Re: CU Resources Exceeded
Check SG24-6266-01, although FICON there are ESCON references in there... what Joel said From: SUBSCRIBE IBM-MAIN Tom Trainor thomas.j.trai...@exxonmobil.com To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 12:44 PM Subject: CU Resources Exceeded After adding devices and two (2) LPARS to IOCDS on 2066, unable to IPL the last two(2) of ten (10) LPARS. The last two (2) are NOT necessarily LPAR numbers 9 and A but are the last two (2) of the ten (10) that are activated. Within Channel Problem Determintation on 2066 SE the message in the Analyze Serial Link Status is: CU Resources Exceeded - Init Failure - No Resources Available. Has anyone seen this or know what the problem might be. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Frequency of Sysplex Verification Audits?
Al, I would say that your assumption/impression is correct, at least in our case. I run some for internal verification based on changes to our Plex, but have been asked, within the last 18 months or so, for the Plex stuff more frequently than in the past. Regards, Pat Falcone From: Al Sherkow a...@sherkow.com To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 11:33 AM Subject: Frequency of Sysplex Verification Audits? I'm curious about the actual frequency that sites are being asked to run IBM's Sysplex Verification Package. (The IBM Sysplex Verification Package can be found at http://ibm.com/systems/z/swprice/sysplex/verify.html .) The TsCs of the Attachment for IBM System z AWLC (this is in other documents as well) include this text: - require Customer to provide IBMwith a completed IBMSysplex Verification Package upon the occurrence of any of the following: 1) Customer implements an actively coupled Parallel Sysplex, 2) a permanent change is made to any Eligible Machine, e.g., model upgrades or model downgrade in the Parallel Sysplex, 3) IBMrequests a package for any year during which Customer has received aggregated AWLC pricing, and 4) at least once in every 12 month period. - My impression based on my clients and licensees is that IBM is requesting more SVP audits than a few years ago. Have others been asked to do the SVP more than once per year? Especially larger customers with multiple machines the number of permanent changes in capacity could easily occur multiple times per year. Thanks everyone! Al -- Al Sherkow, I/S Management Strategies, Ltd. Consulting Expertise on Capacity Planning, Performance Tuning, WLC, LPARs, IRD and LCS Software Seminars on IBM SW Pricing, LPARs, and IRD Voice: +1 414 332-3062 Web: www.sherkow.com -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Connect Direct on a separate LPAR
We're doing this in a 7 way jes plex inside a bigger sysplex. The task can run hot from time to time depending on load and does run with a mix of other workloads. Works OK for us but I can't speak to the $$$ savings. From: Bill Johnson mellonb...@yahoo.com To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 1:51 PM Subject: Connect Direct on a separate LPAR We are considering creating a separate LPAR just to run Connect Direct on because it would reduce the cost of the Connect Direct product by about 80% saving around $80K. Is anyone doing this? Does it make sense? Drawbacks? TIA Bill Johnson -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Inactive WLM CDS Information
Have you considered that the WLM CDS increased with z/OS 1.10 http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/zos/v1r10/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.zos.r10.e0zm100/rwlmcds.htm --- On Mon, 6/20/11, Sandro Ambrozic sandro.ambro...@gmail.com wrote: From: Sandro Ambrozic sandro.ambro...@gmail.com Subject: Re: Inactive WLM CDS Information To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Monday, June 20, 2011, 5:25 PM 2011/6/20 Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net In ce3ffbb7e42033469ef752a1d8a19ba1409...@kl1221tc.cs.ad.klmcorp.net, on 06/20/2011 at 10:02 AM, Vernooij, CP - SPLXM kees.verno...@klm.com said: 1. this newsgroup is a mirror of the news-server. Most people get their posts only from the newsserver. Not even close. AFAIK most people get their posys from the list server. The is a one-way gateway to Usenet, and google has an archive of Usenet. I suggest you subscribe and ask your question there. You don't subscribe to a news server. Since your message appears on the list, it is clear that you subscribed to the list server. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html Sorry, i picked the wrong bookmark to enter the initial post. Back to WLM, the problem was, after a DR test, having switched CDSs to the newly defined one in the secondary site, in the way back, the WLM switch to the original CDS in primary site failed for internal size reasons. We were forced to re-define the CDS to be able to activate it. Both new definitions were made based on the values extracted from the active production CDS at the begining of this process, at least, that's our assumption. This CDS was allocated in 2009, when we were at z/OS 1.8 level, now we have a 1.10 and 1.11 mix. What we want now is to be able to examine the alternate 2009 CDS that was preserved, to find out what was exactly the reason for this problem. Regards, Sandro Ambrozic +34 666 803 223 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Running a SYSPLEX - SCRT -what's needed
Hey Mark, We have a fairly sizable plex and I try to report on as many as I can...some of the sandbox stuff falls outside the plex. I've run the plex, MULC and SCRT reports and am always told to include everything that I possibly can. So typically I have a handful of sandbox LPAR's that have either partial or no data and I include what I can... --- On Thu, 5/19/11, Mark Zelden m...@mzelden.com wrote: From: Mark Zelden m...@mzelden.com Subject: Re: Running a SYSPLEX - SCRT -what's needed To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Thursday, May 19, 2011, 4:35 PM On Thu, 19 May 2011 09:04:17 -0700, Donnelly, John P john.p.donne...@nsc.com wrote: We collect the SMF70,89 records throughout the month and submit a Subcapacity Report each month based on MSU usage; we generally save a few dollars each month. We must report on all LPARS defined to our processor; in our case a production LPAR and a test LPAR. What are people doing for sandbox LPARs? Ones that may be up and down and may not even have tape or automated processes for collecting and storing SMF data. Most of the sandbox LPARs I have worked on in the past have SMFDUMPs going to DD DUMMY. Mark -- Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS mailto:m...@mzelden.com Mark's MVS Utilities: http://www.mzelden.com/mvsutil.html Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
What OS Level was IFAPRD Introduced
Anyone have the answer to the above subject...we're thinking MVS/ESA 4.3 but cannot confirm... TIA... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
ASG Zeke: Insufficient index data space storage
Where having an issue with Zeke on 1.9 with Zeke Z17U8E Insufficient index data space storage Any ideas... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
ASG Zeke: Insufficient index data space storage
Thanks Mike, It appears there was a corruption issue with the catalog in question. I guess the messaging was less elegant than we might have anticipated. Appreciate your input... --- On Sun, 9/12/10, Patrick Falcone patrick.falco...@verizon.net wrote: from: Mike Schwab mike.a.sch...@gmail.com Subject: Re: ASG Zeke: Insufficient index data space storage To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Sunday, September 12, 2010, 10:09 PM On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Patrick Falcone patrick.falco...@verizon.net wrote: Where having an issue with Zeke on 1.9 with Zeke Z17U8E Insufficient index data space storage Any ideas... Three ideas to try. Increase primary allocation. Increase region size. Increase index allocation -- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
WAS V7 and ACF2 9.2 Trouble Accessing Admin. Con. from App. Server
We've had some lingering issues getting into the admin. console from the application server we can't seem to get by. Can anyone kindly assist with helping us understand where we may be going astray? We strongly believe that this is ACF2 related...unfortunately it's on version 9.2 (unsupported) +BBOO0222I: SECJ0129E: Authorization failed for user A2ADMIN:IBMIPA.krms.com while invoking GET on admin_host:/ibm/console/, Authorization failed, Not granted any of the required roles: administrator operator configurator monitor nobody Thank You... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM Plans to Discontinue REDBOOK Series
OK, so who do we send our emails to to let IBM know that it's a dumb idea to even consider discontinuing the Redbook Series? And should there be a generic subject line that gets the attention of those individuals and hopefully eliminates get washed in with all the other dirty laundry... --- On Mon, 3/8/10, Martin Packer martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com wrote: From: Martin Packer martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Subject: Re: IBM Plans to Discontinue REDBOOK Series To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Monday, March 8, 2010, 7:37 AM Without going into the specifics I'd observe that there is a CONTINUAL need for customers to tell IBM how much they value Redbooks. Likewise, there's always a need for IBMers to articulate why Redbooks are very much in IBM's own interest. (I say this as someone who enormously enjoys WRITING Redbooks, and the contacts and learning that flow from being involved in the writing. But it's still true, despite my vested interest.) Martin Packer, Mainframe Performance Consultant, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM countersues Neon over zPrime accelerator
I think you're right on it Bob. And I totally agree that perspective comes into play when looking at this, thanks. For us taking delivery of WAS 3.02 back in 2001, as freeware if I remember correctly, seemed like a prudent move to save work from continually going to the other side. We had a development management type who worked mainframe and midrange/open who's vision was to deploy where he believed the work should be hosted. When we put WAS 3.02 up on a small RB6 G5 machine they jumped on it. It was not a pretty sight from a performance capacity perspective, in the early stages. My rants are in the archives here and on MXG. We managed to work out bugs in the application and as a single server instance I did not have to do much in WLM to find a spot for it in the hierarchy. We eventually upgraded to WAS 3.5 and then 4.0 (3.5 compatibility mode single server instance). All was still relatively good except for the CPU spins we would take which would bring the system to its knees - I built a resource group for those special occasions. When it was decided to move to WAS V5 that's when I started to really feel the pain due to the construct difference between single server instance and cell group. At this point we were already looking at z800 and then z890 and at that point, from a pure performance/cost perspective, the only option getting us out of that mess was a zAAP. The upgrade costs to support anything other than a similar speed z/890 w/zAAP were prohibitive. And to me personally, as the performance guy, I'm looking at it as a significant performance improvement over another knee-capped GP CP. I'm currently in a similar situation right now with an older z890 and similar speed GP CP's and no zAAP trying to shoehorn WAS V7. So while I agree Mark with your statements about engine switching overhead and running all GP CP's over a mix of GP SP CP's there are obvious situations where a knee-capped machine w/SP CP's can out perform an all GP CP knee-capped machine. So in effect, this is my *perspective* of the overall situation and how we evolved with WAS on the mainframe. And while I did say in a previous post *something had to be done* I still feel something did have to be done to help supplement the CPU requirements of WAS while limiting is potential performance impact to the traditional work all running together on the same LPAR, from a performance perspective. I'm not talking about 10 way high speed machines here, I'm talking about a lot of folks just trying to move ahead with the technology in small and mid-size environments where the luxury of having full speed GP CP's is not an option. That costing/marketing gimmicks came into play is all good and added to helping customer stave off some of the migration to other platforms. --- On Fri, 2/5/10, Richards, Robert B. robert.richa...@opm.gov wrote: From: Richards, Robert B. robert.richa...@opm.gov Subject: Re: IBM countersues Neon over zPrime accelerator To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Friday, February 5, 2010, 12:06 PM Far be it from me to play the role of IBM's defender, but I cannot let this exchange go unchallenged. Here we have a case where Eric expresses an opinion and Paul treats it as fact and raises the stake in making IBM be the bad guy. Enough with revisionist history. I see it all the time in this town and am loathe to put up with it in my favorite industry. Eric's assertion is wrong (sorry Eric, but it is...customers always have choices. They may not like them, but they have them). At the time of its introduction, the zAAP was marketed to entice the Java crowd to come play on the big boys' machines at a cost that would not break their software budget's back. One of the many benefits to IBM was bragging rights of J2EE on all platforms, a very significant thing. The big boys observed that they finally had a way to run Java on the mainframe that would not break the software usage bank because of expensive Java cycles on general purpose processors. It was a win-win for the customers that could take advantage of it and, of course, IBM. Prior to that, IBM was not very successful at promoting Java on the mainframe, so as the passage of time has shown, the new strategy clearly worked. Assigning ulterior motives to things IBM does can be fun, bloodsport, like politics are in this town. But sometimes, IBM really does behave like the good corporate citizens they should be and are making a profit to boot. After all, are we not still a country that admires free enterprise? Oops, that slipped out. :-) One comment to add to the processor discussion; IBM started marketing the 9672s with 12 CPs in every box when they determined that it was more cost-effective to do that than to produce the 4 and 8 CP models as well (G4/G5 timeframe?). Using microcode to control the powerwho ever thought of that idea should still be trying to spend the bonus for that suggestion. Clearly, there are
DB2 V7 - Implications to storage increasing RID Pool
Curious if anyone can shed light on the subject matter. We're taking the default of 4 mb and want to increase to around 100 mb for the RID pool. It appears in V7 the RID is allocated below the bar, in V8 it looks like the lists part of the RID get moved above the bar. Do we need to be concerned about region or any other storage metrics, performance implications to DB2? TIA... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM countersues Neon over zPrime accelerator
I saw a roadshow this past summer and immediately came away with the implications to licensing. A small group of us also talked about what you do below, IBM changing the licensing or breaking the software. To me anyway, it's a crafty/risky move and left me feeling, no disrespect to Neon intended, that it was like a pseudo-hack to z/OS. I smirked when I started to understand since I had not heard of the software before. Who wouldn't want to take advantage of the potential savings of running GP workloads on SP CP's? It's not surprising IBM is coming after them I'm just wondering what took so long. --- On Tue, 2/2/10, Mark Zelden mark.zel...@zurichna.com wrote: From: Mark Zelden mark.zel...@zurichna.com Subject: Re: IBM countersues Neon over zPrime accelerator To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Tuesday, February 2, 2010, 11:59 PM On Tue, 2 Feb 2010 17:22:39 -0600, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com wrote: On Mon, 1 Feb 2010 15:18:41 -0800, Guy Gardoit wrote: Good for IBM - goodbye Neon, sleep tight. I'm not sure why the jubilation. Sure, Neon is in business to make money. They're trying to do so by offering IBM's customers a way to save money. Whether it's legal or not is for the courts to decide; they haven't rendered that decision yet. Until then, in the interest of their pocketbooks, pragmatic customers should be rooting for Neon. On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 9:48 PM, Ed Gould wrote: http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2010/01/29/ibm_countersues_neon/ -- gil I don't have a stake either way, but if I were rooting for Neon and they won this battle, IBM would still be free to change the licensing rules or not charge less for special engines, or they could just change the code and break zPrime for Neon. So the only benefit seems to be temporary for anyone using the software. Long term, it could hurt everyone else. Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:mark.zel...@zurichna.com z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM countersues Neon over zPrime accelerator
While I agree with what you are saying and being a very early WAS customer there were also sometimes severe implications to performance *trying* to get WAS to play nice with the traditional workloads. Something had to be done to allow the 2, trad. workloads WebFear, to cohabitate... --- On Wed, 2/3/10, McKown, John john.mck...@healthmarkets.com wrote: From: McKown, John john.mck...@healthmarkets.com Subject: Re: IBM countersues Neon over zPrime accelerator To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Wednesday, February 3, 2010, 1:19 PM -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of R.S. Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 2:04 AM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: IBM countersues Neon over zPrime accelerator Mark Zelden pisze: [...] I don't have a stake either way, but if I were rooting for Neon and they won this battle, IBM would still be free to change the licensing rules or not charge less for special engines, or they could just change the code and break zPrime for Neon. So the only benefit seems to be temporary for anyone using the software. Long term, it could hurt everyone else. Another scenario: Neon wins, IBM tries to break zPrime and is sued for trust practices. Then LOSES anti-trust trial and is obliged to keep zPrime working. Effect: everyone can lower his HW and SW bills. -- Radoslaw Skorupka Lodz, Poland More likely effect: IBM discontinues the speciality engines entirely. And OEM vendors start basing their software prices on both CP and speciality engines in the box instead of just on the CPs. IMO, the entire point of the zAAP at least was to not impact software costs for traditional workloads while making new workloads (WAS) affordable. -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * (817)-961-6183 cell john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM countersues Neon over zPrime accelerator
Really? Is engine switching overhead with SP's and GP's CP's more of a concern versus running WAS with GP CP's and other traditional workloads from a performance perspective? Hmm. I've been there, no SP's, and it can be very ugly. I'm not sure I follow you...So are you saying zAAP's really don't help the overall performance of a mix of WAS and traditional workloads when running this type of mix on the same LPAR? Sorry, maybe I'm misreading the below... --- On Wed, 2/3/10, Mark Zelden mark.zel...@zurichna.com wrote: From: Mark Zelden mark.zel...@zurichna.com Subject: Re: IBM countersues Neon over zPrime accelerator To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Wednesday, February 3, 2010, 3:34 PM On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 06:59:19 -0800, Patrick Falcone patrick.falco...@verizon.net wrote: While I agree with what you are saying and being a very early WAS customer there were also sometimes severe implications to performance *trying* to get WAS to play nice with the traditional workloads. Something had to be done to allow the 2, trad. workloads WebFear, to cohabitate... That has nothing to do with specialty engines. As a matter of fact it makes the problem worse due to all the engine switching that has to take place. Not to mention that the specialty engines could be in a different book. So in that respect, the entire concept of specialty engines is bad and was done for marketing / pricing. It never had anything to do with helping performance and mixing traditional and new workloads on the same LPAR. Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:mark.zel...@zurichna.com z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM countersues Neon over zPrime accelerator
That's fine, I don't agree. Thanks for checking for the documentation. I would have killed for a zAAP when we tried to go WAS V5 years ago. I would not have taken a GP either since the startup of the cell group dimmed the lights and having a GP, that was knee-capped, would have been a disadvantage over having a fully blown zAAP engine to support this workload. We had the estimation tool when it was a zap and the numbers came out in the log and showed the amount of java eligible work but I do not remember seeing switch rate information. --- On Wed, 2/3/10, Mark Zelden mark.zel...@zurichna.com wrote: From: Mark Zelden mark.zel...@zurichna.com Subject: Re: IBM countersues Neon over zPrime accelerator To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Wednesday, February 3, 2010, 5:40 PM On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 08:34:21 -0800, Patrick Falcone patrick.falco...@verizon.net wrote: Really? Is engine switching overhead with SP's and GP's CP's more of a concern versus running WAS with GP CP's and other traditional workloads from a performance perspective? Hmm. I've been there, no SP's, and it can be very ugly. I'm not sure I follow you...So are you saying zAAP's really don't help the overall performance of a mix of WAS and traditional workloads when running this type of mix on the same LPAR? No - not compared to the same number of total GP engines. There is switching overhead to move the zAAP eligible workload. In the early zAAP days, there was quite a bit of tweaking to the JVM to determine when it made sense to switch or not. There were also some estimation tools to help you determine what part of your application could run on a zAAP (prior to the RMF changes that gave you the numbers) and the switch rate (I don't know if there are any switch rate numbers in SMF records, but I don't think there is). I was looking for some SHARE sessions that could explain all of this, but the ones I have looked at don't have the slides attached (dispatcher changes to support zAAP, everything zAAP were a few I looked at). I stopped looking after that. Maybe someone else can point you to documentation or white papers or wants to provide more details. Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:mark.zel...@zurichna.com z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM countersues Neon over zPrime accelerator
Come on Mark, you made a blanket statement about zAAP's and performance and I disagreed. Now you're coming back with specifics which I'm not going to/can't argue. I'm just stating I've been in situations where I personally believe that a zAAP would have been benificial over a GP CP from a performance perspective. So can we call this a *it depends on the environment* at this point. Thanks for the links. --- On Wed, 2/3/10, Mark Zelden mark.zel...@zurichna.com wrote: From: Mark Zelden mark.zel...@zurichna.com Subject: Re: IBM countersues Neon over zPrime accelerator To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Wednesday, February 3, 2010, 9:04 PM On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 12:30:21 -0800, Patrick Falcone patrick.falco...@verizon.net wrote: That's fine, I don't agree. Thanks for checking for the documentation. You don't agree with what? That having 10 GPs has less overhead than 5 GPs and 5 zAAPs and can service the same workload just as well or better (since there will be less overhead)? I would have killed for a zAAP when we tried to go WAS V5 years ago. I would not have taken a GP either since the startup of the cell group dimmed the lights and having a GP, that was knee-capped, would have been a disadvantage over having a fully blown zAAP engine to support this workload. I didn't mention the caveat of a knee-capped engine, but that isn't an apples to apples comparison. Of course you are better off with a full speed specialty engine compared to a knee-capped GP if you can utilize the specialty engine. We had the estimation tool when it was a zap and the numbers came out in the log and showed the amount of java eligible work but I do not remember seeing switch rate information. I still had this old link to the tool: http://www6.software.ibm.com/dl/zosjava2/zosjava2-p Which redirected me here: https://www14.software.ibm.com/webapp/iwm/web/preLogin.do?source=zosjava2 And also this techdoc that replaced WP100431: http://www-03.ibm.com/support/techdocs/atsmastr.nsf/WebIndex/PRS2840 I thought it was the excel workbook in that techdoc that showed the switch rate. But I could be remembering slides I saw at a SHARE presentation. Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:mark.zel...@zurichna.com z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
GP CP's SP CP's (was: IBM countersues Neon over zPrime accelerator)
Check the link below, there is information on switching in question/answer #2. http://www.itindepth.com/JoseCastano-zAAP.htm A zAAP in my last situation would have beat the freakin pants off a GP CP, that's a fact. I'm sitting here with many disparate machines and again find myself with another client deliverable to move WAS V7 into situation where a GP CP will lose to a zAAP with regards to performance, that's a fact. Do I care about overhead switching at that point or relief to support the new workload with minimal compromise to the traditional workload? I'll take the zAAP over the slower GP CP. --- On Wed, 2/3/10, Mark Zelden mark.zel...@zurichna.com wrote: From: Mark Zelden mark.zel...@zurichna.com Subject: Re: IBM countersues Neon over zPrime accelerator To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Wednesday, February 3, 2010, 10:37 PM On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:46:24 -0800, Patrick Falcone patrick.falco...@verizon.net wrote: Come on Mark, you made a blanket statement about zAAP's and performance and I disagreed. Now you're coming back with specifics which I'm not going to/can't argue. I'm just stating I've been in situations where I personally believe that a zAAP would have been benificial over a GP CP from a performance perspective. So can we call this a *it depends on the environment* at this point. I'm not trying to start an argument, but performance is not about beliefs or gut feelings. It's about measurements and data / facts to back it up. The fact is, that there is overhead in engine switching to move work over to a specialty processor, so I'm not inclined to believe that from a performance perspective, overall, a system would run better with a split between zAAPs and GPs as opposed to all GPs. Now, I can see that WAS could run better since the zAAP(s) could be sitting there servicing the java work without competition - but the rest of the system could be CPU starved (also, remember the additional overhead if these engines are in another book). So I guess my point is, putting aside software costs, it is better from an overall system performance perspective to have all GPs. Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:mark.zel...@zurichna.com z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: WLM and TCPIP
Werner, I'm curious, how many CPU's? --- On Fri, 1/29/10, Werner Kuehnel werner.kueh...@mannheimer.de wrote: From: Werner Kuehnel werner.kueh...@mannheimer.de Subject: Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: WLM and TCPIP To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Friday, January 29, 2010, 2:30 PM The normal delay is under 10%. I can't think of another address space than TCPIP to handle the PING. Probably OMPROUTE, but it's also defined as SYSSTC and is delayed for a much higher percentage than at normal times. Werner Kuehnel IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu schrieb am 29.01.2010 15:11:24: Ignorant questions: Does TCPIP handle the Ping itself, so no other adress space is involved? What is the delay % under normal (good) response situations? Kees. Werner Kuehnel werner.kueh...@mannheimer.de wrote in message news:ofe4dc5618.b4211958-onc12576ba.004c69dc-c12576ba.004d3...@mannheim er.de... Tried already to shift TCPIP into SYSTEM, but is not allowed. WLM can not starve STCs defined in SYSSTC. Why does WLM not cut the processor for the batch jobs which are defined DISCRETIONARY? Werner Kuehnel IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu schrieb am 29.01.2010 14:49:44: Given the situation I would say, probably, NO. You *might* be able to move TCPIP to SYSTEM but ISTR some changes made a few releases back to force certain system critical tasks into IBM assigned SCLASSes. The problem is not the TCPIP is not high enough on the food chain, but that the food chain has been shortened when the soft cap kicks in. This is the most likely causes of CPU delay. Possible Performance improvements for TCPIP Segmentation Offload. Not sure of the current status. A long history of trys, retrys, and try agains. Check the archives. There are a couple of TCPIP performance Inoforamation APARS the also might help II11710, II11711, II11712. None of these address CPU directly, but the net effect will be to reduce the CPU overhead per byte when implemented. HTH, snip Our box is running at 90-100% under soft capping. TCPIP is defined with service class SYSSTC. When capping starts the PING response times explode from approx. 15ms to 400 - 1000ms. Looking with RMF3 delay monitor at TCPIP, it shows a delay up to 70% because of processor. SYSSTC is the highest service class I can assign, it runs with dispatching prio of FE. Nevertheless TCPIP is delayed at such a high degree. Is there anything I can do to improve the performance of TCPIP? /snip -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html ** For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered number 33014286 ** -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send
Finding HSA
I've checked the archives, manuals but just can't seem to find an answer for this. Is there a way to find the amount allocated to HSA on the older machines? TIA... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Finding HSA
Well this tells me how many of what I can add to the HSA but I need to see how much storage HSA has allocated on the machine. I would think that will come from the HMC and some panel navigation. It's a long story but I got burned recently trying to squeeze and need to update my cheat sheet matrix with more valid numbers than I currently have. and thanks Ted...and all --- On Thu, 1/21/10, Don Williams donb...@gmail.com wrote: From: Don Williams donb...@gmail.com Subject: Re: Finding HSA To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Thursday, January 21, 2010, 6:28 PM Yes, D IOS,CONFIG(HSA) -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 12:48 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: Finding HSA Is there a way to find the amount allocated to HSA on the older machines? It's an old fragment in my ancient memory, but look up the D IOS oper command. - Too busy driving to stop for gas! -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Finding HSA
You know what's entertaining searching the operating system command manual is the different names for HSA, Hardware Storage Area, Hardware Systems Area. In fact I thought it was Hardware Save Area partial to Hardware Storage Area myself... --- On Thu, 1/21/10, Ted MacNEIL eamacn...@yahoo.ca wrote: From: Ted MacNEIL eamacn...@yahoo.ca Subject: Re: Finding HSA To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Thursday, January 21, 2010, 6:37 PM Even on an older machine, that command is only valid in BASIC mode, not for an LPAR. Well, the command is valid, it just won't give you the information the OP wants. IIRC, it doesn't give memory in PR/SM mode, it just tells you how many more dynamic devices are eligible. But, I haven't used it on anything more modern than a z/900. - Too busy driving to stop for gas! -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: The Economist: The Return of the Mainframe, Back in Fashion
There was a push to get WebFear on the mainframe and when everyone wined about the issues with Java sucking the life out of and the CPU off of the traditional workloads something had to be done. --- On Fri, 1/15/10, Bob Shannon bshan...@rocketsoftware.com wrote: From: Bob Shannon bshan...@rocketsoftware.com Subject: Re: The Economist: The Return of the Mainframe, Back in Fashion To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Friday, January 15, 2010, 3:39 PM Does this imply that zAAPs will become obsolete? I think it implies that creating multiple specialty engines was a mistake, and that one program specialty engine will suffice. I don't see zAAPs becoming obsolete in the foreseeable future. Bob Shannon Rocket Software -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: WLM BATCH rules
Which Service Class takes the beating, the WLM managed one or the JES managed? Yea, I don't understand why IBM took out MTTW save Dis. --- On Fri, 1/15/10, Staller, Allan allan.stal...@kbm1.com wrote: From: Staller, Allan allan.stal...@kbm1.com Subject: Re: WLM BATCH rules To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Friday, January 15, 2010, 7:55 PM snip Assuming the system was 100% busy, those lower service classes might not get any service at all. Not just switch between one or more service classes. /snip This is true. In my case there is enough for one or the other, but seldom both (usually about 2/3 of what the batch workloads want). snip Also when you wrote A short time later, ... I assumed you were talking about something much longer than a 10 second WLM adjustment interval. Perhaps many minutes. /snip Initially yes. It *was* sometimes on the order of minutes. As I said the WLM L2 folks set me straight. Now it takes, in most cases 2 or 3 adjustment cycles for WLM to react, not dozens or hundreds as before. Still haven't been able to completely eliminate the alternating distribution entirely. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: WLM Imp1
Personally, I would say that it depends. My last gig on a small 2-way I was standing on my head with the Policy to make it work due to capacity limitations. I had all kinds of stuff in IMP 1. Now I'm currently supporting a very large plex with many disparate sizes, shapes, workloads. Some LPARs have very little IMP 1 and others have a little more. As long as the the PI's are met and the clients are happy I go with what works. --- On Tue, 11/24/09, Mark Zelden mark.zel...@zurichna.com wrote: From: Mark Zelden mark.zel...@zurichna.com Subject: Re: WLM Imp1 To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Tuesday, November 24, 2009, 1:56 PM On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 09:10:34 +, Martin Packer martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com wrote: Further, most shops I know run with a fair amount of Importance 1. There're no indications they're wrong. So I'd like to understand where the No WLM Importance 1 advice came from. A well known performance expert used to recommend that. But it wasn't NO importance=1, it was that imp=1 should only be used or emergency work and your bread and butter application(s). So I understand where the recommendation comes from. 10-15 years ago I had a lot of consulting gigs doing WLM tuning (some were conversions to WLM). I would say the majority of shops I went into way overused IMP=1 and at the same time underused IMP=5. So I happen to agree with that basic philosophy. There is very little IMP=1 work here. WebSphere enclaves and the DB2 DDF period 1 enclaves that support the same core applications. Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:mark.zel...@zurichna.com z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Secret Service plans IT reboot
Yea, it was always *storage creep* then we started running WAS 3.01 back in, oh, 2001 or so and it became *storage leak* while on calls with IBM. So what does that make it now, *storage creak*. --- On Tue, 10/27/09, Ted MacNEIL eamacn...@yahoo.ca wrote: From: Ted MacNEIL eamacn...@yahoo.ca Subject: Re: Secret Service plans IT reboot To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Tuesday, October 27, 2009, 5:35 PM It does not happen too much anymore on the mainframe, at least not too noticeable. Run JAVA on the mainframe! - Too busy driving to stop for gas! -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Sysplex Tuning
Just to add to Al's nice list also search sysplex on redbooks and check SG24-6485 on redbooks, it has some references to other manuals as well. This is timely for me also as I need to, in the near future, look at some of this as well at our site. Thanks. --- On Wed, 9/23/09, Andrew Metcalfe andrew.metca...@barclays.com wrote: From: Andrew Metcalfe andrew.metca...@barclays.com Subject: Sysplex Tuning To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Wednesday, September 23, 2009, 8:45 AM Hi folks I am reviewing our sysplex setups which haven't changed much since their creation in the 1990s. Are there any pointers to conventional wisdom on the subject of tuning? I am already looking at z/OS 1.10 Setting Up A Sysplex (SA22-7625-16) and the White Paper Parallel Sysplex Performance: XCF Performance Considerations (Version 3.1). Are there any other documents that I should consider? Thanks Andrew Andrew Metcalfe Barclays Bank Plc -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: WLM question - delayed due to CPUCAPPED
You probably have discretionary defined and the service class this job is running in is over achieving, has a velocity of less than 30 or a response time goal over 1 min. and is itself not resource capped and ends up giving resources to discretionary but keeps the PI of the giver between 0.71 and 0.81. This is in SG24-6472-03 Systems Programmers Guide to WLM. --- On Tue, 9/22/09, McKown, John john.mck...@healthmarkets.com wrote: From: McKown, John john.mck...@healthmarkets.com Subject: WLM question - delayed due to CPUCAPPED To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Tuesday, September 22, 2009, 5:00 PM There is a field in Mainview for z/OS which shows me that a slow running job was delayed to CPUCAP. Does anybody really know exactly what that means? We are using Group Capacity to control our software costs. Is this PRSM and WLM working together to cap the LPAR? Or is this just some WLM delay due to another job in the same service class getting all the allowed CPU? This service class in NOT in a Resource Group. John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * (817)-961-6183 cell john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: WLM question - delayed due to CPUCAPPED
Hmmm, you're probably right. John, go to the field descriptor and hit PF1 and you should get the description for the field. --- On Tue, 9/22/09, Kelman, Tom thomas.kel...@commercebank.com wrote: From: Kelman, Tom thomas.kel...@commercebank.com Subject: Re: WLM question - delayed due to CPUCAPPED To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Tuesday, September 22, 2009, 5:56 PM John, From what you're saying you have Group Capacity set up with a softcap. Is that correct? We don't have Mainview here, but I would surmise that the four hour rolling average has reached the level of the softcap. At that point WLM will not allow the system to use any CPU over the limit set by the softcap. What you're seeing is that the job is slow running because of that. Once the 4HRA goes below the softcap again that problem will go away. Tom Kelman Enterprise Capacity Planner Commerce Bank of Kansas City (816) 760-7632 -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of McKown, John Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 12:01 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: WLM question - delayed due to CPUCAPPED There is a field in Mainview for z/OS which shows me that a slow running job was delayed to CPUCAP. Does anybody really know exactly what that means? We are using Group Capacity to control our software costs. Is this PRSM and WLM working together to cap the LPAR? Or is this just some WLM delay due to another job in the same service class getting all the allowed CPU? This service class in NOT in a Resource Group. John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * (817)-961-6183 cell john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html * If you wish to communicate securely with Commerce Bank and its affiliates, you must log into your account under Online Services at http://www.commercebank.com or use the Commerce Bank Secure Email Message Center at https://securemail.commercebank.com NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any attached files are confidential. The information is exclusively for the use of the individual or entity intended as the recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, copying, printing, reviewing, retention, disclosure, distribution or forwarding of the message or any attached file is not authorized and is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic mail message in error, please advise the sender by reply electronic mail immediately and permanently delete the original transmission, any attachments and any copies of this message from your computer system. * -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: WLM question - delayed due to CPUCAPPED
Yes, some of the descriptions leave a little bit to be desired. I like to try to stay away from capping unless absolutely necessary but do have some. Maybe there was an entry in the notes file in WLM stating why that Service Class was resource capped? I try to keep up with documentation, even for myself, as I find going back I'm asking myself sometimes why I did what I did. I have Mainview, what was the screen name that you saw this in? --- On Tue, 9/22/09, McKown, John john.mck...@healthmarkets.com wrote: From: McKown, John john.mck...@healthmarkets.com Subject: Re: WLM question - delayed due to CPUCAPPED To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Tuesday, September 22, 2009, 7:09 PM -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Patrick Falcone Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 1:20 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: WLM question - delayed due to CPUCAPPED Hmmm, you're probably right. John, go to the field descriptor and hit PF1 and you should get the description for the field. Unfortunately, I didn't understand the description. However I did find out that the storage class does indeed have an associated resource group. So that is likely what the capping is referring to. I have no idea why we did this. And we just removed it. -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets® 9151 Boulevard 26 . N. Richland Hills . TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone . (817)-961-6183 cell john.mck...@healthmarkets.com . www.HealthMarkets.com -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z/OS SCRT NO89 Product Information
Bob, I understood what you meant. I was basically trying to get a feel for what the different options implied, *none, *all, qualifying LPARs. My intention all along has been to get this right. There's potentially too much at stake here to get it wrong given the number of machines and LPARs. I've got to the point where I now know what machines and now what LPARs have the NO89 software and am preparing to turn this loose on our environment. And I've taken Mark's suggestion to ensure I'm using the Hardware LPAR name with regards to the qualifying products and their relative LPARs. As it turned out I did not take as many hits on the NO89's as I thought I might to a point that it is somewhat manageable but that's kind of a relative term. I'll give you a call. --- On Thu, 7/30/09, Richards, Robert B. robert.richa...@opm.gov wrote: From: Richards, Robert B. robert.richa...@opm.gov Subject: Re: z/OS SCRT NO89 Product Information To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Thursday, July 30, 2009, 10:43 AM Let me clarify one thing about the ugly suggestion that I made to Patrick. There is a big difference between running the SCRT JCL to get a report and then ACTUALLY SUBMITTING IT. Having never tried it as I said, I did not know what would be produced. I never intended that Patrick actually *submit* a SCRT report that was run using *ALL for all his products. As for Al's comments below about the TsCs, I can assure you that IBM does indeed treat detected, but unlicensed, products as an order. Bob - Robert B. Richards (Bob) US Office of Personnel Management 1900 E Street NW Room: BH04L Washington, D.C. 20415 Phone: (202) 606-1195 Email: robert.richa...@opm.gov - -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Al Sherkow Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 12:14 AM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: z/OS SCRT NO89 Product Information I believe the fine print TsCs indicate that if you specify that a product runs on one LPAR or any LPARs of a machine for which it is not licensed that IBM may view that as an order for the products. Similarly, for products that do generate SMF89 data, if SCRT detects a product on a machine where it is not licensed, that is an order for the product. You can correct this after the fact, but it's better to read the reports and be sure they are what you expect. (LCS highlights the discovery of products running where they are not expected to be running based on your licenses and/or history of product usage). This is the basis of Pat's original question. You are supposed to setup the NO89 parameters to reflect in which LPARs you actually use the NO89 products. This is why LCS detects this, to help sites properly report their usage to IBM. Al Sherkow, I/S Management Strategies, Ltd. Consulting Expertise on Capacity Planning, Performance Tuning, WLC, LPARs, IRD and LCS Software Seminars on IBM SW Pricing, LPARs, and IRD Voice: +1 414 332-3062 Web: www.sherkow.com -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z/OS SCRT NO89 Product Information
Hey Bob, Hope all's well. Well, I actually thought about that, just coding *all, and will probably try it to see what happens. I'm currently running with *none for everything while I shake it out for all the machines and LPAR's. I gotta get with the billing guy and my boss to see how they want to handle this part. Nothings easy, especially when you have a large number of LPAR's to deal with. Al's great and has helped in the past but I doubt that we'll buy more software. I already checked and we don't have SoftAudit or whatever Mark suggested, IBM's re-branded name. So I'll probably be flying by the seat of my pants. Hope the landing isn't too bad. Thanks for your input. --- On Wed, 7/29/09, Richards, Robert B. robert.richa...@opm.gov wrote: From: Richards, Robert B. robert.richa...@opm.gov Subject: Re: z/OS SCRT NO89 Product Information To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Wednesday, July 29, 2009, 12:51 PM Pat, A VERY ugly suggestion. Turn them all on with *ALL* and see what does not report anything. By the way, I have never tried this suggestion so I am not sure it is of any value except what you are paying me for it. Or, get Al's software. :-) Bob - -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Patrick Falcone Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 3:38 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: z/OS SCRT NO89 Product Information I'm currently working with/on SCRT for quite a few physical machines and about triple the amount of LPARs. Is there any easy way for me to find out what products might be on what LPARs for inclusion in the NO89 section? I've got the process working fine but now need to tailor the NO89 section for validity. Or do I just need to read the fine book some more. Al, help!? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z/OS SCRT NO89 Product Information
Thanks for all your input. You'll have to excuse my ignorance with this stuff since my main charge is tuning and I just started to read the manual, like yesterday. OK, if I have this right and I code *all for the NO89 products it may be possible to be billed additionally if that's possible. If I code *none for NO89 products we may not be able to take advantage of where the software is running to get additional SubCapacity savings. And if I code the LPARs where the NO89 products run this might/would be factored into potential SubCapacity savings. My plan is to get this right and so I will be including LPAR's that are part of the NO89 hit list but wanted to understand what the options actually mean from a savings viewpoint. Again, appreciate all your input (and you to Al - thanks) --- On Wed, 7/29/09, Hal Merritt hmerr...@jackhenry.com wrote: From: Hal Merritt hmerr...@jackhenry.com Subject: Re: z/OS SCRT NO89 Product Information To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Wednesday, July 29, 2009, 3:11 PM That's not how it works. The NO89 covers products that do not cut SMF type 89 usage records. You are already paying for licensed products at full capacity. If you know you are not running a given product on LPARX, then include all of the others. Even if you are running it everywhere, you can still achieve sizable savings or, perhaps more importantly, make a good business case for a much bigger box you can grow into instead of a too small box you grow out of. You may not see any savings if your box is too small. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Richards, Robert B. Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 7:51 AM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: z/OS SCRT NO89 Product Information Pat, A VERY ugly suggestion. Turn them all on with *ALL* and see what does not report anything. By the way, I have never tried this suggestion so I am not sure it is of any value except what you are paying me for it. Or, get Al's software. :-) Bob - -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Patrick Falcone Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 3:38 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: z/OS SCRT NO89 Product Information I'm currently working with/on SCRT for quite a few physical machines and about triple the amount of LPARs. Is there any easy way for me to find out what products might be on what LPARs for inclusion in the NO89 section? I've got the process working fine but now need to tailor the NO89 section for validity. Or do I just need to read the fine book some more. Al, help!? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z/OS SCRT NO89 Product Information
Rex, Thanks for the information, it's becoming clearer. I was basically trying to understand the options and implications. And I surely don't want to mislead IBM with this information. At this point I know what software runs on what machines but I'll need to figure out by machine what LPAR's are running the NO89 software that I get hits on. I certainly have a firmer handle on this than I did at this time yesterday. Thanks again for all your input. --- On Wed, 7/29/09, Pommier, Rex R. rex.pomm...@cnasurety.com wrote: From: Pommier, Rex R. rex.pomm...@cnasurety.com Subject: Re: z/OS SCRT NO89 Product Information To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Wednesday, July 29, 2009, 6:38 PM Pat, As far as coding *ALL for NO89 products that you do NOT have licenses to, I can't tell for certain, but I wouldn't do that. You might or might not get billed for these products, or you might get a call from your friendly IBM sales rep thanking you for licensing it all! :-) As far as coding *ALL for NO89 products that you DO have licenses for, you will be billed for the total SCRT usage on the boxes, regardless of how much you actually use the products. As others have stated, NO89 means that IBM doesn't cut SMF records to tell them how much is actually being used, so they bill for the products based on the system utilization. As far as coding *NONE for products you are using, IBM frowns on that, because you're telling them that you aren't using the software. If you're not actually using it, drop the licenses to the product(s) and save the money. If you are using the products but telling IBM you aren't, that's being dishonest. As far as giving IBM a list of LPARs you actually are running software on instead of *ALL, you can save money by not being billed for the software on LPARs you aren't running the software on. In my case, I have 3 LPARs, 1 production a test, and a sandbox. I only have 1 product that is in the NO89 list, COBOL. I don't use this on my sandbox (named MVSTECH), so my entry for this is: 5655-G53=MVSPROD,MVSTEST When I get my SCRT report and subsequent bill, I don't get invoiced for the 1 MSU that typically shows up on the sandbox. On the other LPARs, even though COBOL is used very little, I get billed for the MSUs that the LPARs consume, not that COBOL consumes. HTH Rex -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Patrick Falcone Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 1:02 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: z/OS SCRT NO89 Product Information Thanks for all your input. You'll have to excuse my ignorance with this stuff since my main charge is tuning and I just started to read the manual, like yesterday. OK, if I have this right and I code *all for the NO89 products it may be possible to be billed additionally if that's possible. If I code *none for NO89 products we may not be able to take advantage of where the software is running to get additional SubCapacity savings. And if I code the LPARs where the NO89 products run this might/would be factored into potential SubCapacity savings. My plan is to get this right and so I will be including LPAR's that are part of the NO89 hit list but wanted to understand what the options actually mean from a savings viewpoint. Again, appreciate all your input (and you to Al - thanks) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
z/OS SCRT NO89 Product Information
I'm currently working with/on SCRT for quite a few physical machines and about triple the amount of LPARs. Is there any easy way for me to find out what products might be on what LPARs for inclusion in the NO89 section? I've got the process working fine but now need to tailor the NO89 section for validity. Or do I just need to read the fine book some more. Al, help!? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: 308x Processors - was Mainframe articles
We had 3081's at a time share back in the mid 80's. At one point we took 2 3081G's and had IBM put them together to form a 3084 Q64 w/PIF. --- On Tue, 5/12/09, Martin Packer martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com wrote: From: Martin Packer martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Subject: 308x Processors - was Mainframe articles To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Tuesday, May 12, 2009, 9:39 AM 3083 was Uni, 3081 was Dyadic (2 -way Non-Partitionable), 3084 was Partitionable 4-way. Base and X models with almost unrememberable model letters. Interestingly, later on you could get a 1+1 2-way and a 2+1 3-way. The benefits of these were larger caches (as you got 2 of them). I'm not sure who bought these, though. Martin Martin Packer Performance Consultant IBM United Kingdom Ltd +44-20-8832-5167 +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter ID: MartinPacker They're figuring out that collaboration isn't a productivity hit, it makes them smarter. Sam Palmisano on BlogCentral, 26 November 2008 Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Fw: Re: 308x Processors - was Mainframe articles
Correction they were 3081K 32's, one of the other posts jolted my memory back into focus. Sorry for the drift. --- On Tue, 5/12/09, Patrick Falcone patrick.falco...@verizon.net wrote: From: Patrick Falcone patrick.falco...@verizon.net Subject: Re: 308x Processors - was Mainframe articles To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Tuesday, May 12, 2009, 1:59 PM We had 3081's at a time share back in the mid 80's. At one point we took 2 3081G's and had IBM put them together to form a 3084 Q64 w/PIF. --- On Tue, 5/12/09, Martin Packer martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com wrote: From: Martin Packer martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Subject: 308x Processors - was Mainframe articles To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Tuesday, May 12, 2009, 9:39 AM 3083 was Uni, 3081 was Dyadic (2 -way Non-Partitionable), 3084 was Partitionable 4-way. Base and X models with almost unrememberable model letters. Interestingly, later on you could get a 1+1 2-way and a 2+1 3-way. The benefits of these were larger caches (as you got 2 of them). I'm not sure who bought these, though. Martin Martin Packer Performance Consultant IBM United Kingdom Ltd +44-20-8832-5167 +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter ID: MartinPacker They're figuring out that collaboration isn't a productivity hit, it makes them smarter. Sam Palmisano on BlogCentral, 26 November 2008 Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: DFHSM and WLM Settings
Hi Lizette, We run HSM in STCMED with no issues in a large plex, a small plex and single systems environment. HSM can consume a lot of resources but if your WLM policy is sound and your workloads are happy then STCMED should suffice. The system related companion tasks in SYSSTC are usually there for a reason; monitors, JES, VTAM, TCP/IP etcHaving them in other places in WLM, of lower importance, can be painful. But I'm probably preaching at this point. --- On Mon, 5/11/09, Lizette Koehler stars...@mindspring.com wrote: From: Lizette Koehler stars...@mindspring.com Subject: DFHSM and WLM Settings To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Monday, May 11, 2009, 5:00 PM I ran into a small issue where when using Interval Migration DFHSM took all the resources on my small LPAR. Even on my largest LPAR it still consumes a lot of resources. IBM Suggested I set DFHSM to STCMED. My concern is that since we have a lot of tasks in WLM at SYSSTC (not my choice) that if a recall or migrate was requested, that DFHSM might be impacted by the other high runnings tasks. Has anyone delt with Interval Migration and controlling it via WLM? Does anyone else have DFHSM in STCMED and if so, how is that working for DFHSM. Lizette -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
CA7 Batch Runs but not Marked Complete
I'm looking at an issue where a couple of quick running batch jobs, 1minute or less, started and finished but CA7 does not have any indication that they completed successfully. I'm still looking at this problem but don't have any leads at this point. Anyone familiar with type anomalous event? Operating System is z/OS 1.7 and CA-7 is Version -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
CA7 Batch Runs but not Marked Complete
I'm looking at an issue where a couple of quick running batch jobs, 1minute or less, started and finished but CA7 does not have any indication that they completed successfully. I'm still looking at this problem but don't have any leads at this point. Anyone familiar with type anomalous event? Operating System is z/OS 1.7 and CA-7 is Version 11 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: CA7 Batch Runs but not Marked Complete
What plex member did they convert on? Look at the plex member that was shutdown and then brought back up temporarily without cairim you dummy. Never mind... --- On Wed, 4/15/09, Patrick Falcone patrick.falco...@verizon.net wrote: From: Patrick Falcone patrick.falco...@verizon.net Subject: CA7 Batch Runs but not Marked Complete To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Wednesday, April 15, 2009, 7:15 PM I'm looking at an issue where a couple of quick running batch jobs, 1minute or less, started and finished but CA7 does not have any indication that they completed successfully. I'm still looking at this problem but don't have any leads at this point. Anyone familiar with type anomalous event? Operating System is z/OS 1.7 and CA-7 is Version 11 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: SMF70PMU question
Jeez Jim, sorry about that. Haste makes waste and in this case I hurriedly replied without confirming, hate when I do that... --- On Tue, 3/31/09, Horne, Jim - James S jim.s.ho...@lowes.com wrote: From: Horne, Jim - James S jim.s.ho...@lowes.com Subject: Re: SMF70PMU question To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Tuesday, March 31, 2009, 6:51 PM Patrick, I appreciate the reply but I believe you have confused SMF70PMU with SMF70PMT. Thanks, Jim -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Patrick Falcone Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 2:39 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: SMF70PMU question No, its an arbitrary number that has a maximum of 200 units which would be 20% of a general purpose CP. This would be in relation to blocked workloads and how much CP to give them to get them dispatched and serviced to possibly release resources being held by the blocker. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: SMF70PMU question
No, its an arbitrary number that has a maximum of 200 units which would be 20% of a general purpose CP. This would be in relation to blocked workloads and how much CP to give them to get them dispatched and serviced to possibly release resources being held by the blocker. --- On Tue, 3/31/09, Horne, Jim - James S jim.s.ho...@lowes.com wrote: From: Horne, Jim - James S jim.s.ho...@lowes.com Subject: SMF70PMU question To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Tuesday, March 31, 2009, 5:57 PM Can anyone confirm if the SMF70PMU parameter in the RMF TYPE70 records is in service units? If not, what are the units? Seconds, milliseconds, widgets or what? Thanks, Jim Horne Systems Programmer Large Systems Engineering Messaging IS7-5 Lowe's Companies, Inc. 401 Elkin Highway North Wilkesboro, NC 28659 336-658-4959 jim.ho...@lowes.com NOTICE: All information in and attached to the e-mail(s) below may be proprietary, confidential, privileged and otherwise protected from improper or erroneous disclosure. If you are not the sender's intended recipient, you are not authorized to intercept, read, print, retain, copy, forward, or disseminate this message. If you have erroneously received this communication, please notify the sender immediately by phone (704-758-1000) or by e-mail and destroy all copies of this message (electronic, paper, or otherwise). Thank you. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Changing LPAR Weights
Just checking, is there any other way to change the LPAR weights other than HMC or the Service Element? No system commands that I'm aware of that allow this, correct? TIA... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: No SMF 74(4)
I was unaware that RMF III was required to get the 74(4)'s. I have recently assumed this duty and will probably just go after the LPAR's that are part of the plex and that alone will be enough to keep me busy for quite a while. --- On Wed, 1/21/09, Skip Robinson jo.skip.robin...@sce.com wrote: From: Skip Robinson jo.skip.robin...@sce.com Subject: Re: No SMF 74(4) To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Wednesday, January 21, 2009, 6:04 PM Having stated that 74(4) is required for *all* LPARs, I need to back peddle a bit. As I understand the process, 74(4) is needed to establish the 'qualifying sysplex function' in terms of usage of the relevant structure. For example, if you claim GRS star as the qualifying function, then you need 74(4) to show that all purported sysplex members do indeed use ISGLOCK. If you have other nonmember LPARs running on any of the CECs in the mix--either monoplex members or members of a different sysplex--then it's not clear to me why you would need 74(4) records from the noncandidate LPARs. If an LPAR is not offered up for verification, then who cares what structures if any it uses? On the other hand, gathering 74(4) from *all* LPARs may in the end be easier than getting someone to sign off with data gathered selectively. I took the easy way out and submitted data from all LPARs. Such a wuss. . . JO.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 626-302-7535 Office 323-715-0595 Mobile jo.skip.robin...@sce.com Patrick Falcone patrick.falcone7 @VERIZON.NET To Sent by: IBM IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Mainframe cc Discussion List ibm-m...@bama.ua Subject .edu Re: No SMF 74(4) 01/21/2009 09:44 AM Please respond to IBM Mainframe Discussion List ibm-m...@bama.ua .edu (@#*(*#E)! Thanks Mark and yes, right on Skip. From: Mark Zelden mark.zel...@zurichna.com Subject: Re: No SMF 74(4) To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Wednesday, January 21, 2009, 4:39 PM On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 07:32:26 -0800, Patrick Falcone patrick.falco...@verizon.net wrote: Can't seem to find type 74(4) after adding a new member to the plex. Any not obvious, or obvious, reasons? Seems to be in SMF/RMF. Doesn't that come from RMF III? Is RMFGAT running? Mark -- Mark Zelden -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
No SMF 74(4)
Can't seem to find type 74(4) after adding a new member to the plex. Any not obvious, or obvious, reasons? Seems to be in SMF/RMF. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: No SMF 74(4)
(@#*(*#E)! Thanks Mark and yes, right on Skip. From: Mark Zelden mark.zel...@zurichna.com Subject: Re: No SMF 74(4) To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Wednesday, January 21, 2009, 4:39 PM On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 07:32:26 -0800, Patrick Falcone patrick.falco...@verizon.net wrote: Can't seem to find type 74(4) after adding a new member to the plex. Any not obvious, or obvious, reasons? Seems to be in SMF/RMF. Doesn't that come from RMF III? Is RMFGAT running? Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:mark.zel...@zurichna.com z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: 3270 session disconnects
Wouldn't hurt to check where OMPROUTE is in WLM. If it's set too low and the LPAR gets busy it's possible you'll see 622 disconnects. --- On Tue, 1/6/09, Scott Rowe scott.r...@joann.com wrote: From: Scott Rowe scott.r...@joann.com Subject: Re: 3270 session disconnects To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Tuesday, January 6, 2009, 9:03 PM The first thing I would check are the TimeMark ScanInterval TN3270 parms vs any timeout limits in any firewalls the traffic must traverse. David Logan loga3...@comcast.net 1/6/2009 3:38 PM We have been experiencing this at our shop for months. Local connections are fine. When we logon to a mainframe on the same local network, we can stay logged on all day. But when we logon to a mainframe across the WAN, after a few minutes of inactivity, something times out, and it's not TSO, because the userid stays logged on and we don't get the VTAM screen. It's really bizarre. It doesn't happen on the AS/400 partitions or on VSE or on VM near as I can tell. It only happens on sessions controlled by MVS TCP/IP (with VTAM.) David Logan Manager of Product Development, Pitney Bowes Business Insight http://centrus.com W: (720) 564-3056 C: (303) 818-8222 CONFIDENTIALITY/EMAIL NOTICE: The material in this transmission contains confidential and privileged information intended only for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, please be advised that you have received this material in error and that any forwarding, copying, printing, distribution, use or disclosure of the material is strictly prohibited. If you have received this material in error, please (i) do not read it, (ii) reply to the sender that you received the message in error, and (iii) erase or destroy the material. Emails are not secure and can be intercepted, amended, lost or destroyed, or contain viruses. You are deemed to have accepted these risks if you communicate with us by email. Thank you. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM 2066-002 Adding Spare CP as IFL
I understood the performance implications, this was basically a functional POC and at this point I don't see us moving ahead on this type processor. The 2066-002, on the floor, was picked as a starting point. I'm not involved in the haggling part of the process but I'm sure the necessary individuals are already working on other potential opportunities. Thanks for your replies. --- On Thu, 12/4/08, Timothy Sipples [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Timothy Sipples [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: IBM 2066-002 Adding Spare CP as IFL To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Thursday, December 4, 2008, 9:07 AM Rich Smrcina writes: If you get your POC started on the z800 make sure that everyone has the right expectations. The z800 is no speed demon. At ~192MIPS each, these IFLs are going to be downright slow. The expectation should be function, not performance. Sage advice -- I totally agree. But it's not just the MIPS rating. There has been even more performance progress from z800 to z10 BC for many Linux workloads than the top line numbers suggest. And keep in mind that expanding a 2066-002 to a 2066-003 for z/OS is adding something closer to 149 MIPS, not 192. Which isn't an entirely fair assessment either, but you get the point. All of which is why those MIPS numbers are so perilous, but we all know that by now, right? :-) Note that for functional tests there's no technical impediment to using any desired fraction of CPs at any moment in time. CPs are general purpose processors. They run anything that can run on a mainframe, including Linux. You don't have to ring IBM for that, but Patrick, please talk with your IBM rep. He or she will probably want the opportunity to point out that it's not generally a good economic idea to plunk down new IFL money on an N-3 generation machine with 60 MSUs, even if IBM is willing to take your money. However, he or she will undoubtedly be highly motivated to reach a mutually agreeable solution if at all possible. And then, if reason and logic prevail among all parties, you can ship me your z800. Just let me know when you're ready, and I'll send you my shipping address. Many thanks in advance. :-) - - - - - Timothy Sipples IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan / Asia-Pacific E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
IBM 2066-002 Adding Spare CP as IFL
Can someone, I the know, save me some look-up time and tell me if I can add an IFL to a IBM 2066-002. My understanding is that this processor type comes with 2 spare CP's. The question now becomes, is the 2066 still supported with regards to turning on one of the spares as an IFL? TIA... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM 2066-002 Adding Spare CP as IFL
Thanks Radoslaw. I believe that the 002 comes with 2 GP CP's and 1 SAP configured and 2 spares but I cannot find any document stating that IBM does not support adding the IFL at this late date for this series of processors. --- On Wed, 12/3/08, R.S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: R.S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: IBM 2066-002 Adding Spare CP as IFL To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Wednesday, December 3, 2008, 2:51 PM Patrick Falcone wrote: Can someone, I the know, save me some look-up time and tell me if I can add an IFL to a IBM 2066-002. My understanding is that this processor type comes with 2 spare CP's. The question now becomes, is the 2066 still supported with regards to turning on one of the spares as an IFL? Technically yes, but it would be hard to buy it from IBM. z/800 can have up to 4 processors for user, that means CP's or other. Of course it contains SAP and (afaik) spare as well. -- Radoslaw Skorupka Lodz, Poland -- BRE Bank SA ul. Senatorska 18 00-950 Warszawa www.brebank.pl Sd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy XII Wydzia Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sdowego, nr rejestru przedsibiorców KRS 025237 NIP: 526-021-50-88 Wedug stanu na dzie 01.01.2008 r. kapita zakadowy BRE Banku SA wynosi 118.642.672 zote i zosta w caoci wpacony. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM 2066-002 Adding Spare CP as IFL
Thanks Brian and Al. We were considering *playing* with a POC on this machine but will have to look to a newer one I guess. --- On Wed, 12/3/08, Brian Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Brian Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: IBM 2066-002 Adding Spare CP as IFL To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Wednesday, December 3, 2008, 4:54 PM I believe the document you are looking for is Announcement 905-220 from October 2005: http://www-01.ibm.com/common/ssi/rep_ca/0/897/ENUS905-220/ENUS905-220.PDF Brian On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 07:01:24 -0800, Patrick Falcone wrote: Thanks Radoslaw. I believe that the 002 comes with 2 GP CP's and 1 SAP configured and 2 spares but I cannot find any document stating that IBM does not support adding the IFL at this late date for this series of processors. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Add Storage To Lpar - z/800
Hopefully you get what storage you need contiguous or it's not just an IPL anymore..I got bit by this just last week. --- On Tue, 11/25/08, Eric Bielefeld [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Eric Bielefeld [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Add Storage To Lpar - z/800 To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Tuesday, November 25, 2008, 6:58 PM Thanks to all that replied. I'll only reply to this answer to avoid cluttering up the list. I suspected that I probably couldn't add any storage to this Lpar without at least an IPL. Both of LP01 and LP02 have 2 GB defined for real storage, and 1GB in reserve. I believe the 1GB in reserve gets varied online just after the IPL, as both systems show 3072 MB in storage after a D M=STOR command. I did find out that HSA is 128M, and with LP03 LP04 being at 512M, I should have 896M available to add to LP02, which is our DB2 Lpar. I'm not sure if I can add that amount or not - I'll have to figure out what the increment size is. I'm sure we could easily remove 1 GB from LP01. It runs normally around 5-10% busy, unless I'm running SMP stuff or someone else is running batch. It also has zero paging, and no DB2. The transaction volumes are falling on that Lpar, and it will be phased out in the near future. Thanks for the quick replies. Eric Jim Mulder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu wrote on 11/25/2008 12:11:58 PM: Can real storage be added to an Lpar on a z/800 without shutting down the Lpar and re-IPLing? We have 4 Lpars defined, only two of them running now. Both Lpars have 3G of memory. I think the 2 Lpars that aren't running have .5G each. I know we have a little less than 1G that is free and unassigned, so I'm wondering if I can add that to our production DB2 lpar without having to IPL? You can add storage to a running MVS system, but only if the storage was defined to the LPAR zone as Reserved when MVS was IPLed. MVS needs to know at IPL time the total amount of storage that might ever be online, so that it can build an appropriately sized Page Frame Table. If D M=STOR does not show you any offline storage amounts, then you cannot bring more storage online without IPLing. Jim Mulder z/OS System Test IBM Corp. Poughkeepsie, NY -- Eric Bielefeld Systems Programmer Washington University St Louis, Missouri 314-935-3418 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: SRB Wait JWT
Hi Tom, I'm sorry, yes my below is poorly worded. You answered my question in that an SRB does not wait. I guess I should have just looked at the SMF manual , as I'm doing now, to better understand the scope of what waits fall under JWT. Thanks. --- On Thu, 9/25/08, Tom Harper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Tom Harper [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: SRB Wait JWT To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Date: Thursday, September 25, 2008, 2:57 PM Patrick, I'm having a hard time making any sense out of your question. Tasks can certainly WAIT, but I've never heard of an SRB WAIT. What do you mean by that? Do you mean when a task has scheduled an SRB and is WAITing for an SRB to POST it? Perhaps you can elaborate. Tom Harper IMS Utilities Development Team Neon Enterprise Software, Inc. Sugar Land, TX -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Falcone Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2008 7:15 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: SRB Wait JWT While I don't believe that this is true can someone confirm. If a task goes into some sort of SRB wait, no time is also accrued to the JWT timer making these wait types mutually exclusive. Do I have this right or am I all wet? I would think that if you did hit the JWT limit, set at several minutes, that you have other more serious problems at hand. If this is true does anyone have a good example of an SRB wait that could exceed 15 minutes also tripping the JWT limit? TIA... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
SRB Wait JWT
While I don't believe that this is true can someone confirm. If a task goes into some sort of SRB wait, no time is also accrued to the JWT timer making these wait types mutually exclusive. Do I have this right or am I all wet? I would think that if you did hit the JWT limit, set at several minutes, that you have other more serious problems at hand. If this is true does anyone have a good example of an SRB wait that could exceed 15 minutes also tripping the JWT limit? TIA... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z890 model upgrade
Have a look at the below link. http://www-03.ibm.com/support/techdocs/atsmastr.nsf/WebIndex/WP100258 --- On Mon, 9/22/08, Walter Marguccio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Walter Marguccio [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: z890 model upgrade To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Date: Monday, September 22, 2008, 9:48 AM Hello list, as we heard that upgrading from a 2086-230 to a 2086-270 would cost us 350.000 Euro, we abandoned our consolidating project on the mainframe. The price is, at least for a small company like us, too high, and doesn't take into account the higher sw licence costs which would come along due to more MSUs. Are there guidelines, tools, books, etc. which would help us to estimate whether 3 or 4 CPs (i.e. 2086-350 or 2086-440) less fast would still improve our performance compared with 2 fast CPs like in the 2086-270 ? In other words: better more (slower) CPs of fewer (faster) ones ? What does it depend on ? We are still at z/OS 1.7, Com-plete and ADABAS 7.4.4., online and batch being our main workloads. Walter Marguccio z/OS Systems Programmer BELENUS LOB Informatic GmbH Munich - Germany -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: question for C experts - strcpy vs memcpy (fwd)
I'll keep at it, CPU optimization, depending on size environment and where I draw the line with regards to payback. There are almost always tuning opportunities with regards to CPU. At my last client I would have been happy to get a few percent back since I knew we were not getting an upgrade and I was running flat out with a relatively high in ready. --- On Tue, 9/9/08, Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: question for C experts - strcpy vs memcpy (fwd) To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Date: Tuesday, September 9, 2008, 12:57 AM Thanks to all for your thoughts. And especially to David for doing a quick test for me. I honestly cannot believe that people are still 'optimising' CPU. Unless you call major chunks of CPU-intensive code, you are not going to find enough savings to buy a beer. I/O, even with today's faster hardware, is where you should be concentrating. Especially, on non-Mainframes. - Too busy driving to stop for gas! -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Do you protect your power switch with a lock?
Not sure you want to lock them. There are a variety of switch covers available. We had some of them at my last site. Google IBM power switch covers. Datacover might have what you are looking for. These usually prevent your oops! scenario. Itschak Mugzach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was asked by a customer if there is a standard IBM mainframe power switch lock. I checked and there is no such lock. I wonder how do you protect your mainframe power switches other then access control to the computer room. | Itschak Mugzach | Director | SecuriTeam Software | | Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Mob: +972 522 986404 | Skype: Itschak Mugzach | Web: www.Securiteam.co.il | -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: European BCP Regulations?
A recent interview I had with a large financial institution, east coast, came from the fact that they were going to a GDPS, *geographically dispersed personnel support* structure. The support team was somewhat duplicated at a different site located about 300 hundred miles away. What I didn't get to fully understand was what regulations were fed related versus what reg's were management related. some snipped below Timothy Sipples [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't know about Europe specifically, but I am getting increasing questions about that sort of thing, and I think some of it may be coming from government. - - - - - Timothy Sipples IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect Specializing in Software Architectures Related to System z Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan and IBM Asia-Pacific E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Going unsupported - time to fold?
A bit late on this, was sunning and funning, am I allowed to do this unemployed? But really, I totally agree with these sentiments. While I didn't like working myself out of a job just before the outsourcing I figured I might as well make it work, it kept me busy, and in the end I felt true to myself for not thumbing my nose at the process. Besides, it's a very small world out there and you just never know... And yea, I did hear that we would be off the mainframe at some point but that was back in 02 and of course in 07 they just outsourced it, then sold the company. I believe that they will eventually end up with IGS from the current out sourcer. Hal Merritt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would argue that the better attitude is make it work. You are going to be under the gun no matter which way you choose. If you are making an honest effort to 'make it so', then it is far more difficult to be a target if/when the blood starts flowing. My $0.02 (before taxes) -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gerhard Adam Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 8:28 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Going unsupported - time to fold? FWIW, I pretty much agree with you. I'm not terribly comfortable with the Let it fail philosophy, though; I would feel obligated to try to save the company/agency some pain if I could do it simply by pointing out some potential red flags. Let it fail is not a philosphy, but rather it is an attempt to let decision-makers be responsible for the decisions they make. In the scenario described there is apparently a management decision and a project manager that believe that the z/series processor can be migrated in the next 6 months. It would appear that the onus is on them to deliver. From their perspective, there is no pain from which to save them. Any attempt to convince them otherwise will only reflect negatively on the advice-giver. Besides ... what makes everyone so sure that they're wrong? Adam. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: VTS Tapes and S413 Abends
Have you had any microcode put on the VTS lately? Lizette Koehler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I worked with my CE on this. IBM Tucson dialed into the VTS and was able to reset the error flags and put the tape in READ status. I can now access the files on the back end (physical) tape. The CE physically inspected the tape and it was okay. So we figure it must be some sort of other error. The error apparently occurred last week so the logs in the Specialist have wrappted, IBM does not know why the tape was in error. I will see if there is some way to identify these errors sooner and get IBM working on them so it will not be one of those 5pm issues. Thanks for all the input Lizette Lizette Koehler wrote: So does that mean I need to be my CE out here? Lizette I think the last time we had an EQC on a virtual tape, the gripper on one hand had broken. If there has been some kind of back-end hardware problem, I think it should have called home. If you look on the display panel for the robot it may show the error. If you can't determine anything else, I think you might want your CE to check it out. Note we have an IBM VTS, I don't know much about the SUN/STK one. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: WebSphere Question
Hi Gary, We had a similar problem back at my last place and *sucks the life out of the machine* is about right. Sounds like it could be a storage leak/creep within the heap that is causing the Java heap to go into more frequent garbage collections, especially if the heap is lightly allocated - hopefully it's at least 512 MB or above, as free space diminishes over time to the point where a compaction of the Java heap may be occurring. The compaction process takes considerable CPU to complete. I'm not sure of the reporting at this point with version 6 of WAS but turning on verbose GC, garbage collection, may shed some light on this anomaly and if it is indeed heap space related. BTDTGTS. Of course this could also be a runaway thread, bad logic, in which case you'll need some tracing to find the culprit but would lean on the above if it is happening, like, late afternoons around the same time. I also wonder if log offloads might be causing this but I can't seem to remember if this was a cause of significant CPU within WAS. I'm sure we'll get more elegant responses in the morning. A bit off topic, sorry, I just got done watching the Forbin Project with my son, great movie, I forget who recommended it but thanks Gary Green [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If someone knows where I should ask this question, please tell me where to go. ;) Otherwise... I was chatting with the manager of the tech support group at another company and he was telling me that in his shop they experience a terrible slowdown in WebSphere most afternoons; sucks the life out of the machine comes to mind. They do not have anyone that does performance or capacity work to run the numbers; and they collect very little SMF data even if they did or knew how to run the numbers. He thinks it's the application programmers poorly written code, probably Java doing some daily end of day stuff. To make matters worse, they are still on 1.4, with plans to make a brief stopover on 1.7 before heading off to 1.9. They are pretty much a vanilla IBM shop with a couple of DB2 V7 production regions a couple of production CICS regions and some/few regions each for QA, Dev and testing. I think he said WebSphere was... version 6 if that makes sense... (I am not conversant in WebSphere). They are on a ~480 mip Z9. I know this is not really much to go on but does anyone have any suggestions I could pass along? Perhaps some insight or suggested diagnostic processes? Gary Green While the big event is over, there is still time for you to help me with my efforts to assist those stricken with cancer! Please support my efforts by visiting: http://www.active.com/donate/tntsonj/tntsonjGGreen Thank you. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Displaying Quiesced zFS files
I agree and out of pure morbid curiosity, at this point, did you happen to issue a 'D GRS,C'? And if so did Latch Number 87 come back, a quiesce latch for a zFS file system. Just curious if other zFS support may be lacking.. Mark Zelden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 09:41:13 -0500, Ramiro Camposagrado wrote: The following section was added to the DFS/SMB section of the PSP buckets for z/OS 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, and 1.7, as a result of a PMR that I have opened with zFS development in regards to this issue. I guess they are still working on the fix. 06/04/11 If a zfs filesystem is quiesced 04/11/2006? Over 2 years and still no relief? What about the 1.8 and 1.9 buckets (I didn't check)? Considering the push to zFS, this is really bad. Jeers for IBM on this one... Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Displaying Quiesced zFS files
Thanks Mark. You gotta wonder what happened to this support. It had to be working at some point, you would think. I wonder where it dropped. I'm laughing and I'm not gonna ask if there are any more commands that were issued or need to be for that matter. I promise! Mark Zelden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 05:55:16 -0700, Patrick Falcone wrote: I agree and out of pure morbid curiosity, at this point, did you happen to issue a 'D GRS,C'? And if so did Latch Number 87 come back, a quiesce latch for a zFS file system. Just curious if other zFS support may be lacking.. D GRS,C ISG343I 09.15.40 GRS STATUS 670 NO ENQ RESOURCE CONTENTION EXISTS NO LATCH CONTENTION EXISTS D GRS,L,JOBNAME=ZFS ISG343I 09.15.53 GRS STATUS 672 LATCH DISPLAY FOR JOB ZFS NO LATCHES OWNED OR WAITED UPON D GRS,AN,WAITER ISG349I 09.20.55 GRS ANALYSIS 715 LONG WAITER ANALYSIS: ENTIRE SYSPLEX THERE ARE NO WAITING TASKS MATCHING THE INPUT SPECIFICATION D GRS,AN,BLOCKER ISG349I 09.21.03 GRS ANALYSIS 718 LONG BLOCKER ANALYSIS: ENTIRE SYSPLEX THERE ARE NO BLOCKING TASKS MATCHING THE INPUT SPECIFICATION D GRS,AN,DEPEND ISG349I 09.21.09 GRS ANALYSIS 734 DEPENDENCY ANALYSIS: ENTIRE SYSPLEX THERE ARE NO WAITING TASKS MATCHING THE INPUT SPECIFICATION -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Displaying Quiesced zFS files
You would think that the returned *status* from 'D OMVS,F' would be 'quiesced' instead of 'active' but then again I just stumbled upon the below. 'D OMVS,F,e' where 'e' is exception. Mark Zelden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 15:12:50 -0700, Patrick Falcone wrote: Hi Mark, I'm not sure if this has been mentioned/considered but did you try 'D OMVS,F'? Yes. Mentioned in my OP (I wrote no OMVS display command, nor any MODIFY ZFS command ). Here is a maintenance zFS I just quiesced: ZFS 20 ACTIVE RDWR 06/15/2008 L=32 NAME=SYS1.OMVS.RESM81.XML.ZFS 01.20.14 Q=0 PATH=/servz18/usr/lpp/ixm AGGREGATE NAME=SYS1.OMVS.RESM81.XML.ZFS Here is one that is not: ZFS 21 ACTIVE RDWR 06/15/2008 L=33 NAME=SYS1.OMVS.RESM81.PERLZFS 01.20.14 Q=0 PATH=/servz18/usr/lpp/perl AGGREGATE NAME=SYS1.OMVS.RESM81.PERLZFS -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html Mark Zelden wrote: Much to my dismay, there is no operator command I can find that shows a quiesced ZFS. No OMVS display command, nor any MODIFY ZFS command. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Displaying Quiesced zFS files
I just thought that *maybe* I could catch you not checking that *F*M! :-) If done from the driving system then I would venture this a problem since the *F*M states that the returned status should be quiesced. Mark Zelden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 06:55:49 -0700, Patrick Falcone wrote: You would think that the returned *status* from 'D OMVS,F' would be 'quiesced' instead of 'active' but then again I just stumbled upon the below. 'D OMVS,F,e' where 'e' is exception. Yes I tried that (I did look at the FM before my first post on this subject). Would you expect active to be an exception? :-) Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Displaying Quiesced zFS files
Hi Mark, I'm not sure if this has been mentioned/considered but did you try 'D OMVS,F'? Mark Zelden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was just called about a problem on our WAS development LPAR that turned out to be a quiesced WAS config ZFS. Much to my dismay, there is no operator command I can find that shows a quiesced ZFS. No OMVS display command, nor any MODIFY ZFS command. The only hint at all is this message on the console: IOEZ00581E There are quiesced zFS aggregates This looks like it came in via PTF to help as an aid in diagnosing problems. Searching the syslog I see it in there once. This would have been expected anyway since one of the WAS sysprogs quiesced the zFS. They later unquiesced it also - unfortunately another WAS sysprog also quiesced it and I got involved when things were hung and they couldn't figure out why. So now to my question. Does anyone know a way to figure out how to display what zFS files are quiesced without going into z/OS UNIX and using zfsadm (like from the console)? If not... this looks like a job for... system REXX! Oh wait... can't get there from here (OMVS can't be used from sysrexx, correct?) :-( Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Adabas, zOs and WLM
Hi Anton, At my prior gig we had North American, mostly CST and some EST zone work and a UK workload. I supported one WLM policy. The workloads were grouped as usual, prod onlines, prod batch, test onlines, test batch, etc I had CICS, IDMS, Adabas, Complete, WAS, Domino, TSO. You get the picture. My UK workload was not as resource intensive as my North American workload. In my case I did have some higher importance workload during off hours, namely UK online production, but was able to tune the policy so that the CST/EST nightly batch cycle still completed in time for the North American morning rush. I should say that I was in EST zone and with the physical box. I won't say this was without issue(s) but for the most part, and on most days, there was no significant impact to the core business related workloads. If you have no online or higher importance workload during the nightly batch process increasing the WLM Importance is almost the same as leaving it alone, to some extent. Anton Britz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, How many of you have different WLM defintions for a Day time load and a Night time load in zOs . The LPAR is running CICS, ADABAS, SHADOW ? I am trying to tell them the concept of having different WLM settings for the different parts of the day , is old fashioned ex. We have WEB applications now and there is no point in increasing the Batch priorities when the CICS's are doing nothing at night. Difficult to explain because they believe the Batch jobs will go faster at night if you UP the priorities in WLM. Warnings : Any of your responses might be distributed in our organization , so please talk slowly so that everybody will understand. Note: Opposing views/opinions are always tolerated because that is how all of us think about we do, before doing it. Thanks Anton -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: No VIO Causes SCLM not to Work
Does SC34-4817-07 help? George Rodriguez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been searching hi and low for any information on FLMALLOC which controls the JCL that's submitted to move things around in preparation for a promotion. Does anyone know where I can find this macro so I can change it to use SYSDA instead of VIO? Help will be appreciated... George Rodriguez Specialist, Systems Programmer IT-Operations (561) 357-7652 (office) (561) 707-3496 (mobil) School District of Palm Beach County 3348 Forest Hill Blvd. Room B332 West Palm Beach, FL. 33406-5869 Rated A by the Florida Department of Education 2005, 2006 2007 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Checkpoint job stops processing: Cancel command not working
Curious to know what kind of database. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I utilized RMFWDM and did not find anything of importance; our MIH (Missing Interrupt Handler) is set at MIH DEV=(3E0-3E7),TIME=10:00 we attempted to cancel the job several times and finally forced it out of the System; restored the database ran again and the job ran fine. Created PMR 86917 Branch 370 to see if IBM can point me in a direction to resolve this issue. IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU@inter2 5/17/2008 11:52:03 AM Sounds like it's waiting for or delayed by something. Do you have a monitor that can show wait or delay reasons? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Has anyone ran into this problem or can you tell me where to look for a possible resolution. Running z/OS release 1.7. Payroll jobs that creates checkpoint tapes on real STK 3490 tape drives. Job will process fine to a selected point and stop. There are no outstanding replies to indicate a problem exist. We issue the Cancel command numerous times and the job does not cancel; therefore, we have to Force Exit the job out of the System. I have looked thru SYSLOG and cannot find any reason as to why the job stopped processing or why the cancel command is not working. It does say Cancel command accepted. IEE301I N97P5610 CANCEL COMMAND ACCEPTED -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: SMP/E question.
I've heard that, DASD is a premium, before. See if *they* can provide him with how much the other side uses. I know, I know, it won't do any good. Been there too. McKown, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Zelden Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 11:14 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: SMP/E question. For normal maintenance or most product orders, you really don't need much DASD on z/OS, so why go through all that every time? Even a large product like WebSphere isn't that big. I can see playing games for a z/OS Serverpac perhaps, but that should be the exception. Heck, I would think pointing SMPNTS to /tmp would be plenty of space most of the time. BTW, I don't allocate SMPWKDIR. I just have a large SMPNTS. And I know mainframe dasd is not cheap compared to the sata drive in your workstation, but in the total scheme of your mainframe dasd, how much of a pain would it be to get a little more to support this the way it was meant to work? Mark Well, I blew an entire 3390-3 trying to do a receive. Around here, DASD is again considered a premium resource. The new CIO firmly believes that we are just wasting space left and right and wants __strong__ justification for DASD. To the point were we may start getting Sx37 abends again due to lack of space. I know, that what I can do? I've suffered the pain, he has not. -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: SMP/E question.
You mean they will have to do a, shudder, CBA! Oh the humanity... McKown, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Falcone Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 12:27 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: SMP/E question. I've heard that, DASD is a premium, before. See if *they* can provide him with how much the other side uses. I know, I know, it won't do any good. Been there too. Actually, we've had a number of resignation from the other side because the CIO is demanding the same of them! They cannot just ask for another 5 servers and 2Tb of DASD and have it approved instantly. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Checkpoint job stops processing: Cancel command not working
Sounds like it's waiting for or delayed by something. Do you have a monitor that can show wait or delay reasons? [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Has anyone ran into this problem or can you tell me where to look for a possible resolution. Running z/OS release 1.7. Payroll jobs that creates checkpoint tapes on real STK 3490 tape drives. Job will process fine to a selected point and stop. There are no outstanding replies to indicate a problem exist. We issue the Cancel command numerous times and the job does not cancel; therefore, we have to Force Exit the job out of the System. I have looked thru SYSLOG and cannot find any reason as to why the job stopped processing or why the cancel command is not working. It does say Cancel command accepted. IEE301I N97P5610 CANCEL COMMAND ACCEPTED -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: 3 Page Datasets on one Volume
We did this, long ago far away, at our time share NVIP, IBM 3880-11 w/3350's. I'm with you on this Ted, I always liked to keep this, paging environment, simple as possible with paging with own volume. This may be a bit of old school thinking but when there are problems or potential data management issues I know straight away what it most probably is not. But at this point horses for courses, if you will... Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There was a time that the recommendation was to put paging data sets on dedicated volumes attached to dedicated control units. I've never seen anyone do that with ordinary DASD. I did it 3330's, 3350's, 3380's from 1981 to 1989. Dedicated DASD, control units and channels. With 3390's, and quad pathing, we started getting away from dedicated paths and control units. But, we kept dedicated packs. I'm still biased towards the last one. (Except for the 1-Cyl PLPA 'trick') - Too busy driving to stop for gas! -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Connect:Direct (NDM) CPU Usage
Well, I like the resource group solution but I have to wonder how well STCLOW does normally with a vel = 50 at imp. 4. I might think that this is a never achieving goal service class from all of what might be in STCLOW, but of course I could be way wrong too. I'd resource cap max it, CD, and also look at STCLOW to see if maybe that needs a tweak. Kelman, Tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We run Connect:Direct (used to be called NDM) from Sterling Commerce. Yesterday afternoon the started task, CDNDM, took from 50-60% of an engine on our z9BC for almost 2 hours while it transferred a large file. This caused us to hit our softcap and affected other tasks in the system. We have the CDNDM task running in our STCLO service class which is set for Vel=50 and an importance level of 4. It was still running at a high DP and grabbed the CPU. I can't understand why a task that is basically transmitting a file over the network should need this much CPU. My only explanation might be that it is compressing the data before putting it on the network and the compression algorithm isn't the most efficient in the world. Has anyone else had this kind of a problem running Connect:Direct? What, if anything, did you do to control it? Tom Kelman Commerce Bank of Kansas City (816) 760-7632 * If you wish to communicate securely with Commerce Bank and its affiliates, you must log into your account under Online Services at http://www.commercebank.com or use the Commerce Bank Secure Email Message Center at https://securemail.commercebank.com NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any attached files are confidential. The information is exclusively for the use of the individual or entity intended as the recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, copying, printing, reviewing, retention, disclosure, distribution or forwarding of the message or any attached file is not authorized and is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic mail message in error, please advise the sender by reply electronic mail immediately and permanently delete the original transmission, any attachments and any copies of this message from your computer system. * -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: WLM classification for separate tn3270 server?
Yes, no difference in importance or goal since SYSSTC is *hardwired* at FE which is where TCPIP lives. Chase, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, All, In preparation for z/OS 1.9 (currently on 1.7), we're fledging the tn3270 server from the TCPIP nest to its own address space. TCPIP currently runs in SYSSTC. Would that also be appropriate for the new TN3270 address space? Any difference in importance or specific goals for it? We're studying the current Redbooks.. TIA, -jc- -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: SVCDUMP capture phase statistics.....
much snipped below Hi Jim, Which was one of the reasons I questioned Barbara about having NDM in discretionary. The 25 seconds would have been at least 2 WLM adjustments but on a potentially fully loaded LPAR I'm wondering if there is something that alerts WLM/SRM to make a discretionary address space dispatchable under certain circumstances. Although Barbara stated that NDM appeared to be in it could have been in ready. Jim Mulder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IBM Mainframe Discussion List wrote on 04/10/2008 02:05:33 AM: This is probably because of the partial dump reason code that says only fixed storage was dumped for the address space. This happens when SDUMP detects that the dump task in the address space never got started (after 25 seconds), so it instead dumps the fixed frames of the address space, accessing them via their real storage addresses. Apparently this processing doesn't set the Local Storage End timestamp (that can be corrected in a future release). So the question would be, why didn't the NDM dump task get going for 25 seconds (that should be 25 seconds after resetting system nondispatchability, I think). Since NDM's LSQA should be in the dump, possibly SUMM FOR ASID(x'16A') might have some clues. Is the dump task still in a wait? Is the ECB POSTed? Jim Mulder z/OS System Test IBM Corp. Poughkeepsie, NY -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: SVCDUMP capture phase statistics.....
Hi Barbara, I might consider moving NDM up in importance, middle level, to get it some resources. I might also watch its behavior as NDM has been known to take resources that might affect other workloads. If that's the case you might consider resource capping it as well. Barbara Nitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ..and how to interpret them. Yesterday connect:direct took another of those abend0c4 that Sterling always tells us 'they're all fixed'. They're all from ISTAICPT in SRB mode... And of course they always occur in production where there is extremely high load (both CPU and workload) The problem was that it took a full minute between IST413I VTAM DUMPING FOR JOB NDM and IEA794I SVC DUMP HAS CAPTURED, with system-wide non-dispatchability due to Q=YES 28seconds. This causes TCPIP to get 'adjacency failures' and to drop lots of MQ channel connections, which has a major impact on customers connected to us. Which means a lot of management attention. The dump statistics tell me this: Total dump capture time 00:00:57.956068 System nondispatchability start 04/09/2008 15:04:43.405987 System set nondispatchable 04/09/2008 15:04:43.406106 Global storage start 04/09/2008 15:04:43.053199 Global storage end 04/09/2008 15:04:48.466431 Global storage capture time 00:00:05.413231 System reset dispatchable 04/09/2008 15:05:12.204912 System was nondispatchable 00:00:28.798924 Asid 016A (NDM): Local storage start 04/09/2008 15:05:12.204988 Local storage end 09/18/2042 01:53:47.370496 -- very interesting time stamp Local storage capture time 10:48:35.165507 Tasks reset dispatchable 04/09/2008 15:05:39.356416 Tasks were nondispatchable 00:00:27.151414 Exit address 04353880 Home ASID 0005 DUMPSRV Exit time 00:00:20.810908 Exit attributes: Global, Sdump, SYSMDUMP I've got three questions here: 1. Why is there this interesting time stamp that says the dumps will be finished in 2042? 2. Global capture phase was a mere 5 seconds, why did it take 24 seconds after global capture was finished for the system to become dispatchable again? 3. What the heck took DUMPSRV 20 seconds in the exit? == FLAGS SET IN SDUSDATA: Dump all PSAs, current PSA, nucleus SQA, LSQA, rgn-private area, LPA mod. for rgn, trace, CSA, SWA,summary dump == FLAGS SET IN SDUFLAG2: SUBPLST, KEYLIST, LISTD == FLAGS SET IN SDUCNTL1: SRB == FLAGS SET IN SDUTYP1: FAILRC == FLAGS SET IN SDUEXIT: GRSQ, MASTER trace, SMSX, XESDATA, IOS, RSM, OE == FLAGS SET IN SDUSDAT3: IO The dump is 8929 trks big and was partial, MAXSPACE is 1500M, 6 logical cps, 8.7G real. partial dump reason codes: During dump processing of local storage, the system issued a PURGEDQ because a hung address space was detected. This will result in the loss of some storage related to the address space. During dump processing of a possibly hung address space, dump processing obtained only fixed storage for the address space NDM runs in a discretionary SC, VTAM in SYSSTC. Any idea what's going on? (I am hoping to get a faster answer/ideas what to change here than by opening an ETR with IBM, especially as this may be some sort of tuning problem, except for the 2042 time stamp.) Thanks for reading, best regards, Barbara -- Ist Ihr Browser Vista-kompatibel? Jetzt die neuesten Browser-Versionen downloaden: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/browser -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: My last post in this forum.
I choked on my coffee this morning, ROTFLMAO. I just hope the MF in the post below meant MainFrame. Sorry, I just could not resist. Lindy Mayfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From the main page (http://www.mfnetdisk.com) I clicked on the free link then on the link that says Free Movie Tutorial and it offered to find me a date. Classy. (-: -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of shai hess Sent: 7. huhtikuuta 2008 11:54 To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: My last post in this forum. HI, Since some of you, maybe the majority think like them, criticize my posting about MFNetDisk (Hijackings...), I decide to stop posting any messages to this forum. You will never see any messages of mine in your MF forum. Thanks and good luck, Shai -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: SYSAFF card
Makes me wonder if anything unusual is returned from $D PERFDATA or MASDEF with regards to this *feature* mod. Mark Zelden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 3 Apr 2008 12:47:59 -0700, Edward Jaffe wrote: Mark Zelden wrote: On Thu, 3 Apr 2008 14:27:11 -0400, Craddock, Chris wrote: Yes the job can run anywhere that has an available initiator for the job class. However as a practical matter (at least with JES2) the job almost always runs on the same system where it is submitted because of the behavior of the checkpoint. CC With WLM inits and z/OS 1.8 (or above) this isn't as bad as it used to be. There were some problems with the new design and the work around was to issue $T MASDEF,WLMPERF=OLD to force the pre z/OS 1.8 behavior. So make sure you have the fix for OA21212 on and then do a $T MASDEF,WLMPERF=NEW if you implemented the work around. ROTFLMAO! This JES2 job scheduling design flaw has been around since before I started programming for a living! The limitation was supposed to be finally relieved last century when WLM-managed batch initiators came into being with OS/390 V2R4. And, every couple/few releases since that time, IBM implements something new to fix it -- yet again!! It's like patching a leaky roof! :-D Hey, I didn't say it was fixed or good. Only that it wasn't as bad as it used to be. Okay... maybe that's not saying much. Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: ESQA allocation question
It's not too faded Ted. And yes, Walsh. ftp://ftp.software.ibm.com/software/mktsupport/techdocs/allreal_v11.pdf Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Given that ESQA will just overflow into ECSA is there any real reason not to allocate ESQA fairly low so that it is always at 100%, and then size/monitor ECSA for the combined requirements? I am aware that that would not be a good thing below the line, but I haven't read of any clear reason to 'tune' ESQA rather than ESQA/ECSA as a combined area. I have always been of the opinion that a little SQA/ESQA conversion is okay, but not a lot. IBM (I believe) used recommend as little as possible. But, now with 64-bit addressing, and no expanded storage I think you cannot get away with it. IIRC, IPL-processing needs more ESQA to build page tables, and that will not be allowed to overflow into CSA, since the entire system is not up yet. There's a paper on the WTC site explaining this. And, as my faded memory recalls, it might have been written by Kathy Welsh/Walsh (?). - Too busy driving to stop for gas! -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z9 over-heating prevention
This kind of also ties into the *gas gauge* available for z9 with driver upgrade. I thought this little pdf interesting. ftp://ftp.software.ibm.com/systems/z/pdf/z9_Gas_Gauge_Driver_manual.pdf under http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/z/advantages/energy/index.html Timothy Sipples [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One of the more interesting attributes is that the machine will do everything possible to keep your work moving as best it can even if there's a double MRU failure. It can slow down the processors to reduce heat. WLM (assuming z/OS) is still in control, so heat-related forced slowdowns will tend to disfavor work in lower service classes, starting with purely discretionary workloads. You're probably already monitoring how well WLM is meeting its goals, so that's one (indirect) way to get a warning that something unusual is happening. I think an MRU failure is a Call Home event, by the way. A technician is going to initiate a telephone call to schedule installation of a replacement part, if necessary. If you're visiting IBM (in Poughkeepsie, for example), they may be able to simulate a double MRU failure for you so you can see what happens, at least if you request that demonstration ahead of time. - - - - - Timothy Sipples IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect Specializing in Software Architectures Related to System z Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan and IBM Asia-Pacific E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z9 over-heating prevention
Google IBM z9 cooling. Also check out http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/rd/511/harrer.pdf. The z9 has a MRU, modular refrigeration unit. Joel M Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What safety guards are there on z9bc hardware to prevent over-heating? (Such as when the building's coolers are inoperable.) Are there messages to console to prompt for shutdown? I searched for white paper, flash, archives, etc. Thanks, Joel M Ivey University of SC -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Request for the IBM 9390-001 RAMAC Service Guide
Does this work for you? http://publibfp.boulder.ibm.com/epubs/pdf/a1310xx.pdf Carmelo Grecia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, Does anybody here have a copy of the IBM RAMAC 9390-001 service guide? Regards, Carmelo Grecia [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z/OS 1.7 to z/OS 1.9 Migration - Increase in CPU/MSU Consumption
Hi John, You *may* actually save some CPU with regards to other system related overhead associated with this upgrade. Check the MXG archives under subject Master for a thread in which a few Users are experiencing less CPU with regards to Master and RSM upgrades when migrating to z/OS 1.9. Regards, Patrick Falcone Chase, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are just about to start the migration from z/OS 1.7 to z/OS 1.9. Would someone provide a ballpark percentage increase in the amount of CPU resources between the two releases so we can estimate the monthly increase in our z/OS base monthly billing? TIA, -jc- -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z/OS 1.7 to z/OS 1.9 Migration - Increase in CPU/MSU Consumption
To be precise, it appears that the savings are actually as a result of RSM modifications in z/OS 1.8, carried forward, not z/OS 1.9. Sorry bout that. Patrick Falcone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi John, You *may* actually save some CPU with regards to other system related overhead associated with this upgrade. Check the MXG archives under subject Master for a thread in which a few Users are experiencing less CPU with regards to Master and RSM upgrades when migrating to z/OS 1.9. Regards, Patrick Falcone Chase, John wrote: We are just about to start the migration from z/OS 1.7 to z/OS 1.9. Would someone provide a ballpark percentage increase in the amount of CPU resources between the two releases so we can estimate the monthly increase in our z/OS base monthly billing? TIA, -jc- -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Tape switching: Autoswitch vs MIM/Allocation
I can relate and sympathize with John on this. A while back I was asked to work with the installation team to *shoehorn* WAS V5 onto a G5 in 31 with 2 LPAR's, 1 sandbox/1 production/dev. The prod/dev. LPAR had 2.4 GB w/1.7 cs and .7 es. The machine was already running at 100% with latent demand. While my pre analysis stated that it would not work I was *asked* to make it happen. Of course being the good soldier I am I proceeded. I wish I could have seen the faces when we started the WAS cell groups up during prime time as I was working remote of the corporate site where the prod users were. I sure saw the faces of the support staff at our site when we cranked WAS up. The freakin' lights dimmed in Trevose at times. After about 6 weeks of causing my own performance problems it was decided it would not work. That and the fact that we did not really have the storage to support prod., acceptance, dev. and test WAS cell groups. It was an experience though and I did seem some performance numbers I have never saw before. Rick Fochtman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The whole situation sounds very much like Management by Airline Magazine. Do as you're told, try and soak the very best performance you can get, watch for vacancies in the ranks of senior management and quietly prepare for a CPU upgrade. Your politicians are like most others; not all, but most. They don't know diddley squat about capacity management and they've let things deteriorate to the point where the only solution is to spend some money, a mortal sin in their eyes. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Tape switching: Autoswitch vs MIM/Allocation
Jeez John, I'd rather do the proof of concept on the current setup, WLM prior to plex, than go to a setup, plex, that could cause additional degradation and then maybe have to go back but I guess that's all water under the bridge at this point. I know I'm preaching to the choir but don't *they* realize there is the very real possibility that you'll use more CPU managing a plex environment with weighting than a single image? And so now you could face the possibility that some of the production work may not get done or will be delayed during heavy month end processing due to the plex setup and the guarantee to the test/development image. I have been down the month end road, super peaks with maybe 30 in ready and basically none of my bottom feeders, test/dev., getting any CPU, well 85 - 95% CPU delay, but the production batch work chugged along and finished and my onlines didn't notice any significant delays. This was on a small 2 way machine as I believe you are on also. Good luck... McKown, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Zelden Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 3:46 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Tape switching: Autoswitch vs MIM/Allocation [snip] So what are you doing today to share tape between your two monoplex systems? We only have a single monoplex today. We are splitting it in twain for political reasons. I.e. the current image will run only production work, the new image will run all development/test/qa (nonproduction) work. It will be a basic sysplex because nobody would pony up the $173,000 USD to get a CFL for our z9BC. If interested, the reasoning goes that since we cannot get all of our work done during month-end because production soaks the CPU totally, the non-production work is be unjustly penalized. This will be fixed by putting the non-production work in its only LPAR on the same CEC and weighting the LPARs appropriately. Nobody would believe me when I said that I could do this using WLM on a single image. They wouldn't even allow a proof of concept to see how a WLM solution might work. Yes, I'm disgusted. I've always liked MIA and have used it at different shops since the early 90s. It is simple to set up if you already have MII, but there really is no reason to do so since z/OS 1.2 if you are running a sysplex. One nice thing you can do with MIA that looks like it will be in z/OS 1.10 is the ability to vary devices as overgenned. This takes them out of the EDL. There are also the display that tells you where a drive is allocated, but with only 2 systems it's sort of obvious. The overgenned is nice. I've used it in the past. But that alone does not seem worth the effort to implement MIA. Mark -- -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: upgrading z?OS 1.4 to 1.8 or 1.9
And z/OS 1.4 has been out of support for a while unless you're paying through the nose for continued support as we were. Are you in 31 or 64? We had a problem, in a simple monoplex, going from 31 to 64 in z/OS 1.4 with a 3rd party product doing some nasty things in storage. Bu Dante [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We run on z/OS 1.4. I know recommended upgrade is to 1.7 (N+3). Our system is simple and nothing is shared. There are many 3rd party products running on 1.4 but up to date. Since 1.7 support will run out in September this year, we would like to upgrade now to 1.8 or 1.9 if there are no major issues. Has anybody done this and what are some of the problems encountered and is fallback possible? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Portmap start task
Don't know too much about portmap but it seems like a candidate for SYSSTC. Have you encountered problems that make you reluctant to put it there. Check the link. IBM's sample policy has it defined there. http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries/zos/wlm/documents/sample/samplepol.html Leitner, Timothy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Portmap runs in class stclo - discretionary. I just changed it to stcmd - imp 3 vel 30. Will see if that makes a difference. Tim Leitner OSF Healthcare System Manager, Technical Services 309-683-7452 -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of McKown, John Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 2:27 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Portmap start task -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Leitner, Timothy Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 1:43 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Portmap start task All, Has anybody run into an issue with the portmap started task running in a default service class rather than sysstc like tcpip? We use STK (SUN) HSC and libstation and have had some odd things happening with our Veritas system. We have found that there will be a number (20-30) connections in TCPIP left for long periods of time all pointing back to the Veritas environment. We can drop the connections and things will clear up. Any ideas? Thanks. Tim Leitner We run PORTMAP in a service class called DAEMON. Its WLM classification is Importance=1, velocity=50. I have __no__ idea how this relates to Libstation, HSC, et al. The only thing that I know of that uses this is NFS. Perhaps your portmap is not the standard portmap? The standard portmap simply keeps track of port names with their associated logical names. That way, a client can ask portmap: What port should I connect to in order to access service bubba?. The bubba service, running on the z/OS system, would have previously sent a request to portmap on the order of: Hey! This here is bubba, what port do you want me to listen on for work?. Portmap would then tell bubba what port to listen on. A client would ask portmap what port bubba was listening on and connect to that port in order to talk to bubba. Portmap sees very little use around here. -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z10 presentation on 26 Feb
Thanks Phil, I like the following Users will no longer give up memory for HSA (hardware storage area). I was crowing about this when the z800/z900's came out and was told we would need to allocate 1GB of 8GB's for HSA. Phil Payne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Going to be more fun, I suspect, than many realise. There are n new instructions? Some have mentioned 50. Will it still be 'z/Architecture'? z/Architecture is the subject of litigation - does IBM wish to include the new stuff in that - changing the effective meaning of the expression halfway through a lawsuit? Or, indeed, _can_ they? Some think not. There are those who believe that any extension of z/Architecture (which this will de facto be) could invalidate at least one and possibly two of the main planks in IBM's case against PSI. There is a LOT going on behind the scenes. Another z10 source: http://topgun-tech.com/resource-center/zseries-library/articles/marketplace-trends-ibm-zseries And you may care to check out the definition of NDA at http://www.isham-research.co.uk/dd.html -- Phil Payne http://www.isham-research.co.uk +44 7833 654 800 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Price of CPU seconds
Probably due to the fact that the NT Unix guys get another box when they ask for one without much questioning. You're dealing with with single application/single server mentality. I did a tuning exercise of a Domino Change Management application (non mail server application) running on z/OS that was administered by Domino Mail server Administrators who supported mostly NT. They were dumbfounded that I wanted to disable certain tasks on the z/OS Domino application, that were mail related and unnecessary in support of the non mail application, because to them it was only a few seconds here and there. I was able to show a savings in the thousands of seconds per week due to this exercise. The User realized relative cost savings on a go forward basis and I recovered a bit of CPU for other tasks during our busy prime/peak shifts. Miklos Szigetvari [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi For me this more or less clear. I have here a number of collegues from NT and Unix , and they don't understand why the 0.5% CPU time is a matter: /Would somebody knowledgeable please explain to me why some host people get their panties in a knot (I love colorful expressions!) over a few dozen MBs and a CPU usage of 0.5%? Are there real reasons for this, or are they simply stuck in a 1960s mindset? How much can 408 CPU-seconds per day cost? / Miklos Szigetvari Development Team ISIS Information Systems Gmbh tel: (+43) 2236 27551 570 Fax: (+43) 2236 21081 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hotline: +43-2236-27551-111 Visit our Website: http://www.isis-papyrus.com -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Question on Out Sourcing
Better to check the agreement very thoroughly. I would want to know, before signing, what is covered *after* the contract has been signed. You might be surprised at what you'll be paying for a few weeks down the road after the contract has been signed and you need *x* to be investigated, solved, implemented, upgraded, etc... for you by the outsourcer. I'm willing to bet that a lot of companies get hit with hidden fee's down the line where it becomes evident that outsourcing is ending up costing more that was originally thought. Pat Mihalec [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know this but I needed it from someone else to show the current director. He has not mainframe experience, his background is Windows. He thinks that if you move to the outsourcer system you no longer pay the fees. It comes as a shock to him. I suggested he ask the outsourcer directly about this. Pat Mihalec Rush University Medical Center Senior System Programmer (312) 942-8386 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Need a SMF tool
If you've done some meticulous work on your WLM policy with regards to defining Report Service Classes you can indeed get the necessary, task or address space, information from the SMF type 72 record or stock CMF / RMF Workload Activity Report. RMF Monitor 2 or 3 can show you what is asid is causing a spike in activity, but the RMF Post Processor doesn't give you any information about individual address spaces. The workload manager report could show you what workload is spiking, but not the individual address space. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: SEMI off topic
Yes. It's a damn shame, it's now history as of this past Sunday, well what was left of us over there. I stopped by and popped a few face plates off what was left of the hardware, took the international clock and whatever other trinkets I could carry off. My teenage kids just laughed when I showed up at home with *the junk*. Gary Green [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sounds like the old NVIP site... -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Falcone Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2008 11:52 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: SEMI off topic We had fail-over to battery then to diesel. You could hear the turbines on the Pa. turnpike a couple hundred meters prior to the Philly exit eastbound. I just googled and it looks like anywhere from 4 - 6 ms. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: SEMI off topic
Filmways corporation owned them quite a while back for a few years. Combined then bought it. Everyone that was left got outsourced. Probably Betsy. Gary Green [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wow, I did not know they were still around. I drive by the building every 6 months or so and recall my days there. That was when they were owned by a porno house on the left coast. (or so we were told) Met an IBM PSR there and she was one of the smarted people I ever met in the business. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Falcone Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 11:09 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: SEMI off topic Yes. It's a damn shame, it's now history as of this past Sunday, well what was left of us over there. I stopped by and popped a few face plates off what was left of the hardware, took the international clock and whatever other trinkets I could carry off. My teenage kids just laughed when I showed up at home with *the junk*. Gary Green wrote: Sounds like the old NVIP site... -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Falcone Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2008 11:52 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: SEMI off topic We had fail-over to battery then to diesel. You could hear the turbines on the Pa. turnpike a couple hundred meters prior to the Philly exit eastbound. I just googled and it looks like anywhere from 4 - 6 ms. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: SEMI off topic
We had fail-over to battery then to diesel. You could hear the turbines on the Pa. turnpike a couple hundred meters prior to the Philly exit eastbound. I just googled and it looks like anywhere from 4 - 6 ms. Ed Gould [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: its been an interesting discussion. Thanks all for contributing. One question remains in my mind though what is the allowable time power maybe interrupted to a CPU ? 1 NS (nanosecond) ? or 0 NS? or ? As I said in my original piece I am not familiar with UPS's and could some one come up with a current answer? If the answer is it depends that would be nice to know that, as well. Thanks. Ed -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Printing a PDF or PS doc
Yes, I don't know all the particulars but our support group's LAN had a mainframe attached printer, IBM IP 1140, defined to it to do just what you are asking. I'm sure someone will chime in with more definitive setup requirements. Lindy Mayfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was asked this question and I have to admit I am so clueless I'm not even sure how to google it. Is it possible to print PDF's or PS documents on a mainframe printer? Thanks, Lindy -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: RMF STC and Parmlib
Hi Lizette, Have a look at the RMF User's Guide, sc33-7990-10. Check IEFPARM DD statement for instream support for what you are looking for below. Lizette Koehler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Listers - I have been hunting through the RMF manuals (z/OS V1.7) and cannot seem to find any information on the PARMLIB input. Is it possible to point the RMF and RMFGAT STC JCL to a parmlib of my choice? Or is the PARMLIB that the LOADxx member has the only way to go? Lizette -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: It keeps getting uglier
Yea, I mean there are all kinds of *cheats* in video games and to think there are none in z/OS or any of the other companion products? I ran across this a few years back at a class where an optimization parameter was discussed. When I got back to the shop and tried to track it down it ended being one of *them*. Undocumented - the horror! The support folks probably snicker when they read this stuff. Tony Harminc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:28:22 -, Phil Payne wrote: Has anyone from the Hercules team read IBM's rather stunning admission (on the above page - paragraph 176) that there is a confidential version of the PoP? Their words, not mine. This is bizarre. Why is it a stunning admission that there is a confidential version of the POPs? Lynn Wheeler has been mentioning this Script/GML based book that could be printed as either the customer or the full version, for *years*, on this very list. And well known IBMers have talked very openly at SHARE and in other non-confidential contexts about the real book, vs the published version, though of course they do not discuss its content. And what is the relevance to Hercules? Tony H. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
