Would he need to execute the 'chroot' and 'zipl' commands after
copying the disk contents?
Thomas Denier
Thomas Jefferson University Hospital
-Scott Rohling wrote: -
The easiest thing to do is bring the guest down and LINK these 2
disks
from another running Linux .. mount them as /mnt
-Larry Bernacki wrote: -
I am setting up 4 3592 drives in a 3584 Tape Library,
attached via FCP thru a Fabric switch. I can issue lstape, lsscsi
and lszfp commands which show the drives. I am now wanting to call
for a tape load/mount to ensure the setup is correct. I eventually
-John McKown wrote: -
I download data from z/OS. And I do it repetitively. Basically, run a
job on z/OS to generate a file. Download the file. Process on Linux.
Repeat. I do some intermediate work on z/OS between runs. This work
changes the output of the job. I want to compare the output
-Andrew Wiley wrote: -
I'm trying to research the usefulness of an older IBM mainframe in a
computer science class. The mainframe in question is an IBM 9672 RB6,
which, as I understand it, was first sold in 1998. So it's reasonably
old. Would this machine be able to run a few VM's of
- Chris Zimmerman wrote: -
I mentioned this previously on the list, but I thought I'd throw
this out there again.
We are in a POC with SLES10SP1 and Oracle on zSeries as a possible
replacement for a major Oracle implementation internally. We have
SLES10 up and running in a native LPAR
-Tom Duerbusch wrote: -
I've asked before but now I know more about what I'm talking about
(if you can believe that G).
We are at a conversion point. Our CICS print output was being coded
to a hardware box (IDATA box). And those are going away. The new
printers that are wanted, are IP
-Basim Thayyil wrote: -
We are thinking about moving Tivoli Storage Manager from z/OS to
z/Linux Guest.
Any one out there using IBM ATLs with z/Linux for TSM?
Also wondering if SLES 10 SP1 supports 3592
Any advice would be more than welcome
We did a similar migration in late 2004. The
-Lionel B. Dyck wrote: -
I've heard several good reasons to have my zlinux images use dasd
that is on the fibre connected san and a few for using the old
tried and true dasd. What I'd like to find out is what is true and
what isn't - basically what is considered the best practice for
We have a z800 with a z/VM LPAR and three z/OS LPARs. The z/VM LPAR
supports two Linux guests used to host test and production TSM
servers. We have to relocate some mainframe peripherals to accomodate
installation of new non-mainframe equipment. Specifically, we have
to relocate a 2074 console
-Peggy Andrews wrote: -
I use FTP to transfer the file from zLINUX1 to zLINUX2
Results:
1st ftp - 684MB in 2:47 (3.8MB/s)
2nd ftp - 684MB in 1:34 (6.88MB/s)
First question, why is the transfer better on the 2nd ftp of the
file?
I suspect that the second FTP found most of the file
Adam Thornton:
ned is now freely available, and works wonderfully.
If I remember correctly, Ned still requires a network connection to
a license manager, even though there is no charge for the license.
This tends to make Ned unavailable in precisely the situations where
it would be most
We have a Suse 8 Linux system running under z/VM. It is used solely to
support a TSM server and associated monitoring and automation facilities.
The monitoring facilities include a Perl script that uses X Windows
dialog boxes to report errors. This past Sunday the system got through
the time
This reminds me of a story abe simpson voice . . . back in the old days
. . . /abe simpson voice Some sights that ran large s/360's and
s/370's
actually had these boxes plumbed into the duct work for heating, i.e. to
help heat a building or assist in heating, etc..
I can remember reading
We finally pinned down the cause of the lost packets. The NIC on the
client system was configured to autonegotiate Ethernet settings.
As sometimes happens, the negotiation process finished with the client
system and the Ethernet switch using different duplex settings.
It is still not clear why
We have a Suse 8 Linux system running under VM. The system supports a
TSM server. TSM is a networked backup system. Clients send copies of
new and changed files over the network to the TSM server, and the TSM
server stores the copies on tape, disk, or both. We are in the process
of migrating TSM
I have never observed any kind of packet loss with our Linux guests. Are
you using OSA or Hipersockets for client connections? Is there any IP
conflict?
I don't think the Linux system is playing any role in the packet loss.
Pings from our z/OS system to the client show similar packet loss
One question: is the Linux guest directly attached to a network adapter,
or on a guest LAN routed behind a VM or Linux stack? If the 2nd case,
there may be something going on before the Linux system gets to see the
packets. The VM stack definitely doesn't understand the latest and
greatest
We are in the process of implementing a 5.2.2.0 TSM server running under
zSeries Linux. We initially let the location of the accounting log
default to the current directory for the dsmserv command. We are now
trying to have the accounting log placed in /var/log. I added code
to a copy of the
We have installed a TSM 5.2.2 server under Suse Enterprise Server 8
running on zSeries hardware. The TSM code includes a script named
dsmserv.rc which accepts 'start' and 'stop' as arguments in the same
way as scripts Suse supplies to control built-in services. The dsmserv.rc
script does not
Are your 3590s really FCP scsi drives to the world or are they also
accessed by an A20 tape controller? The newest 3590s come as FCP scsi
drives, but are attached to an A20 tape controller which presents them as
FICON/ESCON drives to the attached systems. You can't access them as
native FCP
If you already are paying for TSM on z/OS and can afford to buy another
standard engine processor every so often as the CPU requirement
increases, then you already have your answer. It's got the bells and
whistles you want, and silo integration via your standard tape
management system on
Taking advantage of the ATL if possible
As other people have noted, TSM under Linux will meet the stated
requirements. It will work with a 3494 ATL. However, it will not
work with tape drives inherited from a z/OS system; the Linux
TSM server only supports tape drives using the Fiber Channel
We are considerng a file organization with rather unusual characteristics,
and are wondering if we are likely to run into performance pathologies.
The proposed file organization would be used to provide a TSM server with
a family of sequential storage pools sharing a single device class with
We are probably going to be running a TSM server under mainframe Linux.
One of the issues we are looking into is the performance impact of
different file systems. TSM manages disk I/O in the same way as many
database packages; it preallocates large files and then overwrites
specific blocks as
24 matches
Mail list logo
