PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 11:51 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Best procedure to migrate dedicated VSE volume to VM
minidisk
Group, correct me if I'm wrong but by defining the disk starting at cyl
000 will cause problems for VM and/or VSE
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tim Joyce
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 1:27 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Best procedure to migrate dedicated VSE volume to VM
minidisk
That is what was throwing me last week
I have had lots of experience with DDR - not recently, but I'm pretty
confident that this should still be accurate.
I've no experience pre-3330 and the following is written in a 3390 contex
t.
Assuming you're runnning DDR in a virtual machine and moving from and to
the same VIRTUAL cylinders
For those on the VM list, this is also being discussed on VSE-L.
The current question is:
Tim, do you really mean full volume? It sounds like you want a
mini-disk that is one cylinder smaller than the volume so you can have a
different VM volume label. What are you trying to accomplish?
Tony
On Apr 20, 2007, at 9:25 AM, Tim Joyce wrote:
Hello,
I am testing procedures to migrate my dedicated VSE volumes to VM
full volume minidisks. I have run into trouble when using DDR to
copy my dedicated 3390 (mod3) pack to the virtual (3390 mod3)
volume. I get :
HCPDDR725D SOURCE DASD
by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
04/20/2007 10:25 AM
Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc:
Subject:Best procedure to migrate dedicated VSE volume to VM
minidisk
Hello,
I am testing procedures
low level data ie H0 R0 record.
-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Sent: 4/20/2007 11:29 AM
Subject: Re: Best procedure to migrate dedicated VSE volume to VM minidisk
On Apr 20, 2007, at 9:25 AM, Tim Joyce wrote:
Hello,
I am testing
Tim--VM would be quite happy with a full volume, 3339 cyl. mdisk that
the guest would get. Now that does leave you with the exposure of the
VSE guest owning cyl 0, including the label. If you change the label,
VM won't know about the different label until you change the MDISK
statement in
Yes, but unfortunately DEVNO causes the MDISK to bypass Minidisk
Cache... :( Went down the same road, same sad results...
Jim Bohnsack wrote:
Tim--VM would be quite happy with a full volume, 3339 cyl. mdisk that
the guest would get. Now that does leave you with the exposure of the
VSE
