In
ofe62c6a0b.5af00354-on852578d2.00402f9d-852578d2.00410...@us.ibm.com,
on 07/19/2011
at 07:50 AM, Peter Relson rel...@us.ibm.com said:
System services have, in general, not been enhanced to accept 8-byte
addresses (be those addresses provided for exits or others).
Yes, but what happens if
The z/OS 1.13 support (or lack of support if you choose to consider it
that) is entirely software-limited. There are no hardware limitations
involved here. For example, the hardware does support ETE's with 8-byte
entry point addresses. And of course the SVC new PSW is 16 bytes and has
On Sun, 17 Jul 2011 18:09:44 -0400 Peter Relson rel...@us.ibm.com wrote:
:The z/OS 1.13 support is for a program to be able to survive the things
:that programs cannot typically avoid -- such as external and I/O
:interrupts, page faults.
:If you can get your program up there (whether by
, SVCed, or PCed to is a
system routine.
Bill Fairchild
Rocket Software
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Binyamin Dissen
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 4:31 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Lines, Bars and ... mini-bars
He did not say the PC instruction will not work above the bar
The Entry Table Entry for a PC routine has not been expanded to 64 bits. Until
it is, a PC routine cannot be above the Bar. It appears that Amode 64 is
supported (but not documented) but the PC routine cannot reside above the Bar
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 14:45:35 +, Bob Shannon wrote:
He did not say the PC instruction will not work above the bar
The Entry Table Entry for a PC routine has not been expanded to 64 bits. Until
it is, a PC routine cannot be above the Bar. It appears that Amode 64 is
supported (but not
z/LINUX uses SVC to invoke the kernel.
Which I find most interesting as it means that, theoretically, one could
write a z/LINUX ABI interface which uses Subsystem SVC screening to run
z/Linux applications on z/OS UNIX.
On Mon, 2011-07-18 at 10:14 -0500, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 10:34:52 -0500, John McKown wrote:
z/LINUX uses SVC to invoke the kernel.
Which I find most interesting as it means that, theoretically, one could
write a z/LINUX ABI interface which uses Subsystem SVC screening to run
z/Linux applications on z/OS UNIX.
fork()? Pipes?
On Mon, 2011-07-18 at 10:47 -0500, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 10:34:52 -0500, John McKown wrote:
z/LINUX uses SVC to invoke the kernel.
Which I find most interesting as it means that, theoretically, one could
write a z/LINUX ABI interface which uses Subsystem SVC screening
Bob Shannon writes:
begin snippet
The entry table for a PC routine has not been expanded to 64 bits. Until it
is, a PC routine cannot be above the Bar. It appears AMODE 64 is supported
(but not documented) but the PC routine cannot reside above the bar.
/end snippet
His first point is a
. What happens inside the
called routine is an independent topic.
Bill Fairchild
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Bob Shannon
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 9:46 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Lines, Bars and ... mini
In
ofa1775815.a71a18dd-on852578d0.00732c2b-852578d0.0079b...@us.ibm.com,
on 07/17/2011
at 06:09 PM, Peter Relson rel...@us.ibm.com said:
If you can get your program up there (whether by yourself or by use
of directed load (LOAD with ADDR64), and if it calls no system
routines of any kind
The z/OS 1.13 support is for a program to be able to survive the things
that programs cannot typically avoid -- such as external and I/O
interrupts, page faults.
If you can get your program up there (whether by yourself or by use of
directed load (LOAD with ADDR64), and if it calls no system
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 12:38:25 -0400, Jim Mulder wrote:
The z/OS 1.13 preview (Feb 15, 2011) says:
http://www-01.ibm.com/cgi-bin/common/ssi/ssialias?infotype=ansubtype=cahtmlfid=897/ENUS211-007
z/OS will be designed to support some programs running in 64-bit storage,
provided that they meet
At 7/10/2011 03:47 PM, Justin R. Bendich wrote:
I agree with Scott and Walter that it must be above the bar if it's
not addressable in AMODE 31. Understand that that's below GAGALAND,
but, yeah, i guess you need another name.
What?? That didn't catch on either
I agree with Scott and Walter that it must be above
the bar if it's not addressable in AMODE 31.
Understand that that's below GAGALAND, but, yeah,
i guess you need another name.
Chris Hoelscher
IDMS DB2 Database Administrator
502-476-2538
You only need to test the programs you don't want to get
On Wed, 6 Jul 2011 10:01:46 -0500 Tom Marchant
m42tom-ibmm...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2011 10:32:57 -0400, Scott Rowe wrote:
If memory is addressable with 31-bits, then it is
below the bar, if not, it is above the bar.
I agree. I think that bar was chosen, not because a bar has
The confusion is caused not merely because people made up their own
nomenclature but also because the thing keeps changing. Once upon a time for
memory above 2G there was no allocation in the 2G - 4G range and this area was
not for executable code. Now the allocation normally is beyond 32G
.)
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 2:23 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] Lines, Bars and ... mini-bars???
In 201107051141.p65bf87f061...@ame7.swcp.com, on 07/05/2011
at 07:43 AM, David Cole dbc...@colesoft.com said:
So what is the name for the 2G to 4G range of storage?
Cash
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 2:23 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] Lines, Bars and ... mini-bars???
In 201107051141.p65bf87f061...@ame7
In 0de6a9840123e547b061ac5b6765c02603a...@exmb-05.ad.wsu.edu, on
07/05/2011
at 11:43 PM, Gibney, Dave gib...@wsu.edu said:
I've never had a problem considering it within the bar. I always
thought of the bar as being 2G thick as opposed to the 2
dimensional line. High School geometry concept :)
In 201107051633.p65gxsbh099...@ame8.swcp.com, on 07/05/2011
at 12:35 PM, David Cole dbc...@colesoft.com said:
LPSW loads scrunched PSWs... LPSW is sorta in the hardware,
isn't it?
Yes, but z/OS control blocks aren't.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 07:43:45 -0400, David Cole dbc...@colesoft.com
wrote:
So I'm working on XDC adding support for debugging execution above
the bar, when I run into a nomenclature problem...
Above the line means 16M.
Above the bar means 4G.
And Below the bar means 2G.
So what is the name for
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
[ snip ]
# z/OS V1.13 is planned to be the last release to support
BPX.DEFAULT.USER. IBM recommends that you either use the
BPX.UNIQUE.USER support that was introduced in z/OS V1.11,
or
So... what exactly is the bar? There seems to be some disagreement.
And that's natural since, being technology developers, we make up our
nomenclature as we go along, so variations in nuances (nuancai?) can
easily arise...
To some, the bar is the 2G line...
At 7/5/2011 11:00 AM, Tom
Bill Fairchild
Rocket Software
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
David Cole
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 8:19 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Lines, Bars and ... mini-bars???
So... what exactly is the bar? There seems
On Wed, 6 Jul 2011 13:34:28 + Bill Fairchild bi...@mainstar.com wrote:
:And just why do we use the word grande to describe machine instructions
that operate on 64-bit addresses and which have the letter G somewhere in the
op code? When did IBM make that official? Why not gargantuan or
Bill Fairchild bi...@mainstar.com of the IBM Mainframe Discussion List
IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu wrote on 07/06/2011 08:34:28 AM:
And just why do we use the word grande to describe machine
instructions that operate on 64-bit addresses and which have the
letter G somewhere in the op code? When did
On Wed, 6 Jul 2011 13:34:28 +, Bill Fairchild bi...@mainstar.com wrote:
A few days ago I composed and sent a post in which I believed that the bar
was the 2GB line because I had just seen a comment statement inside the
IARV64 macro that stated that as a fact. Today I reviewed an IBM SHARE
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 19:15:45 -0500, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
What's the rationale for bit 12? It must be 0 for LPSWE and 1
for LPSW, but in either case a 0 is loaded into the PSW.
In the System/360, bit 12 was the USASCII bit. It controlled the operation
of only a few instructions. UNPK was one.
Until this thread started, I had never even considered the idea that the bar
had any thickness. If memory is addressable with 31-bits, then it is
below the bar, if not, it is above the bar. While I find this discussion
interesting, I have not seen any argument that would cause me to change my
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 19:15:45 -0500, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com wrote:
# Enhancements are planned for the IEBCOPY utility that are intended
to improve performance when copying a partitioned data set (PDS)
to another PDS. In addition, IEBCOPY is planned to exploit 31-bit
storage for
On Wed, 6 Jul 2011 10:32:57 -0400, Scott Rowe wrote:
If memory is addressable with 31-bits, then it is
below the bar, if not, it is above the bar.
I agree. I think that bar was chosen, not because a bar has thickness
but to avoid confusion as to which line was meant when someone said,
above
Tom Marchant wrote:
Scott Rowe wrote:
If memory is addressable with 31-bits, then it is below the bar, if not, it
is
above the bar.
I agree. I think that bar was chosen, not because a bar has thickness
but to avoid confusion as to which line was meant when someone said,
above the line.
I tend
What release were those changes made? I guess I have to start reading the
release notes again.
--
Eric Bielefeld
Systems Programmer
Walt Farrell wfarr...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Yes, originally we had a 2GiB dead space between 2**31 and (2**32)-1, but we
no longer have that.
Instead, we
On Wed, 6 Jul 2011 11:50:05 -0500, Eric Bielefeld eric-ibmm...@wi.rr.com
wrote:
What release were those changes made? I guess I have to start reading the
release notes again.
I'd start with Elpida's presentation, as it gives the details.
In 201107051141.p65bf87f061...@ame7.swcp.com, on 07/05/2011
at 07:43 AM, David Cole dbc...@colesoft.com said:
So what is the name for the 2G to 4G range of storage?
Cash bar g, d r
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see
So I'm working on XDC adding support for debugging execution above
the bar, when I run into a nomenclature problem...
Above the line means 16M.
Above the bar means 4G.
But AMODE(31) supports execution in only the zero to 2G range. For
the 2G to 4G range, you need AMODE(64).
So what is the
I've heard it referred to as the dead zone since it exists but can't be used
by mortals.
Bob Shannon
Rocket Software
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the
@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Lines, Bars and ... mini-bars???
So I'm working on XDC adding support for debugging execution above the bar,
when I run into a nomenclature problem...
Above the line means 16M.
Above the bar means 4G.
But AMODE(31) supports execution in only the zero to 2G range. For the 2G
Unselectable Storage Segment ... ???
Seems a reasonable acronym - shouldn't cause any controversy.
Shane ...
On Tue, Jul 5th, 2011 at 9:43 PM, David Cole wrote:
So what is the name for the 2G to 4G range of storage? Ok, you guys
can go ahead and fight it out. Me? I'm just going to call it
Hi:
isn't the reason it is called a Bar is because it is 2 GB in size and not a
simple 1 byte from 16 MB to 16+1 MB?
Regards,
Gene
In a message dated 7/5/2011 8:09:42 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
ibm-m...@tpg.com.au writes:
Unselectable Storage Segment ... ???
Seems a reasonable
] On Behalf Of
Shane Ginnane
Sent: 05 July 2011 13:10
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Lines, Bars and ... mini-bars???
Unselectable Storage Segment ... ???
Seems a reasonable acronym - shouldn't cause any controversy.
Shane ...
On Tue, Jul 5th, 2011 at 9:43 PM, David Cole wrote:
So what
Don't think so, you have storage above and below both the line and the
bar. So it really is a border between two areas.
Kees.
Gene Hudders eshudd...@aol.com wrote in message
news:50c18.35863b71.3b445...@aol.com...
Hi:
isn't the reason it is called a Bar is because it is 2 GB in size and
not
I suppose another name with multiple meanings will work.
Dead zones are hypoxic (low-oxygen) areas in the world's oceans, the
observed incidences of which have been increasing since oceanographers
began noting them in the 1970s. These occur near inhabited coastlines,
where aquatic life is most
Right, Shane's Unselectable Storage Segment is much better to eliminate
controversy.
Kees.
Rob Schramm rob.schr...@gmail.com wrote in message
news:can3vrrkgvcmn0fedr1tp6v3+txfhuaipftyq-wuvusw49uu...@mail.gmail.com
...
I suppose another name with multiple meanings will work.
Dead zones are
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of David Cole
So I'm working on XDC adding support for debugging execution above
the bar, when I run into a nomenclature problem...
Above the line means 16M.
Above the bar means 4G.
But AMODE(31) supports
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 07:43:45 -0400, David Cole dbc...@colesoft.com wrote:
So I'm working on XDC adding support for debugging execution above
the bar, when I run into a nomenclature problem...
Above the line means 16M.
Above the bar means 4G.
But AMODE(31) supports execution in only the zero to
AFAIK the only fella that grabs storage from the 2G-4G area is Java via an
IBM-internal API
IIRC, the Private Area above the bar begins at 16Gb. Everything below that is
reserved for Java. This change was implemented via PTF.
Bob Shannon
Rocket Software
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of David Cole
So I'm working on XDC adding support for debugging execution above
the bar, when I run into a nomenclature problem...
Above the line means 16M.
Above the bar means 4G.
But AMODE(31) supports execution
Since bars unlike lines do have some thickness I like to think of the bar being
the range from 2G - 4G but that's just me.
Mohammad
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 07:43:45 -0400, David Cole dbc...@colesoft.com
wrote:
So I'm working on XDC adding support for debugging execution above
the bar, when I run
DMZ - DeMemorized Zone.
--
John McKown
Maranatha!
Sent from my Vibrant Android phone.
On Jul 5, 2011 7:23 AM, Vernooij, CP - SPLXM kees.verno...@klm.com
wrote:
Don't think so, you have storage above and below both the line and the
bar. So it really is a border between two areas.
Kees.
Gene
The one and only Shane suggests:
Unselectable Storage Segment
Shane, you are an EVIL, evil man!
Keep up the fine work.
Cheers,,,Steve
Steven F. Conway, CISSP
LA Systems
z/OS Systems Support
Phone: 703.295.1926
steve_con...@ao.uscourts.gov
This gets my vote.
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 8:09 AM, Shane Ginnane ibm-m...@tpg.com.au wrote:
Unselectable Storage Segment ... ???
Seems a reasonable acronym - shouldn't cause any controversy.
Shane ...
--
For IBM-MAIN
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 13:20:58 +, Bob Shannon bshan...@rocketsoftware.com
wrote:
AFAIK the only fella that grabs storage from the 2G-4G area is Java via an
IBM-internal API
IIRC, the Private Area above the bar begins at 16Gb. Everything below that
is reserved for Java. This change was
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 07:43:45 -0400 David Cole dbc...@colesoft.com wrote:
:So I'm working on XDC adding support for debugging execution above
:the bar, when I run into a nomenclature problem...
:Above the line means 16M.
:Above the bar means 4G.
:But AMODE(31) supports execution in only the
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 07:43:45 -0400, David Cole wrote:
So I'm working on XDC adding support for debugging execution above
the bar, when I run into a nomenclature problem...
Above the line means 16M.
Above the bar means 4G.
I think that above the bar means 2G. It is true that the bar was once
Java uses memory in the bar? An IBMer stated that is impossible . I
thought it required an MCL available only on the latest z machines.
--
John McKown
Maranatha!
Sent from my Vibrant Android phone.
On Jul 5, 2011 8:08 AM, Mark Zelden m...@mzelden.com wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 07:43:45 -0400,
Java uses memory in the bar?
Java uses the area for compressed pointers. It doesn't execute there.
Bob Shannon
Rocket Software
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to
z/VM and z/VSE have no problem. z/OS hurls if the PSW instruction
address is above the bar. The reason is that the PSW save area in the
RBs and TCB is still only a doubleword, not a quadword.
On Tue, 2011-07-05 at 17:27 +0300, Binyamin Dissen wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 07:43:45 -0400 David Cole
Above the bar 2G.
Elpida Tzortzatos from IBM (and Ms. VSM) gave an incredibly wonderful
presentation at SHARE in Boston. This not only shows the lines and bars, but
describes how the reserved area for Java works. It also contains the applicable
APARs.
A direct link is -
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 17:27:32 +0300, Binyamin Dissen wrote:
:So what is the name for the 2G to 4G range of storage? Ok, you guys
:can go ahead and fight it out. Me? I'm just going to call it above
:the mini bar.
I vote for within the bar.
There would be the need for special page tables to execute
Found it here:
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/zos/v1r12/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.zos.r12.ieaa200/iea2a2b0496.htm
quote
,LOCALSYSAREA=NO
|,LOCALSYSAREA=YES
|An optional input parameter that specifies whether this is an |
explicit allocation request for 64-bit virtual storage in
Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
John McKown
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 10:50 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Lines, Bars and ... mini-bars???
z/VM and z/VSE have no problem. z/OS hurls if the PSW instruction
address is above the bar. The reason is that the PSW save
At 7/5/2011 12:02 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
Again, not the hardware, but a construct of z/OS which scrunches the
PSW to 64 bits, discarding the upper 32 bits of the program address.
LPSW loads scrunched PSWs... LPSW is sorta in the hardware, isn't it?
Just saying...
Dave Cole
Subject: Re: Lines, Bars and ... mini-bars???
z/VM and z/VSE have no problem. z/OS hurls if the PSW instruction
address is above the bar. The reason is that the PSW save area in the
RBs and TCB is still only a doubleword, not a quadword.
On Tue, 2011-07-05 at 17:27 +0300, Binyamin Dissen
Hi Bruno,
It seems useful to me to have a distinct
shorthand way to refer to the 2G line vs. the 4G
line. Since bar already refers to the 4G line,
using mini-bar to refer to the 2G line appeals to me.
As regards to a name for the 2G-4G area,
DEADZONE is something I came up with back in
: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
John McKown
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 11:15 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Lines, Bars and ... mini-bars???
Found it here:
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/zos/v1r12/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.zos.r12
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 17:10:08 +, Bill Fairchild bi...@mainstar.com wrote:
I believe you mean the USE2GTO32G=»NO|YES keyword, which defaults to NO
and which allows the caller to acquire virtual storage above the 2G
proto-bar but possibly below the 4G quasi-bar, or even up to the 32G
neo-bar.
Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of David Cole
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 11:56 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Lines, Bars and ... mini-bars???
Hi Bruno,
It seems useful to me to have a distinct
shorthand way to refer to the 2G line vs. the 4G
line. Since bar
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 12:38:25 -0400, Jim Mulder wrote:
The z/OS 1.13 preview (Feb 15, 2011) says:
I must have been napping about then. But I checked the IBM-MAIN
archives around mid-February, and I can't readily find a URL for
this. Help!
z/OS will be designed to support some programs running
Try here:
http://www-01.ibm.com/common/ssi/cgi-bin/ssialias?subtype=cainfotype=an
supplier=897letternum=ENUS211-007
or
search ibm.com for 211-007
HTH,
snip
The z/OS 1.13 preview (Feb 15, 2011) says:
I must have been napping about then. But I checked the IBM-MAIN
archives around
On 5 July 2011 13:28, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 12:38:25 -0400, Jim Mulder wrote:
storage constraint relief to applications, particularly those that imbed code
in data areas for performance reasons.
Why would there be an advantage to imbedding code in data
On 7/5/2011 10:28 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
z/OS will be designed to support some programs running in 64-bit storage,
provided that they meet certain restrictions. This is intended to provide
virtual
certain restrictions. Does this restrict ATB execution to contexts
such that the PSW
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 13:17:26 -0700, Edward Jaffe wrote:
The operating system control blocks now handle 64-bit PSWs such that an
interrupt while executing above the bar is supported. No abend occurs.
They put a 64-bit address in a 64-bit PSW? This leaves precious
little room for flags.
-- gil
PSW on a z machine is 128 bits or 16 bytes or 4 fullwords aka a
quadword. z/OS compresses this to a doubleword by assuming that the
instruction address is below 2 GiB and eliminates a lot of the bits
which are always set to 0 because they are currently unused by the
hardware (must be zero?). See
--snip---
Unselectable Storage Segment ... ???
Seems a reasonable acronym - shouldn't cause any controversy.
Shane ...
---unsnip--
Knee-slapper of the finest
On 7/5/2011 2:53 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 13:17:26 -0700, Edward Jaffe wrote:
The operating system control blocks now handle 64-bit PSWs such that an
interrupt while executing above the bar is supported. No abend occurs.
They put a 64-bit address in a 64-bit PSW? This
-snip---
So I'm working on XDC adding support for debugging execution above
the bar, when I run into a nomenclature problem...
Above the line means 16M.
Above the bar means 4G.
But AMODE(31) supports execution in only the
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Rick Fochtman
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 4:38 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Lines, Bars and ... mini-bars???
-snip
-snip--
Since bars unlike lines do have some thickness I like to think of the
bar being the range from 2G - 4G but that's just me.
Mohammad
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 17:52:39 -0500, John McKown wrote:
PSW on a z machine is 128 bits or 16 bytes or 4 fullwords aka a
quadword. z/OS compresses this to a doubleword by assuming that the
instruction address is below 2 GiB and eliminates a lot of the bits
which are always set to 0 because they are
At 11:02 -0500 on 07/05/2011, Paul Gilmartin wrote about Re: Lines,
Bars and ... mini-bars???:
Not very special. The 2 GiB thickness of the bar is a product of
the fertile imagination of z/OS. Other OSes routinely permit use
of storage within that range, and routinely support execution above
83 matches
Mail list logo
