I need to transfer some files between a first and second level system, and
tried to define an RSCS CTCA connection, but when I try to start the
connection, the see each other, but immediately shut down the link. The
second level connection gets the following messages:
DMTCMY700I Activating link
On Monday, 02/07/2011 at 11:15 EST, RPN01 nix.rob...@mayo.edu wrote:
DMTCMY700I Activating link NPOLAR NJE line=AA20 class=*
queueing=priority
DMTNET141I Line AA20 ready for connection to link NPOLAR
DMTNET142I Link NPOLAR line AA20 dataset ready
DMTNCR916E Invalid NJE signon connection
The systems are polar and npolar.
On 2/7/11 10:22 AM, Alan Altmark alan_altm...@us.ibm.com wrote:
On Monday, 02/07/2011 at 11:15 EST, RPN01 nix.rob...@mayo.edu wrote:
DMTCMY700I Activating link NPOLAR NJE line=AA20 class=*
queueing=priority
DMTNET141I Line AA20 ready for connection to link
http://www.sucks-rocks.com/rate/z%2Fos/z%2Fvm/z%2Flinux/linux/windows/mac+os/osx/vse/tpf
(z/vse and z/tpf both got no rating)
On Monday, 02/07/2011 at 11:53 EST, RPN01 nix.rob...@mayo.edu wrote:
The systems are polar and npolar.
DMTNCR916E Invalid NJE signon connection record received
That message comes out because signon record contains
- A node id that doesn't match the local system's expectation of who is at
the
IOW what does the LOCAL statement in your RSCS CONFIGs specify?
--
Mike Harding
z/VM System Support
mhard...@us.ibm.com
mike.b.hard...@kp.org
mikehard...@mindless.com
(925) 926-3179 (w)
(925) 323-2070 (c)
IM: VMBearDad (AIM), mbhcpcvt (Y!)
The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
I've read the CP COMMAND manual and the PERFORMANCE manual regarding the
SET SHARE command and how it works.
Would someone care to comment on how you have used them for your z/VSE
production and guest machines?
What would suggest for TCPIP/RSCS/VTAM SET SHARE values?
Thanks in advance.
A while ago a very experienced VM person from IBM suggested that we not
use ABSOLUTE unless you absolutely must cap off a guest to keep it
from running away with your real processors. We used that setting on
our test system only.
Our VSE TOR and VM guest TCPIP both had high relative shares (1
We use absolute shares for VSE machines with limithard during the day and
remove the limit from production at night.
-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU] On Behalf
Of Robert Payne
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2011 1:06 PM
To:
We use absloute shares for all our VSEs to guarentee them CPU time, no
LIMITHARD. I manually do a LIMITHARD on a VSE machine when the CPU is close to
100% due to probably many batch jobs running in one VSE. This is done so that
our CMS users get some time. Once the CPU goes down, usually
A slight correction... It's VMRMSVM that manages the share settings not
PerformanceToolkit.. There are many ways to influence how VMRMSVM manages
the share values.
The concept is similar to setting PRTY in VSE, the partitions with the
highest I/O (high wait states) gets the higher priority and the
Catherine,
I don't think your understanding of SHARE is backwards, but your
expectation of what the performance manager will do might be. I suspect
it's trying to keep heavy CPU users from hogging the processors.
To get back to the original question, Jim, I think you need to describe
what
I am trying to replace a WAKEUP (IUCVMSG routine with a PIPE STARMSG.
I have the following snippet that seems to work fine except for capturing
the return code from the cp/cms command (XCMD).
Is there a simple fix to this? - Thanks
/*
*/
trace
o
cp set msg
iucv
arg
xcmd
'pipe (endchar
?)',
Thanks for the reply Marty. Long time, no see.
Our VSE systems are mainly interactive CICS or IDMS/DC systems during
the day. Night time they become batch machines.
The CICS and IDMS/DC systems are mainly accessed via VTAM.
Our three production systems are each set to ABSOLUTE 20%
Take a look at VMRMSVM it is included in z/VM 5.3 and later..
It is simple to setup and worked quite well for us...
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Hughes, Jim jim.hug...@doit.nh.gov wrote:
Thanks for the reply Marty. Long time, no see.
Our VSE systems are mainly interactive CICS or
Jim wrote The more I read about CP SET SHARE the more I suspect it isn't
designed to be a panacea for smooth performance in time of trouble.
You are right - it is not.
We don't run test guests on production LPARs.
Actually, we don't run test LPARs on production z boxes.
Actually, we don't run
Hi Jim,
We run one production VSE guest, runs IDMS/DC (no CICS) all the time.
Batch happens throughout the day, much of it user driven, so day is
usually busier for batch than night.
That guest gets absolute share 50% and LIMITSOFT of 80%.
We have a VSE development guest that gets absolute
Very few people understand the scheduler, and what it does - What it
does, it does very well. You just have to understand the language.
Rob did some recent experiments that validated how it works, and
validated how little functions like VRM really help your workloads
(except by accident).
Thanks Barton.
Jim Hughes
Consulting Systems Programmer
Mainframe Technical Support Group
Department of Information Technology
State of New Hampshire
27 Hazen Drive
Concord, NH 03301
603-271-5586Fax 603.271.1516
Statement of Confidentiality: The contents of this message
We have sufficient enough resources so set share isn't a big deal, however, I
do have production set at set share relative 150 and the test systems as set
share rel 50.
When they are competing, the production machines end up with 75% of the
processor and the test machines with about 25%. That
Hi Barton,
That's a nice one, learned something new today on scheduler language.
But I do have a question. It relates to the zVM scheduler handeling
typical Linux load. But linux load differs from the way CMS and VSE
loads run. To what extent is this applicable for VSE and/or CMS loads?
Doesn't
tyvm, Paul and Marcy
In my VSWITCH definition, rdev is changing from 9004 to 9404 when we go
to the z196.
define vswitch lnxvsw1 rdev 9004.p00 9004.p01
Does that mean that after I change my VSWITCH definition to 9404, the next
2 addresses: 9005, 9006, will also automatically change from
Yes - it is assumed that 3 devices are used.. so 9404-9406 will be used,
with the definitions you show.
Scott Rohling
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 4:02 PM, George Henke/NYLIC
george_he...@newyorklife.com wrote:
tyvm, Paul and Marcy
In my VSWITCH definition, rdev is changing from 9004 to 9404
I need to transfer some files between a first and second level system, and
tried to define an RSCS CTCA connection, but when I try to start the
connection, the see each other, but immediately shut down the link. The
second level connection gets the following messages:
DMTCMY700I Activating link
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Tom Duerbusch
duerbus...@stlouiscity.com wrote:
We have sufficient enough resources so set share isn't a big deal, however,
I do have production set at set share relative 150 and the test systems as
set share rel 50.
When they are competing, the production
25 matches
Mail list logo
