How far apart are the two sites? Are you sending more data now than in the
beginning? Are you sending this data across pure Ficon, or are you using
network (like DWDM)? The first thing I would check is buffer credits on the
ISL ports. If you start pushing a lot of data, if buffer credits
I will be out of the office starting 01/29/2011 and will not return until
02/03/2011.
Hello,
I will be out of the office until Thursday 2/3. William Poulsen is my delegate.
I will have access to my cell phone, but not my email.
Best,
Alexander
American Express made the following annotations
I have a simple question and I cannot find my notes for the answer.
I have been searching the archives and manuals but I guess I am just missing
the solution.
The SetUP -
The system has been IPL'd but I want to now add IPv6 to my environment.
I create a new member BPXPRMV6 with the definition.
Yes, that's correct.
Jol fixes all that sort of thing up automatically for you.
Clem
Schwarz, Barry A wrote:
It was explained to me a long time ago by someone who used to read the
microfiche that when a dataset is found in the Pass Queue, it is removed from
the queue. The work around (from
If you do that - use permanent data sets as pseudo-temporaries - then you
forego the potential for VIO (In Central). But then I do it myself
sometimes.
Cheers, Martin
Martin Packer,
Mainframe Performance Consultant, zChampion
Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM
+44-7802-245-584
I did this on my sandbox and unless someone knows a trick, the answer is a
NO. You need to IPL the system to correct the NETWORK definitions in
BPXPRMxx .
Lizette
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of
Lizette Koehler
Sent:
Lizette
You need to be reading through Chapter 12, Managing Operation in the z/OS
UNIX System Services Planning manual, especially sections starting
with Dynamically changing the BPXPRMxx parameter values. It seems that
SETOMVS may be as useful a command - if not more so - than SET OMVS.
Cris Hernandez #9 wrote:
I too have auditors who treat the my mainframe like one those little puters
and I find it best to first educate them before they convince my management
to send me chasing phantoms. Don't assume your auditor won't appreciate a
mainframe education.
Jim Marshall wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jan 2011 22:46:47 -0600, John McKown wrote:
That's what I do:
//SYSUT1 DD DSN=amp;DSN,DISP=(OLD,PASS)
//SYSUT2 DD DSN=*.SYSUT1,DISP=(OLD,PASS),
// UNIT=AFF=SYSUT1,
// VOL=REF=*.SYSUT1
I frequently do this to create SYSEXEC (DISP=NEW) as a temp DS;
populate it with an EXEC
On Fri, 28 Jan 2011 18:14:50 -0800, Edward Jaffe wrote:
It fails with:
IEF212I JCLERROR IGMLENU SYSUT2 - DATA SET NOT FOUND
If it can find the data set for SYSUT1, then why can't it find it for SYSUT2?
It
works fine when a normal cataloged data set is used. It fails only with a
temporary data
I think this explains the passed data set restriction seen. I believe the
example found in section 4.1.1.2.1 is incorrect and is a doc error.
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/iea2b560/4.6.2.1.5?SHELF=DT=20100701093058CASE=
4.6.2.1.5 Passing a Data Set
Do not try to
Elardus,
Please let me add some information in response to your posting:
There is a difference between a Virus and a System Integrity
Exposure.The System Integrity Exposure is the Root Cause that a Virus
exploits.There may be many Viruses, especially in Windows Systems, which
exploit the
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 14:04:21 -0600, Ray Overby wrote:
..., if any integrity exposures were found,
they would have reported the vulnerabilities to IBM z/OS Development and
Development would have fixed them.That would just be the normal course
of business within IBM.
At 13:09 -0600 on 01/29/2011, Paul Gilmartin wrote about Re: Second
Reference to Temporary Data Set Fails:
Armed with a priori knowledge of the correct answer, I went looking for
the restriction. I found, to the contrary, that it's supposed to
work:
At 14:53 -0500 on 01/29/2011, David Kreiss wrote about Re: Second
Reference to Temporary Data Set Fails:
I think this explains the passed data set restriction seen. I
believe the example found in section 4.1.1.2.1 is incorrect and is a
doc error.
That section shows how to create a member
Concerning the note,
I have a requirement to be able to find the caller of a called program.
The caller and called program are both COBOL running in batch. I found from
the list that I should try CEETBCK. So I am trying to write an assembler
routine to do this. Since I a novice at assembler I
16 matches
Mail list logo
