Re: DCBs and DCBEs - Could IBM have done it any worse?
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 20:42:22 -0400 Robert A. Rosenberg hal9...@panix.com wrote: :At 22:44 +0300 on 06/11/2011, Binyamin Dissen wrote about Re: DCBs :and DCBEs - Could IBM have done it any worse?: : :The only thing that I can think of is that IBM was trying to be user :friendly and was concerned that programmers may not have read the :instructions that DCBE's need to be in writable storage and as DCBE's may be :ignored decided that the best approach was to ignore the DCBE if not in the :PSW key. :This analysis fails on two points. :First, if the DCBE resides in writable storage then the programmer :has followed the rules. Zeroing the pointer (and flags) would only be :valid if the DCBE was NOT writable. DFSMS development overlooked special key 9. :Second, it should return a RC when it overrode the programmer's :instructions so that the RC can be used to trigger some action, if :desired, due to the request being unilaterally denied by IBM. Thus :the action is user unfriendly due to the stealth nature of the :zero'ing (ie: Doing it without notifying the program that it was :done). At one time OPEN non-VSAM did not have return codes. You had to check DCBOFOPN to see if it did its job. Seems like that has changed. :I have a vague memory of cases where an operation returns a success :RC but also a subcode that indicates that the classification of :success was due to some requests not being serviced or some :conditions having occurred that allowed the operation to continue in :a degraded mode. This case would, IMO, fall into this type of :situation. IOW: You can continue BUT if you do, it will be without :the routines that were listed in the DCBE being used. OPEN RC=4 seems appropriate, and as DCBE is new code no downward compatibility issue. -- Binyamin Dissen bdis...@dissensoftware.com http://www.dissensoftware.com Director, Dissen Software, Bar Grill - Israel Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me, you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain. I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems, especially those from irresponsible companies. -- 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: Catalog Mapping.
To map each user into a user catalog, perform the following when the user is logged off. Use the Access Method Services manual as reference. 1 - REPRO MERGECAT all datasets with the user's high level qualifier from the master catalog to the desired user catalog. 2 - DEFINE ALIAS to relate the high level qualifier to the same user catalog. A User should have only read access to the master catalog and only update access only to the user catalog where his/her datasets are catalogued. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of jagadishan perumal Sent: Saturday, June 11, 2011 7:49 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Catalog Mapping. Hi, Here in this case Source LPAR A is running OS 1.6 and the New target LPAR B is initialized with OS 1.12. We ran the MVS CBPDO over 1.6 as a driving system but due to version incompatibility some of the other features didnt ran well. Only the Racf details were mapped to our New OS 1.12, Here my concern is that the Old users logging to OS 1.12 Versions are mapped to Master Catalog not to a User Catalog. Also we have defined a New user catalog , but when try relating the Users to User catalog in 1.12 we get a duplication error(Obvious that they are mapped to Master Catalog). Is there a way where we can Map all the uses to a User catalog so that whenever a User tries to Logging to 1.12 they are mapped to User Catalog.And Yes the Dasd are shared across the Machine.Each Lpar has their own Racf Database.Also I saw the Codes given for DBSYNC but does it has the capacity of Mapping it to New user catalog ?. Apology if this is purely related to Racf But this being a catalog managment so thought of getting your expert suggestions. Ofcourse I would just need your suggestion interms of catalog mapping and the other racf related questions will be moved on to Racf-L. -- 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
1021 STP
Hi , Please can some one help in this, we have 2 z9 BC machines . We want to install STP 1021 (Sysplex Timer Protocol) but SBM (IBM Rep) in our region saying its withdrawn from Marketing since June 2010. Can any third party Vendor still selling this STP and Maintaining it. Thanks for your usual cooperation. Best Regards, Azim Syed Info System Specialist Saudi Arabian Airline Jeddah Saudi Arabia -- 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: 1021 STP
On Sun, Jun 12th, 2011 at 8:42 PM, Azim Syed wrote: Hi , Please can some one help in this, we have 2 z9 BC machines . We want to install STP 1021 (Sysplex Timer Protocol) but SBM (IBM Rep) in our region saying its withdrawn from Marketing since June 2010. Can any third party Vendor still selling this STP and Maintaining it. It's not STP that has gone unsupported, but the z9. That includes features and upgrades - see the ibm site and search for z9 withdrawal. Shane ... -- 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 doc numbering question
Not sure about the 121 prefix, but ISTR that S in front of a manual number usually meant for sale by IBM, i.e., they didn't give it to you free for the asking, you had to pay them to get a copy. G as the initial letter was for the free documentation and later L was for Licensed documentation which you could not get unless you licensed the software that was documented by that manual, plus you also had to pay for it (I think). I don't remember when the A letter prefix came into use, and I'm not entirely sure of its meaning, if it has one. For a hardware manual like the one you describe I would think a G was more appropriate than an S, but I could be wrong about that. They also might not have been using any initial letters at all at that time. HTH Peter -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of William Donzelli Sent: Saturday, June 11, 2011 10:45 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: IBM doc numbering question So I am working at cataloging my collection of older IBM documents, and came across: 2540 Card Read Punch Parts Catalog (121-0545-3) Picky question - can I assume that there should be an S prefixing the document number, as in S121-0545-3? I have noticed that my other S/360 (and later) Parts Catalogs are S(something). Did IBM just forget the S when typesetting? Do they imply it? Is there significance to the missing S? I need to know where to file it! Thanks much... -- This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your 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
Re: IBM doc numbering question
snip So I am working at cataloging my collection of older IBM documents, and came across: 2540 Card Read Punch Parts Catalog (121-0545-3) Picky question - can I assume that there should be an S prefixing the document number, as in S121-0545-3? I have noticed that my other S/360 (and later) Parts Catalogs are S(something). Did IBM just forget the S when typesetting? Do they imply it? Is there significance to the missing S? I need to know where to file it! Thanks much... --unsnip If I remember correcvtly, here's what the prefixes meant: G -- Generally available. Customers could get some number of this manual for free S -- SELL manual. Customers could BUY this manual if they desired a copy or two, or however many. Y -- Program Logic. Customers got a single free copy when they had the product. Hardware manuals were provided when you installed the hardware, regardless of any prefix value. IIRC, most of the S/360-related hardware books were G prefixed. Rick -- 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: DCBs and DCBEs - Could IBM have done it any worse?
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 10:01:14 +0300, Binyamin Dissen wrote:
At one time OPEN non-VSAM did not have return codes. You had to check DCBOFOPN
to see if it did its job. Seems like that has changed.
It hasn't changed a whole lot; it's still way easy to get Sx13 ABENDs:
READY
allocate dd(sysin) shr reuse dsn('sys1.maclib(nonesuch)')
READY
call *(iebgener)
DATA SET UTILITY - GENERATE PAGE 0001
IEC141I 013-18,IGG0191B,user,$STCTSO1,SYSIN,4140,MVS3RS,SYS1.MACLIB(NONESUCH)
IKJ56641I IEBGENER ENDED DUE TO ERROR+
READY
-- gil
--
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: retraction ...
On 6/11/2011 2:00 PM, Ed Gould wrote: Of course you are correct. MIM was originally written by dusquene systems ( pittsburg). Both enq and tape parts anyway. When you called you actually talked with a code writer and could seem to see issues in the code as you went through the debugging process. For the life of me I can't remember the owners last name but if I think hard enough his fist name was Glen. He seemed to hire the best of the best people. The FDR people are almost as good but hey when compared to CA( excluding CA-1) almost any product is better. Ed I've spent two days looking through old stuff (not to mention Google), but couldn't find anything. I recall that in the mid-seventies we ran Executor, an initiator replacement from Allen Services, Inc., that significantly (30%) reduced non-billable overhead in MVT scheduling. We also used the Shell Oil Enqueue package to reduce unwanted reserves. A little while later Allen Services introduced a similar package, and I recall it as MIM. Allen Services was bought out a little later, but I don't recall the buyer. So I'm wondering whether MIM is another one of those overloaded acronyms, or whether it's the same package? Gerhard Postpischil Bradford, VT -- 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: retraction ...
Duquesne ? - Legent ? - CA Jay Campbell IBM OS Support Section -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Gerhard Postpischil Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2011 2:23 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: retraction ... On 6/11/2011 2:00 PM, Ed Gould wrote: Of course you are correct. MIM was originally written by dusquene systems ( pittsburg). Both enq and tape parts anyway. When you called you actually talked with a code writer and could seem to see issues in the code as you went through the debugging process. For the life of me I can't remember the owners last name but if I think hard enough his fist name was Glen. He seemed to hire the best of the best people. The FDR people are almost as good but hey when compared to CA( excluding CA-1) almost any product is better. Ed I've spent two days looking through old stuff (not to mention Google), but couldn't find anything. I recall that in the mid-seventies we ran Executor, an initiator replacement from Allen Services, Inc., that significantly (30%) reduced non-billable overhead in MVT scheduling. We also used the Shell Oil Enqueue package to reduce unwanted reserves. A little while later Allen Services introduced a similar package, and I recall it as MIM. Allen Services was bought out a little later, but I don't recall the buyer. So I'm wondering whether MIM is another one of those overloaded acronyms, or whether it's the same package? Gerhard Postpischil Bradford, VT -- 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
BatchPipes/MVS
Is anyone using this product? Is it worth the price (somewhere between $300- $2000/month)? Would you use it if it came as part of z/OS? I've searched the IBM-Main archives and found one question in each of the last four years, but I found that IBM documentation is missing in action. I'm thinking of creating a SHARE requirement that asks IBM to do something with it, but that's ineffective if nobody uses it. For the most current documentation, see the Redbook, Batch Modernization on z/OS, http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/abstracts/sg247779.html?Open (SG24- 7779). This boasts our friend, Martin Packer, as one of the authors. Thanks, Cheryl -- 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: retraction ...
Bernard, No, the original writer was duquesne(sp?) systems out of Pittsburgh. If memory serves me it was written for my company by them. They had also written QCM a performance management system. They also wrote PMO (iirc LLA put them out) I think they also wrote Quickfetch which was also superseded by IBM. We tried out all of them and I think we were so short on memory that we turned away both of them. MIm really worked well for us as operators were forever vering tape drives on or off system incorrectly. MIM was also fixing issues with job scheduling. Tw Allen systems bought them from duquesne. Ed Sent from my iPad On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:23 PM, Gerhard Postpischil gerh...@valley.net wrote: On 6/11/2011 2:00 PM, Ed Gould wrote: Of course you are correct. MIM was originally written by dusquene systems ( pittsburg). Both enq and tape parts anyway. When you called you actually talked with a code writer and could seem to see issues in the code as you went through the debugging process. For the life of me I can't remember the owners last name but if I think hard enough his fist name was Glen. He seemed to hire the best of the best people. The FDR people are almost as good but hey when compared to CA( excluding CA-1) almost any product is better. Ed I've spent two days looking through old stuff (not to mention Google), but couldn't find anything. I recall that in the mid-seventies we ran Executor, an initiator replacement from Allen Services, Inc., that significantly (30%) reduced non-billable overhead in MVT scheduling. We also used the Shell Oil Enqueue package to reduce unwanted reserves. A little while later Allen Services introduced a similar package, and I recall it as MIM. Allen Services was bought out a little later, but I don't recall the buyer. So I'm wondering whether MIM is another one of those overloaded acronyms, or whether it's the same package? Gerhard Postpischil Bradford, VT -- 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 doc numbering question
Hardware manuals were provided when you installed the hardware, regardless of any prefix value. IIRC, most of the S/360-related hardware books were G prefixed. Thanks so far, the pair of you. So when filing these things away on the shelf, would it be safe to assume that the initial S or G or whatever the first letter of a four character alphanumeric prefix is, can be ignored? For example, would: S100-1234-0 G100-1234-1 S101-1234-1 S101-1235-1 G101-1235-2 be in correct order? -- Will -- 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 doc numbering question
I remember (years ago), when I was working for a Canadian Insurance company, the local IBM rep told us we should be filing ignoring the first letter. But, I explained to him that our admins (secretaries - not sysprogs) didn't know the secret handshake. So, imo, I don't think it matters. Pick a system, and stay consistent. - Ted MacNEIL eamacn...@yahoo.ca Twitter: @TedMacNEIL -Original Message- From: William Donzelli wdonze...@gmail.com Sender: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 16:06:37 To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Reply-To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: IBM doc numbering question Hardware manuals were provided when you installed the hardware, regardless of any prefix value. IIRC, most of the S/360-related hardware books were G prefixed. Thanks so far, the pair of you. So when filing these things away on the shelf, would it be safe to assume that the initial S or G or whatever the first letter of a four character alphanumeric prefix is, can be ignored? For example, would: S100-1234-0 G100-1234-1 S101-1234-1 S101-1235-1 G101-1235-2 be in correct order? -- Will -- 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: BatchPipes/MVS
If I correctly understand the functioning of Batchpipes in that document, ISTM that it has the disadvantage that if one end of the pipe fails for any reason, then *both* ends would have to be rerun. That can be more disruptive and batch-window-time-consuming than just needing to rerun one of them, perhaps even more so for really large volume batch applications which one would think would gain the most benefit from this technology. Sometimes it not what a tool does when everything works correctly that makes or breaks the decision to use it or not, it is what happens when things fail that is the most crucial. After all, even in the days of 70xx hardware checkpointing was used, e.g. for really large all-day tape sorts. No one wanted to rerun the whole-day process all over from the beginning when a work tape inevitably snapped 20 hours into the process. OTOH I personally would love to have it available to experiment with, but that's just because I'm a dyed-in-the-wool techno-geek. Just my USD$0.02 worth. Peter P.S. - I found the OS/380 bookshelf on which BatchPipes OS/390 manuals are located, and 3 of the 4 manuals are available as PDF's: http://publibfp.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/Shelves/ASF1BS11 I don't know if those are the latest ones, but they were the latest I could find. HTH -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Cheryl Watson Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2011 3:26 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: BatchPipes/MVS Is anyone using this product? Is it worth the price (somewhere between $300-$2000/month)? Would you use it if it came as part of z/OS? I've searched the IBM-Main archives and found one question in each of the last four years, but I found that IBM documentation is missing in action. I'm thinking of creating a SHARE requirement that asks IBM to do something with it, but that's ineffective if nobody uses it. For the most current documentation, see the Redbook, Batch Modernization on z/OS, http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/abstracts/sg247779.html?Open (SG24- 7779). This boasts our friend, Martin Packer, as one of the authors. -- This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: DCBs and DCBEs - Could IBM have done it any worse?
On 6/12/2011 9:24 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
allocate dd(sysin) shr reuse dsn('sys1.maclib(nonesuch)')
READY
call *(iebgener)
DATA SET UTILITY - GENERATE PAGE 0001
IEC141I 013-18,IGG0191B,user,$STCTSO1,SYSIN,4140,MVS3RS,SYS1.MACLIB(NONESUCH)
IKJ56641I IEBGENER ENDED DUE TO ERROR+
READY
You must already have SYSPRINT allocated somewhere (not shown) or IEBGENER would
have ended with a simple OPEN failure for SYSPRINT sans abend:
call *(iebgener)
IEC130I SYSPRINT DD STATEMENT MISSING
READY
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
310-338-0400 x318
edja...@phoenixsoftware.com
http://www.phoenixsoftware.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: DCBs and DCBEs - Could IBM have done it any worse?
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 14:33:39 -0700, Edward Jaffe wrote:
On 6/12/2011 9:24 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
allocate dd(sysin) shr reuse dsn('sys1.maclib(nonesuch)')
READY
call *(iebgener)
DATA SET UTILITY - GENERATE PAGE
0001
IEC141I
013-18,IGG0191B,user,$STCTSO1,SYSIN,4140,MVS3RS,SYS1.MACLIB(NONESUCH)
IKJ56641I IEBGENER ENDED DUE TO ERROR+
READY
You must already have SYSPRINT allocated somewhere (not shown) or IEBGENER
would
have ended with a simple OPEN failure for SYSPRINT sans abend:
call *(iebgener)
IEC130I SYSPRINT DD STATEMENT MISSING
READY
That just shows it's inconsistent. Sometimes RC0; sometimes Sx13.
I suspect (with no evidence whatever) the utility checks for a DDNAME
allocation (but why bother?) If it's absent, exit with return code;
if it's present, attempt the OPEN which may ABEND.
IIRC, our TSO LOGON proc allocates SYSIN and SYSPRINT to terminal.
IBM recommends this by example in:
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/ikj4b4b0/3.2.3.2
Title: z/OS V1R12.0 TSO/E Customization
Document Number: SA22-7783-11
-- gil
--
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: DCBs and DCBEs - Could IBM have done it any worse?
On 6/12/2011 3:00 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote: That just shows it's inconsistent. Sometimes RC0; sometimes Sx13. I suspect (with no evidence whatever) the utility checks for a DDNAME allocation (but why bother?) If it's absent, exit with return code; if it's present, attempt the OPEN which may ABEND. No. IEC130I is the standard message produced by OPEN when a DD name is missing. -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 831 Parkview Drive North El Segundo, CA 90245 310-338-0400 x318 edja...@phoenixsoftware.com http://www.phoenixsoftware.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: DCBs and DCBEs - Could IBM have done it any worse?
On 13/06/2011 02:24 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
It hasn't changed a whole lot; it's still way easy to get Sx13 ABENDs:
READY
allocate dd(sysin) shr reuse dsn('sys1.maclib(nonesuch)')
READY
call *(iebgener)
DATA SET UTILITY - GENERATE PAGE 0001
IEC141I 013-18,IGG0191B,user,$STCTSO1,SYSIN,4140,MVS3RS,SYS1.MACLIB(NONESUCH)
IKJ56641I IEBGENER ENDED DUE TO ERROR+
READY
-- gil
Gil,
an unfair test.
The test should be
OPEN (TEXTDCB,,CONVDCB,(OUTPUT),PRINTDCB, X
(OUTPUT))
LTR RF,RF
BZ OPEN_OK
various error testing routines
wrapped of course in the rest of the module, compiled, linked and
executed with the appropriate JCL.
I don't, without going top the MVS 3.8 source know the extent of
IEBGENER's error checking
Ken
--
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: retraction ...
MIM is pretty good but I am bias, worked for Legent Scott J Ford From: John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Sent: Sat, June 11, 2011 5:19:36 PM Subject: Re: retraction ... I think CA-7 is fairly decent, but quite complicated. OT: I'm in the acute care hospital and doing well. -- John McKown Maranatha! Sent from my Vibrant Android phone. On Jun 11, 2011 12:55 PM, Ed Gould ps2...@yahoo.com wrote: Sam, Of course you are correct. MIM was originally written by dusquene systems ( pittsburg). Both enq and tape parts anyway. When you called you actually talked with a code writer and could seem to see issues in the code as you went through the debugging process. For the life of me I can't remember the owners last name but if I think hard enough his fist name was Glen. He seemed to hire the best of the best people. The FDR people are almost as good but hey when compared to CA( excluding CA-1) almost any product is better. Ed Ps MIM was really an excellent product and while not totally bug free it was top shelf Sent from my iPad On Jun 10, 2011, at 1:52 PM, Knutson, Sam sknut...@geico.com wrote: I think you mean MIM Ed -- 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: BatchPipes/MVS
I agree. Also our programmers would most likely declare it too complicated to use. Personally, if I want to do this sort of thing, I use Co:Z from Dovetailed Technologies to run under z/OS UNIX using its piping. It is possible to run normal batch work via a UNIX shell. It is just a bit more difficulty to allocate the datasets properly. -- John McKown Maranatha! Sent from my Vibrant Android phone. On Jun 12, 2011 4:21 PM, Farley, Peter x23353 peter.far...@broadridge.com wrote: If I correctly understand the functioning of Batchpipes in that document, ISTM that it has the disadvantage that if one end of the pipe fails for any reason, then *both* ends would have to be rerun. That can be more disruptive and batch-window-time-consuming than just needing to rerun one of them, perhaps even more so for really large volume batch applications which one would think would gain the most benefit from this technology. Sometimes it not what a tool does when everything works correctly that makes or breaks the decision to use it or not, it is what happens when things fail that is the most crucial. After all, even in the days of 70xx hardware checkpointing was used, e.g. for really large all-day tape sorts. No one wanted to rerun the whole-day process all over from the beginning when a work tape inevitably snapped 20 hours into the process. OTOH I personally would love to have it available to experiment with, but that's just because I'm a dyed-in-the-wool techno-geek. Just my USD$0.02 worth. Peter P.S. - I found the OS/380 bookshelf on which BatchPipes OS/390 manuals are located, and 3 of the 4 manuals are available as PDF's: http://publibfp.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/Shelves/ASF1BS11 I don't know if those are the latest ones, but they were the latest I could find. HTH -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Cheryl Watson Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2011 3:26 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: BatchPipes/MVS Is anyone using this product? Is it worth the price (somewhere between $300-$2000/month)? Wou... -- This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / si... -- 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: BatchPipes/MVS
If you have seriously large quantities of data to process in a short amount of time, it works wonders. used it back when it was new, had 5 jobs reading multi tape volumes feeding the rest of the 20 batch jobs running various sorts appl programs. works great when all goes well, a real bear when one the jobs fails and you have to restart it all. --- On Sun, 6/12/11, Cheryl Watson cwwalke...@gmail.com wrote: From: Cheryl Watson cwwalke...@gmail.com Subject: BatchPipes/MVS To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Sunday, June 12, 2011, 3:25 PM Is anyone using this product? Is it worth the price (somewhere between $300- $2000/month)? Would you use it if it came as part of z/OS? I've searched the IBM-Main archives and found one question in each of the last four years, but I found that IBM documentation is missing in action. I'm thinking of creating a SHARE requirement that asks IBM to do something with it, but that's ineffective if nobody uses it. For the most current documentation, see the Redbook, Batch Modernization on z/OS, http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/abstracts/sg247779.html?Open (SG24- 7779). This boasts our friend, Martin Packer, as one of the authors. Thanks, Cheryl -- 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: DCBs and DCBEs - Could IBM have done it any worse?
At 10:01 +0300 on 06/12/2011, Binyamin Dissen wrote about Re: DCBs and DCBEs - Could IBM have done it any worse?: :I have a vague memory of cases where an operation returns a success :RC but also a subcode that indicates that the classification of :success was due to some requests not being serviced or some :conditions having occurred that allowed the operation to continue in :a degraded mode. This case would, IMO, fall into this type of :situation. IOW: You can continue BUT if you do, it will be without :the routines that were listed in the DCBE being used. OPEN RC=4 seems appropriate, and as DCBE is new code no downward compatibility issue. I agree. A warning message should also be issued so that there is some documentation of what went wrong for post analysis. A multi-DCB/ACB open would need to require the program to step though the CBs to find the error flags (but this is normal in that situation) and which CB had the partial failure. -- 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
BDT and PDSEs
The SHARE MVSE project is reviewing some older requirements and this one came as a surprise to me. It's requirement SSSHARE012987 and was submitted on 11/01/1994: We run and maintain MVS in two sites: New York and New Jersey. We currently run DFSMS/MVS 1.1 at both these sites and plan to migrate to DFSMS/MVS 1.2 within the next 6 months. It is our intent to exploit PDSEs. We have been informed that the MVS BDT File to File feature will not support the transmission of PDSE's. The inability of BDT to transmit PDSE's will severely restrict our ability to exploit PDSEs since we transmit 100's of load modules between sites on a daily basis. Is this still true today, and if so, what do sites use to transfer PDSEs? Thanks so much, Cheryl == Cheryl Watson Watson Walker, Inc. www.watsonwalker.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: BatchPipes/MVS
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:46:31 -0500, John McKown wrote: Personally, if I want to do this sort of thing, I use Co:Z from Dovetailed Technologies to run under z/OS UNIX using its piping. It is possible to run normal batch work via a UNIX shell. It is just a bit more difficulty to allocate the datasets properly. FSVO possible ... normal. I find it impractical to deal with multi-file tapes, such as SMP/E RELFILE except in legacy batch. DYNALLOC lacks any analogue of RETAIN or of VOL=REF, so I must remount the tape before opening every data set. -- gil -- 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 doc numbering question
On 12 June 2011 16:06, William Donzelli wdonze...@gmail.com wrote: So when filing these things away on the shelf, would it be safe to assume that the initial S or G or whatever the first letter of a four character alphanumeric prefix is, can be ignored? For example, would: S100-1234-0 G100-1234-1 S101-1234-1 S101-1235-1 G101-1235-2 Yes. The first character (always a letter, to my knowledge) is called the Use Key. The values I know of, with their old definitions are: G - Generally available to anyone at no charge S - Sell to anyone. Available to IBM customers free of charge in quantities sufficient to meet their normal needs L - Licensed material. A use charge applies in some cases, but the manual remains the property of IBM. Z - IBM Internal Use Only. Not (in theory) available to customers. [Use Key S items led to a number of problems in the old days, because the branch office was billed internally for its customers' orders for them, but evidently lacked the authority to refuse them. In the 1970s the university where I worked started ordering S manuals for students, and selling them at the list price, while getting them for nothing from IBM. The BO tried to charge for them, I pointed out the official wording for Use Key S, and some diplomacy ensued, which resulted in staffers being able to order S books free, but with an agreement that we would not sell or give them to students. Since then IBM's policies on charging for manuals, and of course the very existence of paper manuals, has changed a lot.] The Use Keys came into use somewhere in the late 1960s. Before that, the same numbering system was used, but without the Use Keys, so it makes complete sense to sort without respect to the first alpha character as you show above. But if you have a mix of numbers with and without, you need to parse it determine what you have. Of course the trailing revision number may not be present, and on occasion there may be no dashes. There was historically, from observation, some method to the second and in some cases subsequent characters after the Use Key, though I never saw it documented. And that too seems to have changed over the years. A few things from memory (failing rapidly): Second character: A - hardware books BOF - Bill Of Forms - order number for a group of manuals C - the most common letter for software manuals (operating systems, compilers, etc.) G - Redbooks (formerly the various System Centre, ITSO, etc. books of various colours) H - Less mainstream Program Products mostly N - Technical Newsletters (updates to manuals). See also Q and T. Q - Pseudo order number for an old version (so GQ23-9876 might get you GC12-3456-5 when the -6 version was current) R - IBM Education - course material T - Same as Q except one version older. (Or maybe I have Q and T backwards) V - Audio/Visual stuff, films, slides, presentations, later video tapes X - Reference Cards, booklets, summaries Y - PLMs (logic manuals) Z - found only as ZZ - IBM internal use only n - (numeric) general overviews and more salesy than technical pubs. Also some things like binders and other non books. But some very old technical pubs without a use key were all numeric. Third character: Normally numeric; when alphabetic indicated a microfiche publication, e.g. SCD2-1234 Third and fourth characters taken together give a clue as to the geographic origin of the publication, when not in the USA. 09 - mostly Toronto lab, but some European pubs at times 33 - Hursley? Well, I digress... But it's logically still Friday. Tony H. -- 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
Non-cancelable task - tso
Hi, I tried Purging the tso but it was not coming down. The commands used to stop tso was : 1) stop tso - No luck 2) force tso,arm - No luck 3) force tso,arm,a=ASID - No luck I even tried looking for any outstanding message in console but there were no outstanding messages at all. Could anyone please guide me in this. Regards, Jags -- 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: Non-cancelable task - tso
I think you can try P TSO command, which will make your TSO down. Regards Saurabh On 6/13/2011 10:10 AM, jagadishan perumal wrote: Hi, I tried Purging the tso but it was not coming down. The commands used to stop tso was : 1) stop tso - No luck 2) force tso,arm - No luck 3) force tso,arm,a=ASID - No luck I even tried looking for any outstanding message in console but there were no outstanding messages at all. Could anyone please guide me in this. Regards, Jags -- 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: Non-cancelable task - tso
Hi, I tried with P TSO too but no luck. Regards, Jags On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:14 AM, saurabh khandelwal saurabh.khandel...@oracle.com wrote: I think you can try P TSO command, which will make your TSO down. Regards Saurabh On 6/13/2011 10:10 AM, jagadishan perumal wrote: Hi, I tried Purging the tso but it was not coming down. The commands used to stop tso was : 1) stop tso - No luck 2) force tso,arm - No luck 3) force tso,arm,a=ASID - No luck I even tried looking for any outstanding message in console but there were no outstanding messages at all. Could anyone please guide me in this. Regards, Jags -- 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: Non-cancelable task - tso
Can you please see, if you are getting any messages, while issuing this command. Regards Saurabh On 6/13/2011 10:16 AM, jagadishan perumal wrote: Hi, I tried with P TSO too but no luck. Regards, Jags On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:14 AM, saurabh khandelwal saurabh.khandel...@oracle.com mailto:saurabh.khandel...@oracle.com wrote: I think you can try P TSO command, which will make your TSO down. Regards Saurabh On 6/13/2011 10:10 AM, jagadishan perumal wrote: Hi, I tried Purging the tso but it was not coming down. The commands used to stop tso was : 1) stop tso - No luck 2) force tso,arm - No luck 3) force tso,arm,a=ASID - No luck I even tried looking for any outstanding message in console but there were no outstanding messages at all. Could anyone please guide me in this. Regards, Jags -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu mailto: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: Non-cancelable task - tso
Hi, When I give P TSO - Non- cancelable task - issue force arm Then, I gave : force tso,arm - command accepted. When I do D A,TSO - still the tso address space is up. then, I gave : force tso,arm,A=asid, but still the tso task is up. Regards, Jags On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:17 AM, saurabh khandelwal saurabh.khandel...@oracle.com wrote: Can you please see, if you are getting any messages, while issuing this command. Regards Saurabh On 6/13/2011 10:16 AM, jagadishan perumal wrote: Hi, I tried with P TSO too but no luck. Regards, Jags On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:14 AM, saurabh khandelwal saurabh.khandel...@oracle.com wrote: I think you can try P TSO command, which will make your TSO down. Regards Saurabh On 6/13/2011 10:10 AM, jagadishan perumal wrote: Hi, I tried Purging the tso but it was not coming down. The commands used to stop tso was : 1) stop tso - No luck 2) force tso,arm - No luck 3) force tso,arm,a=ASID - No luck I even tried looking for any outstanding message in console but there were no outstanding messages at all. Could anyone please guide me in this. Regards, Jags -- 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: Non-cancelable task - tso
Can you confirm if any of your TSO users are still logged on to System. If yes, then cancel that user id and then try to stop TSO with P TSO command. Regards Saurabh On 6/13/2011 10:19 AM, jagadishan perumal wrote: Hi, When I give P TSO - Non- cancelable task - issue force arm Then, I gave : force tso,arm - command accepted. When I do D A,TSO - still the tso address space is up. then, I gave : force tso,arm,A=asid, but still the tso task is up. Regards, Jags On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:17 AM, saurabh khandelwal saurabh.khandel...@oracle.com mailto:saurabh.khandel...@oracle.com wrote: Can you please see, if you are getting any messages, while issuing this command. Regards Saurabh On 6/13/2011 10:16 AM, jagadishan perumal wrote: Hi, I tried with P TSO too but no luck. Regards, Jags On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:14 AM, saurabh khandelwal saurabh.khandel...@oracle.com mailto:saurabh.khandel...@oracle.com wrote: I think you can try P TSO command, which will make your TSO down. Regards Saurabh On 6/13/2011 10:10 AM, jagadishan perumal wrote: Hi, I tried Purging the tso but it was not coming down. The commands used to stop tso was : 1) stop tso - No luck 2) force tso,arm - No luck 3) force tso,arm,a=ASID - No luck I even tried looking for any outstanding message in console but there were no outstanding messages at all. Could anyone please guide me in this. Regards, Jags -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu mailto: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: Non-cancelable task - tso
Hi, I did D TS,L and there are no active TSO users. Regards, Jags On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:22 AM, saurabh khandelwal saurabh.khandel...@oracle.com wrote: Can you confirm if any of your TSO users are still logged on to System. If yes, then cancel that user id and then try to stop TSO with P TSO command. Regards Saurabh On 6/13/2011 10:19 AM, jagadishan perumal wrote: Hi, When I give P TSO - Non- cancelable task - issue force arm Then, I gave : force tso,arm - command accepted. When I do D A,TSO - still the tso address space is up. then, I gave : force tso,arm,A=asid, but still the tso task is up. Regards, Jags On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:17 AM, saurabh khandelwal saurabh.khandel...@oracle.com wrote: Can you please see, if you are getting any messages, while issuing this command. Regards Saurabh On 6/13/2011 10:16 AM, jagadishan perumal wrote: Hi, I tried with P TSO too but no luck. Regards, Jags On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:14 AM, saurabh khandelwal saurabh.khandel...@oracle.com wrote: I think you can try P TSO command, which will make your TSO down. Regards Saurabh On 6/13/2011 10:10 AM, jagadishan perumal wrote: Hi, I tried Purging the tso but it was not coming down. The commands used to stop tso was : 1) stop tso - No luck 2) force tso,arm - No luck 3) force tso,arm,a=ASID - No luck I even tried looking for any outstanding message in console but there were no outstanding messages at all. Could anyone please guide me in this. Regards, Jags -- 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: Non-cancelable task - tso
Are you running any product on this LPAR. Also try 3270 address space and then recycle TSO . Regards Saurabh On 6/13/2011 10:32 AM, jagadishan perumal wrote: Hi, I did D TS,L and there are no active TSO users. Regards, Jags On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:22 AM, saurabh khandelwal saurabh.khandel...@oracle.com mailto:saurabh.khandel...@oracle.com wrote: Can you confirm if any of your TSO users are still logged on to System. If yes, then cancel that user id and then try to stop TSO with P TSO command. Regards Saurabh On 6/13/2011 10:19 AM, jagadishan perumal wrote: Hi, When I give P TSO - Non- cancelable task - issue force arm Then, I gave : force tso,arm - command accepted. When I do D A,TSO - still the tso address space is up. then, I gave : force tso,arm,A=asid, but still the tso task is up. Regards, Jags On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:17 AM, saurabh khandelwal saurabh.khandel...@oracle.com mailto:saurabh.khandel...@oracle.com wrote: Can you please see, if you are getting any messages, while issuing this command. Regards Saurabh On 6/13/2011 10:16 AM, jagadishan perumal wrote: Hi, I tried with P TSO too but no luck. Regards, Jags On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:14 AM, saurabh khandelwal saurabh.khandel...@oracle.com mailto:saurabh.khandel...@oracle.com wrote: I think you can try P TSO command, which will make your TSO down. Regards Saurabh On 6/13/2011 10:10 AM, jagadishan perumal wrote: Hi, I tried Purging the tso but it was not coming down. The commands used to stop tso was : 1) stop tso - No luck 2) force tso,arm - No luck 3) force tso,arm,a=ASID - No luck I even tried looking for any outstanding message in console but there were no outstanding messages at all. Could anyone please guide me in this. Regards, Jags -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu mailto: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 doc numbering question
The values I know of, with their old definitions are: This is exactly the information I am looking for - many thanks! The Use Keys came into use somewhere in the late 1960s. That would explain why my original example for the 2540 had no S, but the equivalent manuals for other S/360 era machines did - clearly a transition. Before that, the same numbering system was used, but without the Use Keys, so it makes complete sense to sort without respect to the first alpha character as you show above. Yes, while plowing through a bunch of 650 docs, I see no Use Keys, but maybe something similar, as some have an alpha character either on or not on your list, and some have just two numbers. The four number middle section seems consistent. Of course the trailing revision number may not be present, and on occasion there may be no dashes. I am not too worried about the revision suffix format. I will just file the different revisions in numeric order. A few things from memory (failing rapidly): This pretty much matches what I am seeing. Y - PLMs (logic manuals) Maintenance in general. n - (numeric) general overviews and more salesy than technical pubs. I have noticed a fair amount of these are Parts Catalogs - S131, S241, S124. Well, I digress... But it's logically still Friday. I think my plan is to file these docs ignoring the Use Key, but using everything else. And then there is all the stuff that has no number... -- Will -- 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
