- PRIMARY SPACE MANAGEMENT
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Received: Wednesday, July 13, 2011, 11:47 AM
Elardus Engelbrecht wrote:
willie bunter wrote:
I went back as far as July 01 SMF records and nothing showed despite
searching for records 14 15 17 18 61 62 63 64 65 67 68 136 139
Why SMF record type
DFHSM is the culprit.
On behalf of DFHSM, I object. HSM merely enforces policy. If there's a
culprit here, it would be the person(s) who designed the policy or maybe
applications for not understanding the rules. They do know there are
rules, right?
;o)
ddk
This e-mail message and all
darth.kel...@assurant.com wrote:
From: Darth Keller darth.kel...@assurant.com
Subject: Re: DFHSM QUESTION - PRIMARY SPACE MANAGEMENT
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Received: Monday, July 18, 2011, 8:25 AM
DFHSM is the culprit.
On behalf of DFHSM, I object. HSM merely enforces policy. If there's
Hallo To All,
I am trying to track down a problem of a missing dataset. The dsn was used by
a STC however for some unexplainable reason it disappeared. In the STC the
dsn is DISP=SHR. I checked all the SMF records -TYPE 17, 18, 61, 62, 63, 64,
65, 67, 68, 136, 138 139- but there is no
snip
Expire after Days Non-usage . : 540
Expire after Date/Days . . . . : NOLIMIT
Retention Limit . . . . . . . : 0
/snip
Indicates to delete the dataset 540 days after last use. The NOLIMIT
allows the user to
allan.stal...@kbmg.com
Subject: Re: DFHSM QUESTION - PRIMARY SPACE MANAGEMENT
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Received: Wednesday, July 13, 2011, 8:42 AM
snip
Expire after Days Non-usage . : 540
Expire after Date/Days . . . . : NOLIMIT
bunter williebun...@yahoo.com
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Date: 07/13/2011 10:26 AM
Subject: DFHSM QUESTION - PRIMARY SPACE MANAGEMENT
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Hallo To All,
I am trying to track down a problem of a missing dataset. The dsn
was used
...@assurant.com
Subject: Re: DFHSM QUESTION - PRIMARY SPACE MANAGEMENT
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Received: Wednesday, July 13, 2011, 9:42 AM
Could it have been renamed?
Thank you and have a Terrific day!
Jonathan Goossen, ACS, CL
Tape Specialist
ACT Mainframe Storage Group
Personal: 651-361-4541
snip
Again, if the dsn was deleted by a TSO user wouldn't it show up in the
SMF records?
/snip
Absolutely.
Since you indicated in another post the data set was in use as of July
10th by an STC, I would go back at least to the start date/time of that
STC for you SMF hunt.
Again, DAF is your
PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: DFHSM QUESTION - PRIMARY SPACE MANAGEMENT
I don't think so because the STC was using it until July 10 at 04:00 a.m.
When the user attempted to bring up the STC on July 11 she received a jcl error
- dsn not found.
--- On Wed, 7/13/11, Jonathan Goossen
12:02 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] DFHSM QUESTION - PRIMARY SPACE MANAGEMENT
I don't think so because the STC was using it until July 10 at 04:00 a.m.
When the user attempted to bring up the STC on July 11 she received a jcl error
- dsn not found.
--- On Wed, 7/13/11
I went back as far as July 01 SMF records and nothing showed despite searching
for records 14 15 17 18 61 62 63 64 65 67 68 136 139
--- On Wed, 7/13/11, Staller, Allan allan.stal...@kbmg.com wrote:
From: Staller, Allan allan.stal...@kbmg.com
Subject: Re: DFHSM QUESTION - PRIMARY SPACE
willie bunter wrote:
I went back as far as July 01 SMF records and nothing showed despite searching
for records 14 15 17 18 61 62 63 64 65 67 68 136 139
No RACF SMF records? Hmmm? I hope you have really LOGOPTIONS=ALWAYS for dataset
RACF class...
Are *all* your SMF processes running 100%
Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
willie bunter
Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 10:20 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: DFHSM QUESTION - PRIMARY SPACE MANAGEMENT
I went back as far as July 01 SMF records and nothing showed despite searching
for records 14 15 17
Elardus Engelbrecht wrote:
willie bunter wrote:
I went back as far as July 01 SMF records and nothing showed despite
searching for records 14 15 17 18 61 62 63 64 65 67 68 136 139
Why SMF record type 138 and 139? What product is generating them?
Aw, f** s***, I really mean SMF type 136, not
Assuming that all SMF records are being recorded... And all SMF records from
all systems are being kept then even HSM will show up deleting the dataset (and
all SMF record types are being archived and are input to DAF then you will find
the culprit. I have in the past scanned hundreds of tapes
16 matches
Mail list logo
