On Thursday, 04/02/2009 at 08:30 EDT, Rob van der Heij
wrote:
> Hmm... could it be that the RSU also made a "databufferpoolsize" from
> TCPIP disappear?
> Screens much larger than &deity created them in the beginning may
> result in transfers that don't fit in the default buffer size.
Whoops! I
On Thursday, 04/02/2009 at 08:19 EDT, Raymond Noal
wrote:
> Upon further investigation I have found that the problem with the PEEK
command
> is associated with the user?s terminal screen size. I was using a
terminal
> emulation screen sizeof 62X 160.If I change the terminal characteristics
Even though you have it working now, if you cannot find any doc about screen
size limits (if there such a restriction), and if you can't find any other
reason (ala Rob's TCPIP idea), then open a PMR to find out and get fixed or
documented that restriction.
Those new, young Operators like big sc
I know he did and I've spent a good amount of time, other than "other
duties as assigned", trying to figure out how to do it. You don't just
type in "FILEPOOL UNLOAD GSKSSLDB" and have magic happen. Maybe you
do but it doesn't work for someone who doesn't know BFS from beans. I
am close to h
>
>Is this yet another reason that IBM should not distribute such files as
compiled REXX, so the user could diagnose similar problems?
>
I agree with the sentiment, but in this case, it's misplaced. PROFPEEK
XEDIT on the S-disk is indeed compiled, but the source is also on the
S-disk as PROFP
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 2:17 AM, Raymond Noal wrote:
> Upon further investigation I have found that the problem with the PEEK
> command is associated with the user’s terminal screen size. I was using a
> terminal emulation screen size of 62 X 160. If I change the terminal
> characteristics to 43 X
Dear Listers,
Thanks to all who responded, even Chuckie.
Upon further investigation I have found that the problem with the PEEK
command is associated with the user's terminal screen size. I was using
a terminal emulation screen size of 62 X 160. If I change the terminal
characteristics to 43 X 80
On Thu, 2 Apr 2009 17:11:11 -0400, Alan Altmark
wrote:
>On Thursday, 04/02/2009 at 03:16 EDT, Alan Ackerman
> wrote:
>> Does it use monitor data or accounting data? People at my shop would n
ot
>> like it using monitor data. Other shops can decide for themselves.
>
>You can't just drop that her
On Thursday, 04/02/2009 at 07:07 EDT, Alan Ackerman
wrote:
> You have it backwards. There is PROFPEEK XEDIT, and all the other
PROF
> XEDIT, are supposed to be on the S disk.
Ray just said that MAINT has PROFPEEK XEDIT on the A-disk (he didn't say
why) and that it works fine, but the user
On Thursday, 04/02/2009 at 05:24 EDT, Raymond Noal
wrote:
> Oh, almost forgot. While I can?t recall thiseverbeing a problem before,
I
> recently applied RSU 0901 with no problems. H-m-m-m-m-m- ???
>
> And before you ask? it?s not April 1st, today is April 2nd. Mayhaps
Chuckie is
> afoot!!
On Thu, 2 Apr 2009 15:05:13 -0700, Raymond Noal
wrote:
>B-I-N-G-O
>
>James wins the cigar!
>
>On the MAINT virtual machine where everything worked as expected, there
>was a PROFPEEK XEDIT file on the 191 A-Disk. For the other two machines
>that were encountering the problem, they only h
Because I get asked often about accounting and charge back for Linux
processes, z/VM virtual machines, and Linux applications, I've put up
more material explaining what data is available, and how to get that
data. The web page is at "http://www.VelocitySoftware.com/account.html";
=?iso-8859-1
B-I-N-G-O
James wins the cigar!
On the MAINT virtual machine where everything worked as expected, there
was a PROFPEEK XEDIT file on the 191 A-Disk. For the other two machines
that were encountering the problem, they only had a PROFPEEK XEDIT on
their 190 S-Disk. I copied the PROFPEEK XED
From the AP:
IBM in final stages of deal talks with Sun By JORDAN ROBERTSON
Associated Press April 2, 2009, 3:30PM
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — IBM Corp. and rival Sun Microsystems Inc. are in
the final stages of negotiations over IBM’s takeover of Sun. A deal
could be announced within days.
Haggling
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 11:33 PM, wrote:
>
> Mine is z/VM Version 5 Release 4.0, service level 0801 (64-bit)
> Generated at 07/29/08 14:19:31 EDT .
>
> How I know it is the newest one? And how to do upgrade?
Magic trick is to order PTF UM97540 (note the last 3 digits). That
will get you the lates
RSU 901 is the latest but There are about several Hypers to go on top.
Scott R Wandschneider
Senior Systems Programmer|| Infocrossing, a Wipro Company || 11707 Miracle
Hills Drive, Omaha, NE, 68154-4457|| ': 402.963.8905 || Ë:847.849.7223 || ::
scott.wandschnei...@infocrossing.com **Think Gr
sunny...@wcb.ab.ca wrote:
Mine is z/VM Version 5 Release 4.0,
service level 0801 (64-bit)
Generated at 07/29/08 14:19:31 EDT .
How I know it is the newest one? And
how to do upgrade?
Sunny Hu
I. M. Technical Services
W.C.B. Alberta
(780) 498-4739
Hi, Sunny.
You can see what the latest RSU is for any supported version/relese of
z/VM by looking at the "Service" page on the z/VM web site:
http://www.vm.ibm.com/service
Take a look at the RSU Recommended Service Upgrade section. There also
instructions on how to order the current RSU; the
Mine is z/VM Version 5 Release 4.0, service level 0801 (64-bit)
Generated at 07/29/08 14:19:31 EDT .
How I know it is the newest one? And how to do upgrade?
Sunny Hu
I. M. Technical Services
W.C.B. Alberta
(780) 498-4739
sunny...@wcb.ab.ca
This message is intended only for the addressee. It
I got 901 up today. My PEEK exec has the same date as yours and I can't repeat
your problem. Looks like there is something extra out there messing you up.
Bob Bates
Enterprise Hosting Services
w. (469)892-6660
c. (214) 907-5071
"This message may contain confidential and/or privileged informati
Do you have a private copy of PROFPEEK XEDIT?
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Raymond Noal
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 2:21 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Problem using the PEEK Command
Dear List
Dear Listers,
I've encountered a strange situation using the PEEK command issued from
the CMS Ready prompt. The same thing happens if I select a reader for to
peek from within a RDRLIST display.
I'll type in PEEK xx - where xx is some reader spool file number for
this user.
The result is as expec
On Thursday, 04/02/2009 at 03:16 EDT, Alan Ackerman
wrote:
> Does it use monitor data or accounting data? People at my shop would not
> like it using monitor data. Other shops can decide for themselves.
You can't just drop that here and walk away! :-) Please explain. Why
would someone like o
exactly. installations wanting to charge at the process level or
anything to do with inside linux using valid data will use ESALPS.
Traditional vm sites not interested in what is inside linux can use a
multiple of data sources available for 30 years or so. this thread was
about linux process
On Thu, 2 Apr 2009 10:09:08 -0800, Barton Robinson wrote:
>Alan, ESALPS correlates the linux process data and the z/vm data,
>allowing chargeback to be done correctly at the process level. Other
>products have not announced this capability as far as i know? So you
>would be correct for other meth
Oh, and yes, I too would charge based on resident storage (and yes we
have that data available). Charging on resident storage would make
things like current WAS polling show up as expensive as it really is -
it ensures Linux doesn't easily page out. And then it would be cheaper
for the charge
ESALPS uses MONITOR data, that has 100.00% capture ratio, accurate to
the micro second for z/VM. For Linux data, we capture the process table
every minute to correlate to the vm monitor interval. I believe the
capture ratio obtained by ESALPS from monitor data is higher that what
you get from
>I've been scouring OE and SFS doc for the last couple of weeks figuring
>out how to get the BFS stuff moved from the installation system to our
>existing VMSYS and VMSYSU file pools and I think I'm finally close. :-)
Alan Altmark answered this last week: FILEPOOL UNLOAD FILESPACE on your
insta
On Thu, 2 Apr 2009 09:47:09 -0700, Miguel Delapaz
wrote:
>Alan,
>
>The links in the "RSU Content" column, take you to a list of all APARs o
n
>the releases' RSUs, along with the RSU they were included on.
>
>Regards,
>Miguel Delapaz
>z/VM Development
So it does! I clicked on one of them and di
On Thu, 2 Apr 2009 11:31:40 -0400, Jim Bohnsack wrot
e:
>I've been scouring OE and SFS doc for the last couple of weeks figuring
>out how to get the BFS stuff moved from the installation system to our
>existing VMSYS and VMSYSU file pools and I think I'm finally close. :-)
>
>Jim
We don't mix SF
On Thursday, 04/02/2009 at 10:37 EDT, Shimon Lebowitz
wrote:
> Hi,
> I have been trying to find the OFFICIAL rules regarding defining
> an OSA as PRIROUTER, and not having any success. I admit
> I am not at the office with the CD-ROM, but at home stuck using
> that supremely awful (IMHO) eclipse
Alan, ESALPS correlates the linux process data and the z/vm data,
allowing chargeback to be done correctly at the process level. Other
products have not announced this capability as far as i know? So you
would be correct for other methods of collecting process data.
Alan Ackerman wrote:
On Thu
The ESAPLPS code that Barton mentioned is doing prorating, right? How
accurate is that? Are you using accounting data or performance data?
I have a long-standing bias against using performance data for accounting
.
I can go into detail, if anyone needs to know, but first we have to see
which d
On Thu, 2 Apr 2009 09:15:57 -0500, =?iso-8859-1?Q?Greg_Dyrda?=
wrote:
>We currently bill for Linux on a per guest basis. I'm wondering what
>approach others are taking. Specifically, I'm wondering if it is
possible
>to bill at the process level and if anyone else is billing that way.
>
Alan,
The links in the "RSU Content" column, take you to a list of all APARs on
the releases' RSUs, along with the RSU they were included on.
Regards,
Miguel Delapaz
z/VM Development
The IBM z/VM Operating System wrote on 04/02/2009
09:32:28 AM:
>
> I just went to that site. It does not appe
ESALPS provides the data for accounting for the Linux process level,
linux application level, linux user level, and of course at the virtual
machine level. How to do this I thought was on our website, will put it
there today. It involves a very simple process usually as part of the
night time
On Thu, 2 Apr 2009 09:57:40 -0400, David Boyes
wrote:
>Answered offllist to preserve list purity.
>
>
>On 4/2/09 12:25 AM, "Gary M. Dennis" wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
Can I have a copy? See email address below. (The one I am signed up with
is at my home.)
I don't believe in 'list purity'. I'd pref
Taken from previous topic Re: z/VM 5.3 maintenance question
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 17:26:49 -0400, Alan Altmark
wrote:
>You can find the content of any RSU at http://www.vm.ibm.com/service/rsu
/
>
>Alan Altmark
>z/VM Development
>IBM Endicott
>
=
===
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 4:38 PM, Scott Rohling wrote:
> - it was nice to feed this data in the existing z/VM accounting which we
> already had a billing process for.
This is different from what I encounter in several installations. If
the VM accounting data is used to feed into the corporate proc
I've been scouring OE and SFS doc for the last couple of weeks figuring
out how to get the BFS stuff moved from the installation system to our
existing VMSYS and VMSYSU file pools and I think I'm finally close. :-)
Jim
Gentry, Stephen wrote:
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
-
And Alan Altmark has made it clear in recent conversations that we can
expect to see more use of OpenEdition services and APIs in the future.
Richard Troth wrote:
One exciting development recently is improved portability from USS to
CMS OE. What that means is you can compile something on USS a
Steve,
We ran into the same situation and had to access the following minidisks,
as outlined in the DVD Installation summary Service Procedure section,
before proceeding with step 7.
Access 191 A
Access 5E5 B
Access 51D D
Joseph Di Pippo
Operating Systems Programmer III
FRIT Computing Service
One exciting development recently is improved portability from USS to
CMS OE. What that means is you can compile something on USS and
expect it to run on OpenVM. There are limits: If the resulting
executable calls some z/OS service, then expect it to ABEND and take
down your whole OE environment
Gentry, Stephen wrote:
Just a curiosity
question. Is anybody doing anything with
OpenExtension anymore? Legacy stuff still running? Developing new
apps, etc?
Steve
New z/VM specific features use OpenExtensions. The LDAP Server, the
new CMS Based SSL Server, for inst
Just a quick note that one thing I see missing from most billing schemes is
memory usage. How much memory is assigned to the guest can have more of an
impact on the system than CPU, depending on the environment. It's also
easier to monitor as the virtual machine guest size stays fairly static. S
Just a curiosity question. Is anybody doing anything with OpenExtension
anymore? Legacy stuff still running? Developing new apps, etc?
Steve
On Apr 2, 2009, at 9:15 AM, =?iso-8859-1?Q?Greg_Dyrda?= wrote:
We currently bill for Linux on a per guest basis. I'm wondering what
approach others are taking. Specifically, I'm wondering if it is
possibl
e
to bill at the process level and if anyone else is billing that way.
If you want
I did some work at one time to have a Linux server cut a z/VM accounting
record, setting the account code of the owning process before a process ran,
and a 'close' afterwards. Major flaw: this only works for one process at a
time. All the CPU used during the process run counted toward that proc
Hi,
I have been trying to find the OFFICIAL rules regarding defining
an OSA as PRIROUTER, and not having any success. I admit
I am not at the office with the CD-ROM, but at home stuck using
that supremely awful (IMHO) eclipse-of-the-sun system. (I believe
someone commented here recently that an ecl
I've also seen hardware appliances that will do thin provisioning and
de-duplication for a SAN environment. Basically the idea is you hide
all your real storage behind the appliance and it will present virtual
LUNs to the operating systems and only store a single copy of any
duplicated data in the
I set all but 2 of our linux SVMs so that they can be billed as black-box
appliances. The other two contain our smallest customers and our POC area
s
so we don't really charge very well there. In particular, we have a singl
e
Apache instance providing virtual hosts for multiple customer websites.
We currently bill for Linux on a per guest basis. I'm wondering what
approach others are taking. Specifically, I'm wondering if it is possibl
e
to bill at the process level and if anyone else is billing that way.
Answered offllist to preserve list purity.
On 4/2/09 12:25 AM, "Gary M. Dennis" wrote:
[snip]
53 matches
Mail list logo
