@hewitt.com wrote:
-snip-
They also recommend bypassing dependency
checking to force installation of this package, which strikes me as flat out
wrong. What's the point of a software
On 2/3/09 11:57 AM, Mark Post mp...@novell.com wrote:
On 2/3/2009 at 11:27 AM, David Boyes dbo...@sinenomine.net wrote:
On 2/3/09 11:19 AM, Mike Walter mike.wal...@hewitt.com wrote:
-snip-
They also recommend bypassing dependency
checking to force installation of this package, which strikes
Mark Post replied...
On 2/3/2009 at 11:27 AM, David Boyes dbo...@sinenomine.net wrote:
On 2/3/09 11:19 AM, Mike Walter mike.wal...@hewitt.com wrote:
-snip-
They also recommend bypassing dependency
checking to force installation of this package, which strikes me as flat
out
wrong. What's the
Background:
Upgrading a system to current level. Have a vendor product that insists on
the installation of a backlevel component application that causes the
configuration and service management system to report errors in the
configuration. Vendor insists that the backlevel component is the only
If they are not even willing to take a bug report and work towards a fix for
the future - then I'd assume the company is 'dead and hollow' and collecting
revenue for the last gasping breath of the product. I imagine an empty room
with the dusty desks where support staff once toiled.. and a
Hi Florian,
To avoid the userid being forced by CP, put the following in your SYSTEM
CONFIG:
Under FEATURES
DISCONNECT_TIMEout OFF disables the automatic logoff of a virtual machine
that is forcibly disconnected.
Abraços / Best regards
Edi Lopes Alves
IBM Global Accounts (IGA)
z/VM Systems
What is the difference between a computer salesman and a used car
salesman? The car salesman knows when he's lying.
David Dean
Information Systems
*bcbstauthorized*
Life is too important to be taken seriously
-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System
Ok here's some heresy that I've presented to IBM and maybe was
communicated to their sales folks. From a capacity planning and service
level perspective, adding a CPU gives you MORE than 100%, not less than.
Really, BUT ONLY if you actually care about service levels.
From a service level
I would expect that some would challenge your conclusion based on the
idea that the MP effect does not even appear unless you are running at
or near capacity. If I have two cpus or IFLs and 1.1 cpu's worth of
demand, will I notice the MP effect? Probably not. I probably will see a
better service
Dean, David (I/S) wrote:
What is the difference between a computer salesman and a used car
salesman? The car salesman knows when he's lying.
You know about the woman who on the honeymoon evening of
her fourth marriage said, Be gentle with me, I'm a virgin.
How can that be? asked her groom,
29 matches
Mail list logo
