Re: CHPID dynamic Activation error
Jake, Have you tried running 'Channel Problem Determination' function from the SE on the affected chpid? Depending on the System z server you have and the microcode level, you will get some useful diagnostics from this. Hope this helps. Roger -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: When should we ACCEPT DB2 PTFs?
I can't recall ever seeing such an ACCEPT recommendation from IBM, probably because your own installation maintenance practices play such a major role here. The only reason for not ACCEPTing PTFs (USERMODS and APAR fixes should typically never be accepted) is because you might need to RESTORE a PTF; but if you have been successfully running with a PTF installed for months, it is highly unlikely you would ever need to RESTORE it, and even if some subsequent error HOLD was placed on the PTF, if it is not an issue that has caused problems in your environment it is just as likely that a resolving PTF will become available allowing you to go forward in maintenance rather than having to back out the PTF. I have even had a few rare cases where I have bypassed an ERROR HOLD to force an ACCEPT of a PTF and clean up a zone when the nature of the error HOLD was such that it would clearly never be an issue for us. The most likely point at which you might actually need to do a RESTORE would be shortly after another mass APPLY of PTF's (not just any next APPLY). Failure to ACCEPT previous mass maintenance for PTFs already running in production sometime before doing the next mass APPLY means any RESTORE after that point is likely to also force a back out of PTFs with which you have been successfully running for months. I would expect this to add unnecessary risk by placing your system in configurations further at variance from those with which IBM and others (including your own installation) have done rigorous RSU-level testing. Joel C. Ewing On 11/22/2013 05:30 PM, Mike Schwab wrote: How about not until IBM tells you to? As in you must accept before apply this PTF? On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 8:40 AM, Staller, Allan allan.stal...@kbmg.com wrote: IMO, the short answer is just before the next APPLY. HTH, -- Joel C. Ewing,Bentonville, AR jcew...@acm.org -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Questions about ESTAE(X)
I hate it when I re-read my posts and see obvious omissions, such as the omission of non- before retryable in the following: SDWACLUP is on not only for TERM=YES but also for all other retryable abends. A point about TERM=YES: that option is available to unauthorized programs, whereas resmgrs are not. While an unauthorized cannot obtain authorized resources, it is still possible it has some protocol that wants things being done upon cancel (such as needing to write something to a data set). Peter Relson z/OS Core Technology Design -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: IXGBRWSE - SMF Logstream
Thank Peter and Nick Jones for your explanation. Only now I could answer. Thinking about compatibility: when the SMF is written on SMF files (MANx) it is possible to read, with a user program (in assembler, obviously), any records by user's criteria. Now, using SMF Logstream this will not be possible if IBM doesn't give us support with IXGBRWSE. I know installations which have this kind of access on SMF MANx files to get some informations as soon as possible. I think that has good services using this kind of facility. I think IXGBRWSE could be more flexible on z/OS 2.1 and give an option to the caller specifies a parameter about the compression or this uncompression could be another available standard service. José ADAUTO Ribeiro De: Peter Relson rel...@us.ibm.com Enviada: Segunda-feira, 18 de Novembro de 2013 16:14 Para: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Assunto: Re: IXGBRWSE - SMF Logstream IXGBRWSE returns via the buffer keyword the exact area that the exploiter requested to be written to the logstream. Thus, it is that exploiter that knows the mapping. I conclude, by the fact that SMF apparently documents only the SMF record itself (and that an SMF record is only part of the logstream record), that ether - SMF does not want you to be reading these records and dealing with them on your own; or - it's an oversight; or - it was thought about but was not thought worthwhile. Is there a business need for reading the logstream that such a program as IFASMFDL does not accommodate? Peter Relson z/OS Core Technology Design -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
IEEE journal
The latest volume does not yet appear to be available electronically on the IEEE sites - latest available seems to be volume 35 #3. Do you have a link to #4? I haven't seen #4 in electronic form yet either. Issues of Annals have an irregular update schedule in electronic form; I still get the paper form (hint, hint, IEEE). -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: IBM-MAIN Digest - 21 Nov 2013 to 22 Nov 2013 (#2013-326)
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/tocresult.jsp?isnumber=5255174 AFAICT, that's still #3 (and earlier). -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Bloomberg: Druckenmiller Shorting IBM in Bet Cloud Computing to Win
Nuts! IBM is 50% services, right? They don't care where the computing is done so long as they help you do it. And I don't see most of the companies represented on this list ditching their mainframes (a high-profit line for IBM) for the cloud. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Gabe Goldberg Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 2:41 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Fwd: Bloomberg: Druckenmiller Shorting IBM in Bet Cloud Computing to Win He's also betting against Warren Buffet, of course... and against IBM technology providing cloud computing. From Bloomberg, Nov 22, 2013, 16:18:03 Stan Druckenmiller, who has one of the best track records in the hedge-fund industry over the past three decades, said he’s betting against the shares of International Business Machines Corp. (IBM) http://www.bloomberg.com/quote/IBM:US because the company’s business will be replaced by technology such as cloud computing. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: 047 Abend
Surprised it works under TESTAUTH. You either need to specify it in ISPTCM or use TSOEXEC to invoke it under the parallel TMP (assuming also that it was added to IKJTSO AUTHCMD. On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 01:03:00 -0500 MichealButz michealb...@optonline.net wrote: :Hi, : : : :I am running a TSO command processor that has authorized code the load :library is APF authorized. : : : :I set it to the beginning of the search chain with TSOLIB : : : :I also have the ISPF library ISP.SISPLPA apf Authorized : : : :So when I do the following @ the READY prompt TESTAUTH 'ISP.SISPLPA(ISPF)' :CP + ENTER + RUN : : : :I then execute the program from the ISPF Main Menu it runs ok : : : :Without TESTAUTH I get a 047 abend ? -- 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...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
