Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Bill Johnson]

You’re quite foolish in thinking just because a corporation is using AWS (or 
Azure/Google clouds) they are doing it to replace or supplement the mainframe. 
Own me some more fool.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Friday, October 22, 2021, 10:12 PM, David Crayford  
wrote:

How about JPMorgan Chase who also use AWS in their enterprise 
https://aws.amazon.com/solutions/case-studies/jpmorgan-chase/. It's the 
tip of the iceberg.

You have obviously been out of the industry for a while. The typical 
enterprise IT system these days is heterogeneous. It's all about 
integration. CICS have recently added support for correlation tokens so 
a transaction can be tracked to the source of origin on distributed 
systems.

On 23/10/2021 9:58 am, Bill Johnson wrote:
> HSBC is one poorly run bank. Since 2000 to today the stock has been cut in 
> half. 60 to 30. So, I wouldn’t be touting their decision making. Also, the 
> AWS signing was so they could layoff thousands of employees. A move that 
> wreaks of desperation.
>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>
>
> On Friday, October 22, 2021, 9:39 PM, David Crayford  
> wrote:
>
> On 23/10/2021 9:04 am, Bill Johnson wrote:
>> No bank needs AWS to process millions of transactions an hour. Every major 
>> bank does it on the mainframe without the outages AWS injects into the 
>> process.
> Well, obviously HSBC do and they're the 6th biggest bank in the world.
> AWS offers 99.999% uptime SLAs so if HSBC suffered an outage it's going
> to be expensive for Amazon.
>
> Talking about outages a few years ago my bank suffered a catastrophic
> outage when a batch job was incorrectly restarted from the wrong step.
> Wages and pensions were not processed. RBS had a CA7 maintenance error
> which caused weeks of chaos which was blamed on lack of skills after
> outsourcing their operations to Hyberbad. They were find £57M by the UK
> government. Air New Zealand suffered a catastrophic mainframe failure
> caused by the incompetence of IBM global services carrying out a DR
> test. Customers couldn't board their planes. It doesn't matter how solid
> your IT platforms are when humans can make errors.
>
>
>>
>> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>>
>>
>> On Friday, October 22, 2021, 7:38 PM, David Crayford  
>> wrote:
>>
>> Haha, you don't give up. How about this. HSBC has nearly $3T dollars in
>> assets. They have integrated their mainframe with Amazons AWS cloud.
>> You've been pwned man, take a breather.
>>
>> "For large financial institutions, it can be extremely hard to predict
>> when your architecture may need to scale to process millions of
>> financial transactions per day. HSBC addressed this challenge by
>> integrating its on-premises mainframe with AWS services such as AWS
>> Lambda, Amazon Kinesis, and Amazon DynamoDB."
>>
>> https://www.slideshare.net/AmazonWebServices/how-hsbc-uses-serverless-to-process-millions-of-transactions-in-real-time-fsv305-aws-reinvent-2018
>>
>>
>> On 22/10/2021 7:51 pm, Bill Johnson wrote:
>>> Australia’s largest bank is Commonwealth Bank of Australia with a little 
>>> over 1 trillion in assets in Aussie dollars. ANZ banking group #2 at 
>>> slightly over a trillion in assets. Wetpac banking 3rd at around 900 
>>> billion in assets. Which doesn’t put any of them in the top 20. The 20th 
>>> bank in the real top 20 is Group BPCE of France at approx 1.5 trillion. 
>>> These numbers are as of October 10th, 2021.
>>>
>>> Millions of transactions a day is comical. Millions per hour is what many 
>>> banks process. 1 billion credit card transactions happen daily. Just credit 
>>> cards.
>>>
>>> I look forward to seeing your proof of an Aussie bank in the top 20.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The link I provided was Australia's largest (and a world top 20) bank
>>> with millions of transactions a day. They're not stupid, production
>>> technology choices are critical which is probably why IBM have spent $$
>>> making sure Kafka runs ok on z/OS.
>>>
>>> Caching isn't a new idea. It's a common CICS design pattern using TS so
>>> you don't have to make an expensive call to DB2 or IMS. The customer
>>> solution is not call the mainframe for read transactions. It's not
>>> uncommon, it starting to become pervasive. Writes are a different matter.
>>>
>>>
 However the management was not happy because of that, just because
 they want to switch the mainframe off.  Nevermind, the new transaction
 system has response times 35-140ms (compared to 4-5ms on mainframe).



>>> --
>>> 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
>> 

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Bill Johnson]

JPM isn’t replacing their mainframe either. No banks that want security, 
uptime, and transaction processing AWS can’t match are. Wait til IBM’s 2nm chip 
becomes the norm.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Friday, October 22, 2021, 10:12 PM, David Crayford  
wrote:

How about JPMorgan Chase who also use AWS in their enterprise 
https://aws.amazon.com/solutions/case-studies/jpmorgan-chase/. It's the 
tip of the iceberg.

You have obviously been out of the industry for a while. The typical 
enterprise IT system these days is heterogeneous. It's all about 
integration. CICS have recently added support for correlation tokens so 
a transaction can be tracked to the source of origin on distributed 
systems.

On 23/10/2021 9:58 am, Bill Johnson wrote:
> HSBC is one poorly run bank. Since 2000 to today the stock has been cut in 
> half. 60 to 30. So, I wouldn’t be touting their decision making. Also, the 
> AWS signing was so they could layoff thousands of employees. A move that 
> wreaks of desperation.
>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>
>
> On Friday, October 22, 2021, 9:39 PM, David Crayford  
> wrote:
>
> On 23/10/2021 9:04 am, Bill Johnson wrote:
>> No bank needs AWS to process millions of transactions an hour. Every major 
>> bank does it on the mainframe without the outages AWS injects into the 
>> process.
> Well, obviously HSBC do and they're the 6th biggest bank in the world.
> AWS offers 99.999% uptime SLAs so if HSBC suffered an outage it's going
> to be expensive for Amazon.
>
> Talking about outages a few years ago my bank suffered a catastrophic
> outage when a batch job was incorrectly restarted from the wrong step.
> Wages and pensions were not processed. RBS had a CA7 maintenance error
> which caused weeks of chaos which was blamed on lack of skills after
> outsourcing their operations to Hyberbad. They were find £57M by the UK
> government. Air New Zealand suffered a catastrophic mainframe failure
> caused by the incompetence of IBM global services carrying out a DR
> test. Customers couldn't board their planes. It doesn't matter how solid
> your IT platforms are when humans can make errors.
>
>
>>
>> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>>
>>
>> On Friday, October 22, 2021, 7:38 PM, David Crayford  
>> wrote:
>>
>> Haha, you don't give up. How about this. HSBC has nearly $3T dollars in
>> assets. They have integrated their mainframe with Amazons AWS cloud.
>> You've been pwned man, take a breather.
>>
>> "For large financial institutions, it can be extremely hard to predict
>> when your architecture may need to scale to process millions of
>> financial transactions per day. HSBC addressed this challenge by
>> integrating its on-premises mainframe with AWS services such as AWS
>> Lambda, Amazon Kinesis, and Amazon DynamoDB."
>>
>> https://www.slideshare.net/AmazonWebServices/how-hsbc-uses-serverless-to-process-millions-of-transactions-in-real-time-fsv305-aws-reinvent-2018
>>
>>
>> On 22/10/2021 7:51 pm, Bill Johnson wrote:
>>> Australia’s largest bank is Commonwealth Bank of Australia with a little 
>>> over 1 trillion in assets in Aussie dollars. ANZ banking group #2 at 
>>> slightly over a trillion in assets. Wetpac banking 3rd at around 900 
>>> billion in assets. Which doesn’t put any of them in the top 20. The 20th 
>>> bank in the real top 20 is Group BPCE of France at approx 1.5 trillion. 
>>> These numbers are as of October 10th, 2021.
>>>
>>> Millions of transactions a day is comical. Millions per hour is what many 
>>> banks process. 1 billion credit card transactions happen daily. Just credit 
>>> cards.
>>>
>>> I look forward to seeing your proof of an Aussie bank in the top 20.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The link I provided was Australia's largest (and a world top 20) bank
>>> with millions of transactions a day. They're not stupid, production
>>> technology choices are critical which is probably why IBM have spent $$
>>> making sure Kafka runs ok on z/OS.
>>>
>>> Caching isn't a new idea. It's a common CICS design pattern using TS so
>>> you don't have to make an expensive call to DB2 or IMS. The customer
>>> solution is not call the mainframe for read transactions. It's not
>>> uncommon, it starting to become pervasive. Writes are a different matter.
>>>
>>>
 However the management was not happy because of that, just because
 they want to switch the mainframe off.  Nevermind, the new transaction
 system has response times 35-140ms (compared to 4-5ms on mainframe).



>>> --
>>> 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
>> 

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Bill Johnson]

LOL, organizations have been running multiple systems for decades. Before you 
were born.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Friday, October 22, 2021, 10:12 PM, David Crayford  
wrote:

How about JPMorgan Chase who also use AWS in their enterprise 
https://aws.amazon.com/solutions/case-studies/jpmorgan-chase/. It's the 
tip of the iceberg.

You have obviously been out of the industry for a while. The typical 
enterprise IT system these days is heterogeneous. It's all about 
integration. CICS have recently added support for correlation tokens so 
a transaction can be tracked to the source of origin on distributed 
systems.

On 23/10/2021 9:58 am, Bill Johnson wrote:
> HSBC is one poorly run bank. Since 2000 to today the stock has been cut in 
> half. 60 to 30. So, I wouldn’t be touting their decision making. Also, the 
> AWS signing was so they could layoff thousands of employees. A move that 
> wreaks of desperation.
>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>
>
> On Friday, October 22, 2021, 9:39 PM, David Crayford  
> wrote:
>
> On 23/10/2021 9:04 am, Bill Johnson wrote:
>> No bank needs AWS to process millions of transactions an hour. Every major 
>> bank does it on the mainframe without the outages AWS injects into the 
>> process.
> Well, obviously HSBC do and they're the 6th biggest bank in the world.
> AWS offers 99.999% uptime SLAs so if HSBC suffered an outage it's going
> to be expensive for Amazon.
>
> Talking about outages a few years ago my bank suffered a catastrophic
> outage when a batch job was incorrectly restarted from the wrong step.
> Wages and pensions were not processed. RBS had a CA7 maintenance error
> which caused weeks of chaos which was blamed on lack of skills after
> outsourcing their operations to Hyberbad. They were find £57M by the UK
> government. Air New Zealand suffered a catastrophic mainframe failure
> caused by the incompetence of IBM global services carrying out a DR
> test. Customers couldn't board their planes. It doesn't matter how solid
> your IT platforms are when humans can make errors.
>
>
>>
>> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>>
>>
>> On Friday, October 22, 2021, 7:38 PM, David Crayford  
>> wrote:
>>
>> Haha, you don't give up. How about this. HSBC has nearly $3T dollars in
>> assets. They have integrated their mainframe with Amazons AWS cloud.
>> You've been pwned man, take a breather.
>>
>> "For large financial institutions, it can be extremely hard to predict
>> when your architecture may need to scale to process millions of
>> financial transactions per day. HSBC addressed this challenge by
>> integrating its on-premises mainframe with AWS services such as AWS
>> Lambda, Amazon Kinesis, and Amazon DynamoDB."
>>
>> https://www.slideshare.net/AmazonWebServices/how-hsbc-uses-serverless-to-process-millions-of-transactions-in-real-time-fsv305-aws-reinvent-2018
>>
>>
>> On 22/10/2021 7:51 pm, Bill Johnson wrote:
>>> Australia’s largest bank is Commonwealth Bank of Australia with a little 
>>> over 1 trillion in assets in Aussie dollars. ANZ banking group #2 at 
>>> slightly over a trillion in assets. Wetpac banking 3rd at around 900 
>>> billion in assets. Which doesn’t put any of them in the top 20. The 20th 
>>> bank in the real top 20 is Group BPCE of France at approx 1.5 trillion. 
>>> These numbers are as of October 10th, 2021.
>>>
>>> Millions of transactions a day is comical. Millions per hour is what many 
>>> banks process. 1 billion credit card transactions happen daily. Just credit 
>>> cards.
>>>
>>> I look forward to seeing your proof of an Aussie bank in the top 20.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The link I provided was Australia's largest (and a world top 20) bank
>>> with millions of transactions a day. They're not stupid, production
>>> technology choices are critical which is probably why IBM have spent $$
>>> making sure Kafka runs ok on z/OS.
>>>
>>> Caching isn't a new idea. It's a common CICS design pattern using TS so
>>> you don't have to make an expensive call to DB2 or IMS. The customer
>>> solution is not call the mainframe for read transactions. It's not
>>> uncommon, it starting to become pervasive. Writes are a different matter.
>>>
>>>
 However the management was not happy because of that, just because
 they want to switch the mainframe off.  Nevermind, the new transaction
 system has response times 35-140ms (compared to 4-5ms on mainframe).



>>> --
>>> 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
>> --
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access 

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[David Crayford]

How about JPMorgan Chase who also use AWS in their enterprise 
https://aws.amazon.com/solutions/case-studies/jpmorgan-chase/. It's the 
tip of the iceberg.


You have obviously been out of the industry for a while. The typical 
enterprise IT system these days is heterogeneous. It's all about 
integration. CICS have recently added support for correlation tokens so 
a transaction can be tracked to the source of origin on distributed 
systems.


On 23/10/2021 9:58 am, Bill Johnson wrote:

HSBC is one poorly run bank. Since 2000 to today the stock has been cut in 
half. 60 to 30. So, I wouldn’t be touting their decision making. Also, the AWS 
signing was so they could layoff thousands of employees. A move that wreaks of 
desperation.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Friday, October 22, 2021, 9:39 PM, David Crayford  
wrote:

On 23/10/2021 9:04 am, Bill Johnson wrote:

No bank needs AWS to process millions of transactions an hour. Every major bank 
does it on the mainframe without the outages AWS injects into the process.

Well, obviously HSBC do and they're the 6th biggest bank in the world.
AWS offers 99.999% uptime SLAs so if HSBC suffered an outage it's going
to be expensive for Amazon.

Talking about outages a few years ago my bank suffered a catastrophic
outage when a batch job was incorrectly restarted from the wrong step.
Wages and pensions were not processed. RBS had a CA7 maintenance error
which caused weeks of chaos which was blamed on lack of skills after
outsourcing their operations to Hyberbad. They were find £57M by the UK
government. Air New Zealand suffered a catastrophic mainframe failure
caused by the incompetence of IBM global services carrying out a DR
test. Customers couldn't board their planes. It doesn't matter how solid
your IT platforms are when humans can make errors.




Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Friday, October 22, 2021, 7:38 PM, David Crayford  
wrote:

Haha, you don't give up. How about this. HSBC has nearly $3T dollars in
assets. They have integrated their mainframe with Amazons AWS cloud.
You've been pwned man, take a breather.

"For large financial institutions, it can be extremely hard to predict
when your architecture may need to scale to process millions of
financial transactions per day. HSBC addressed this challenge by
integrating its on-premises mainframe with AWS services such as AWS
Lambda, Amazon Kinesis, and Amazon DynamoDB."

https://www.slideshare.net/AmazonWebServices/how-hsbc-uses-serverless-to-process-millions-of-transactions-in-real-time-fsv305-aws-reinvent-2018


On 22/10/2021 7:51 pm, Bill Johnson wrote:

Australia’s largest bank is Commonwealth Bank of Australia with a little over 1 
trillion in assets in Aussie dollars. ANZ banking group #2 at slightly over a 
trillion in assets. Wetpac banking 3rd at around 900 billion in assets. Which 
doesn’t put any of them in the top 20. The 20th bank in the real top 20 is 
Group BPCE of France at approx 1.5 trillion. These numbers are as of October 
10th, 2021.

Millions of transactions a day is comical. Millions per hour is what many banks 
process. 1 billion credit card transactions happen daily. Just credit cards.

I look forward to seeing your proof of an Aussie bank in the top 20.



The link I provided was Australia's largest (and a world top 20) bank
with millions of transactions a day. They're not stupid, production
technology choices are critical which is probably why IBM have spent $$
making sure Kafka runs ok on z/OS.

Caching isn't a new idea. It's a common CICS design pattern using TS so
you don't have to make an expensive call to DB2 or IMS. The customer
solution is not call the mainframe for read transactions. It's not
uncommon, it starting to become pervasive. Writes are a different matter.



However the management was not happy because of that, just because
they want to switch the mainframe off.  Nevermind, the new transaction
system has response times 35-140ms (compared to 4-5ms on mainframe).




--
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

--
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

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to 

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Bill Johnson]

HSBC is one poorly run bank. Since 2000 to today the stock has been cut in 
half. 60 to 30. So, I wouldn’t be touting their decision making. Also, the AWS 
signing was so they could layoff thousands of employees. A move that wreaks of 
desperation.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Friday, October 22, 2021, 9:39 PM, David Crayford  
wrote:

On 23/10/2021 9:04 am, Bill Johnson wrote:
> No bank needs AWS to process millions of transactions an hour. Every major 
> bank does it on the mainframe without the outages AWS injects into the 
> process.

Well, obviously HSBC do and they're the 6th biggest bank in the world. 
AWS offers 99.999% uptime SLAs so if HSBC suffered an outage it's going 
to be expensive for Amazon.

Talking about outages a few years ago my bank suffered a catastrophic 
outage when a batch job was incorrectly restarted from the wrong step. 
Wages and pensions were not processed. RBS had a CA7 maintenance error 
which caused weeks of chaos which was blamed on lack of skills after 
outsourcing their operations to Hyberbad. They were find £57M by the UK 
government. Air New Zealand suffered a catastrophic mainframe failure 
caused by the incompetence of IBM global services carrying out a DR 
test. Customers couldn't board their planes. It doesn't matter how solid 
your IT platforms are when humans can make errors.


>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>
>
> On Friday, October 22, 2021, 7:38 PM, David Crayford  
> wrote:
>
> Haha, you don't give up. How about this. HSBC has nearly $3T dollars in
> assets. They have integrated their mainframe with Amazons AWS cloud.
> You've been pwned man, take a breather.
>
> "For large financial institutions, it can be extremely hard to predict
> when your architecture may need to scale to process millions of
> financial transactions per day. HSBC addressed this challenge by
> integrating its on-premises mainframe with AWS services such as AWS
> Lambda, Amazon Kinesis, and Amazon DynamoDB."
>
> https://www.slideshare.net/AmazonWebServices/how-hsbc-uses-serverless-to-process-millions-of-transactions-in-real-time-fsv305-aws-reinvent-2018
>
>
> On 22/10/2021 7:51 pm, Bill Johnson wrote:
>> Australia’s largest bank is Commonwealth Bank of Australia with a little 
>> over 1 trillion in assets in Aussie dollars. ANZ banking group #2 at 
>> slightly over a trillion in assets. Wetpac banking 3rd at around 900 billion 
>> in assets. Which doesn’t put any of them in the top 20. The 20th bank in the 
>> real top 20 is Group BPCE of France at approx 1.5 trillion. These numbers 
>> are as of October 10th, 2021.
>>
>> Millions of transactions a day is comical. Millions per hour is what many 
>> banks process. 1 billion credit card transactions happen daily. Just credit 
>> cards.
>>
>> I look forward to seeing your proof of an Aussie bank in the top 20.
>>
>>
>>
>> The link I provided was Australia's largest (and a world top 20) bank
>> with millions of transactions a day. They're not stupid, production
>> technology choices are critical which is probably why IBM have spent $$
>> making sure Kafka runs ok on z/OS.
>>
>> Caching isn't a new idea. It's a common CICS design pattern using TS so
>> you don't have to make an expensive call to DB2 or IMS. The customer
>> solution is not call the mainframe for read transactions. It's not
>> uncommon, it starting to become pervasive. Writes are a different matter.
>>
>>
>>> However the management was not happy because of that, just because
>>> they want to switch the mainframe off.  Nevermind, the new transaction
>>> system has response times 35-140ms (compared to 4-5ms on mainframe).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> 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
> --
> 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

--
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

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Bill Johnson]

HSBC isn’t replacing their mainframe. Because they’re not stupid. Although 
google HSBC hack and see quite a few problems. And AWS is down quite 
frequently. As is Azure and Google cloud. And security on those cloud services 
isn’t even close to the mainframe security.
Your Fintech fetish is also dubious. FDIC insure those deposits? Are they 
regulated like banks? Backed by governments? I doubt Jamie Dimon is losing 
sleep over them.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Friday, October 22, 2021, 9:39 PM, David Crayford  
wrote:

On 23/10/2021 9:04 am, Bill Johnson wrote:
> No bank needs AWS to process millions of transactions an hour. Every major 
> bank does it on the mainframe without the outages AWS injects into the 
> process.

Well, obviously HSBC do and they're the 6th biggest bank in the world. 
AWS offers 99.999% uptime SLAs so if HSBC suffered an outage it's going 
to be expensive for Amazon.

Talking about outages a few years ago my bank suffered a catastrophic 
outage when a batch job was incorrectly restarted from the wrong step. 
Wages and pensions were not processed. RBS had a CA7 maintenance error 
which caused weeks of chaos which was blamed on lack of skills after 
outsourcing their operations to Hyberbad. They were find £57M by the UK 
government. Air New Zealand suffered a catastrophic mainframe failure 
caused by the incompetence of IBM global services carrying out a DR 
test. Customers couldn't board their planes. It doesn't matter how solid 
your IT platforms are when humans can make errors.


>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>
>
> On Friday, October 22, 2021, 7:38 PM, David Crayford  
> wrote:
>
> Haha, you don't give up. How about this. HSBC has nearly $3T dollars in
> assets. They have integrated their mainframe with Amazons AWS cloud.
> You've been pwned man, take a breather.
>
> "For large financial institutions, it can be extremely hard to predict
> when your architecture may need to scale to process millions of
> financial transactions per day. HSBC addressed this challenge by
> integrating its on-premises mainframe with AWS services such as AWS
> Lambda, Amazon Kinesis, and Amazon DynamoDB."
>
> https://www.slideshare.net/AmazonWebServices/how-hsbc-uses-serverless-to-process-millions-of-transactions-in-real-time-fsv305-aws-reinvent-2018
>
>
> On 22/10/2021 7:51 pm, Bill Johnson wrote:
>> Australia’s largest bank is Commonwealth Bank of Australia with a little 
>> over 1 trillion in assets in Aussie dollars. ANZ banking group #2 at 
>> slightly over a trillion in assets. Wetpac banking 3rd at around 900 billion 
>> in assets. Which doesn’t put any of them in the top 20. The 20th bank in the 
>> real top 20 is Group BPCE of France at approx 1.5 trillion. These numbers 
>> are as of October 10th, 2021.
>>
>> Millions of transactions a day is comical. Millions per hour is what many 
>> banks process. 1 billion credit card transactions happen daily. Just credit 
>> cards.
>>
>> I look forward to seeing your proof of an Aussie bank in the top 20.
>>
>>
>>
>> The link I provided was Australia's largest (and a world top 20) bank
>> with millions of transactions a day. They're not stupid, production
>> technology choices are critical which is probably why IBM have spent $$
>> making sure Kafka runs ok on z/OS.
>>
>> Caching isn't a new idea. It's a common CICS design pattern using TS so
>> you don't have to make an expensive call to DB2 or IMS. The customer
>> solution is not call the mainframe for read transactions. It's not
>> uncommon, it starting to become pervasive. Writes are a different matter.
>>
>>
>>> However the management was not happy because of that, just because
>>> they want to switch the mainframe off.  Nevermind, the new transaction
>>> system has response times 35-140ms (compared to 4-5ms on mainframe).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> 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
> --
> 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

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN




--
For 

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[David Crayford]

On 23/10/2021 9:04 am, Bill Johnson wrote:

No bank needs AWS to process millions of transactions an hour. Every major bank 
does it on the mainframe without the outages AWS injects into the process.


Well, obviously HSBC do and they're the 6th biggest bank in the world. 
AWS offers 99.999% uptime SLAs so if HSBC suffered an outage it's going 
to be expensive for Amazon.


Talking about outages a few years ago my bank suffered a catastrophic 
outage when a batch job was incorrectly restarted from the wrong step. 
Wages and pensions were not processed. RBS had a CA7 maintenance error 
which caused weeks of chaos which was blamed on lack of skills after 
outsourcing their operations to Hyberbad. They were find £57M by the UK 
government. Air New Zealand suffered a catastrophic mainframe failure 
caused by the incompetence of IBM global services carrying out a DR 
test. Customers couldn't board their planes. It doesn't matter how solid 
your IT platforms are when humans can make errors.






Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Friday, October 22, 2021, 7:38 PM, David Crayford  
wrote:

Haha, you don't give up. How about this. HSBC has nearly $3T dollars in
assets. They have integrated their mainframe with Amazons AWS cloud.
You've been pwned man, take a breather.

"For large financial institutions, it can be extremely hard to predict
when your architecture may need to scale to process millions of
financial transactions per day. HSBC addressed this challenge by
integrating its on-premises mainframe with AWS services such as AWS
Lambda, Amazon Kinesis, and Amazon DynamoDB."

https://www.slideshare.net/AmazonWebServices/how-hsbc-uses-serverless-to-process-millions-of-transactions-in-real-time-fsv305-aws-reinvent-2018


On 22/10/2021 7:51 pm, Bill Johnson wrote:

Australia’s largest bank is Commonwealth Bank of Australia with a little over 1 
trillion in assets in Aussie dollars. ANZ banking group #2 at slightly over a 
trillion in assets. Wetpac banking 3rd at around 900 billion in assets. Which 
doesn’t put any of them in the top 20. The 20th bank in the real top 20 is 
Group BPCE of France at approx 1.5 trillion. These numbers are as of October 
10th, 2021.

Millions of transactions a day is comical. Millions per hour is what many banks 
process. 1 billion credit card transactions happen daily. Just credit cards.

I look forward to seeing your proof of an Aussie bank in the top 20.



The link I provided was Australia's largest (and a world top 20) bank
with millions of transactions a day. They're not stupid, production
technology choices are critical which is probably why IBM have spent $$
making sure Kafka runs ok on z/OS.

Caching isn't a new idea. It's a common CICS design pattern using TS so
you don't have to make an expensive call to DB2 or IMS. The customer
solution is not call the mainframe for read transactions. It's not
uncommon, it starting to become pervasive. Writes are a different matter.



However the management was not happy because of that, just because
they want to switch the mainframe off.  Nevermind, the new transaction
system has response times 35-140ms (compared to 4-5ms on mainframe).




--
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

--
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


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Bill Johnson]

There’s a website called downdetector.com which logs the enormous number of 
outages on AWS. I don’t think any banks have a similar website for their 
mainframe outages. Own me some more.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Friday, October 22, 2021, 7:38 PM, David Crayford  
wrote:

Haha, you don't give up. How about this. HSBC has nearly $3T dollars in 
assets. They have integrated their mainframe with Amazons AWS cloud. 
You've been pwned man, take a breather.

"For large financial institutions, it can be extremely hard to predict 
when your architecture may need to scale to process millions of 
financial transactions per day. HSBC addressed this challenge by 
integrating its on-premises mainframe with AWS services such as AWS 
Lambda, Amazon Kinesis, and Amazon DynamoDB."

https://www.slideshare.net/AmazonWebServices/how-hsbc-uses-serverless-to-process-millions-of-transactions-in-real-time-fsv305-aws-reinvent-2018


On 22/10/2021 7:51 pm, Bill Johnson wrote:
> Australia’s largest bank is Commonwealth Bank of Australia with a little over 
> 1 trillion in assets in Aussie dollars. ANZ banking group #2 at slightly over 
> a trillion in assets. Wetpac banking 3rd at around 900 billion in assets. 
> Which doesn’t put any of them in the top 20. The 20th bank in the real top 20 
> is Group BPCE of France at approx 1.5 trillion. These numbers are as of 
> October 10th, 2021.
>
> Millions of transactions a day is comical. Millions per hour is what many 
> banks process. 1 billion credit card transactions happen daily. Just credit 
> cards.
>
> I look forward to seeing your proof of an Aussie bank in the top 20.
>
>
>
> The link I provided was Australia's largest (and a world top 20) bank
> with millions of transactions a day. They're not stupid, production
> technology choices are critical which is probably why IBM have spent $$
> making sure Kafka runs ok on z/OS.
>
> Caching isn't a new idea. It's a common CICS design pattern using TS so
> you don't have to make an expensive call to DB2 or IMS. The customer
> solution is not call the mainframe for read transactions. It's not
> uncommon, it starting to become pervasive. Writes are a different matter.
>
>
>> However the management was not happy because of that, just because
>> they want to switch the mainframe off.  Nevermind, the new transaction
>> system has response times 35-140ms (compared to 4-5ms on mainframe).
>>
>>
>>
> --
> 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

--
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

Re: C signal() and abends not being signaled

[David Crayford]

On 23/10/2021 1:59 am, Seymour J Metz wrote:

S0C1 and S0C4 are ABENDs and caught by SIGABND; what SIGSEGV catches are 
program checks via an (E)SPIE exit. I'm not sure whether it catches every 
relevant PIC or only 04.


Nope. That's only true if you set the TRAP(ON,NOSPIE) LE runtime option 
in which case SIGABND signals are handled by LEs ESTAE condition handler.





As a side issue, can you catch a data exception, fix the data in the handler 
and retry the way that you can in a PL/I ON unit?


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
David Crayford [dcrayf...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2021 8:22 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: C signal() and abends not being signaled

You're using the wrong signal. SIGABND catches abends such as x37. If
you want to catch machine checks use SIGSEGV (0C4), SIGILL (0C1) etc.

On 19/10/2021 11:03 pm, Jantje. wrote:

Esteemed listers,

I have the situation that in the vast majority of cases the C program just 
works fine, but in an infinitesimal small number of cases, it gets a S0C4 
abend. I could perhaps, through intricate testing and comparing of lots of 
things -- and burning huge amounts of CPU in doing so -- prevent the abend from 
happening, but I would rather avoid the cost of that testing and instead 
privilege the normal case.

So, I thought to use the signal() function to take control in those very few 
cases where the abend occurs.

However...

signal or no signal, LE takes that CEEDUMP and the program stops, no matter 
what.

What am I missing?

I reduced my program to bare minimum to prove the point. Here is the code:

#include 
#include 
#include 
#ifdef __cplusplus
extern "C" void StrAbn(int);
#else
void StrAbn(int);
#endif
int main(int argc, char *argvݨ) {
printf("Setting abend handler\n");
if (signal(SIGABND, StrAbn) == SIG_ERR) {
  perror("Could not signal user signal");
  abort();
} else {
  printf("Abend handler set\n");
}
printf("This must cause an abend\n");
strcpy(0,"Coucou");
printf("Continuing after abend\n");
return(0);
}
void StrAbn(int SIG_TYPE) {
printf("Trapped a vicious abend\n");
signal(SIG_TYPE, SIG_IGN);
printf("Exiting after the abend\n");
exit(0);
}

The output says:

Setting abend handler
Abend handler set
This must cause an abend

and it does cause an abend. But control does not come to my signal handling routine. The 
"Trapped a vicious abend" never appears.
I have been reading up on LE condition handling and on the use of the signal() 
function, and I have searched the archives of this very list. All to no avail.

For what it is worth: I do see the following LE options:

ABPERC(NONE)
ABTERMENC(ABEND)
DEBUG
POSIX(OFF)
NOTEST(ALL,"*","PROMPT","INSPPREF")
TRAP(ON,SPIE)

So, what do I need to do to actually trap that abend and get control back in my 
program when it happens?

Any and all suggestions are welcome.

Thanks and very best regards,

Jantje.

--
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

--
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

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Bill Johnson]

No bank needs AWS to process millions of transactions an hour. Every major bank 
does it on the mainframe without the outages AWS injects into the process.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Friday, October 22, 2021, 7:38 PM, David Crayford  
wrote:

Haha, you don't give up. How about this. HSBC has nearly $3T dollars in 
assets. They have integrated their mainframe with Amazons AWS cloud. 
You've been pwned man, take a breather.

"For large financial institutions, it can be extremely hard to predict 
when your architecture may need to scale to process millions of 
financial transactions per day. HSBC addressed this challenge by 
integrating its on-premises mainframe with AWS services such as AWS 
Lambda, Amazon Kinesis, and Amazon DynamoDB."

https://www.slideshare.net/AmazonWebServices/how-hsbc-uses-serverless-to-process-millions-of-transactions-in-real-time-fsv305-aws-reinvent-2018


On 22/10/2021 7:51 pm, Bill Johnson wrote:
> Australia’s largest bank is Commonwealth Bank of Australia with a little over 
> 1 trillion in assets in Aussie dollars. ANZ banking group #2 at slightly over 
> a trillion in assets. Wetpac banking 3rd at around 900 billion in assets. 
> Which doesn’t put any of them in the top 20. The 20th bank in the real top 20 
> is Group BPCE of France at approx 1.5 trillion. These numbers are as of 
> October 10th, 2021.
>
> Millions of transactions a day is comical. Millions per hour is what many 
> banks process. 1 billion credit card transactions happen daily. Just credit 
> cards.
>
> I look forward to seeing your proof of an Aussie bank in the top 20.
>
>
>
> The link I provided was Australia's largest (and a world top 20) bank
> with millions of transactions a day. They're not stupid, production
> technology choices are critical which is probably why IBM have spent $$
> making sure Kafka runs ok on z/OS.
>
> Caching isn't a new idea. It's a common CICS design pattern using TS so
> you don't have to make an expensive call to DB2 or IMS. The customer
> solution is not call the mainframe for read transactions. It's not
> uncommon, it starting to become pervasive. Writes are a different matter.
>
>
>> However the management was not happy because of that, just because
>> they want to switch the mainframe off.  Nevermind, the new transaction
>> system has response times 35-140ms (compared to 4-5ms on mainframe).
>>
>>
>>
> --
> 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

--
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

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Bill Johnson]

HSBC isn’t Australian. And they run a mainframe.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Friday, October 22, 2021, 7:38 PM, David Crayford  
wrote:

Haha, you don't give up. How about this. HSBC has nearly $3T dollars in 
assets. They have integrated their mainframe with Amazons AWS cloud. 
You've been pwned man, take a breather.

"For large financial institutions, it can be extremely hard to predict 
when your architecture may need to scale to process millions of 
financial transactions per day. HSBC addressed this challenge by 
integrating its on-premises mainframe with AWS services such as AWS 
Lambda, Amazon Kinesis, and Amazon DynamoDB."

https://www.slideshare.net/AmazonWebServices/how-hsbc-uses-serverless-to-process-millions-of-transactions-in-real-time-fsv305-aws-reinvent-2018


On 22/10/2021 7:51 pm, Bill Johnson wrote:
> Australia’s largest bank is Commonwealth Bank of Australia with a little over 
> 1 trillion in assets in Aussie dollars. ANZ banking group #2 at slightly over 
> a trillion in assets. Wetpac banking 3rd at around 900 billion in assets. 
> Which doesn’t put any of them in the top 20. The 20th bank in the real top 20 
> is Group BPCE of France at approx 1.5 trillion. These numbers are as of 
> October 10th, 2021.
>
> Millions of transactions a day is comical. Millions per hour is what many 
> banks process. 1 billion credit card transactions happen daily. Just credit 
> cards.
>
> I look forward to seeing your proof of an Aussie bank in the top 20.
>
>
>
> The link I provided was Australia's largest (and a world top 20) bank
> with millions of transactions a day. They're not stupid, production
> technology choices are critical which is probably why IBM have spent $$
> making sure Kafka runs ok on z/OS.
>
> Caching isn't a new idea. It's a common CICS design pattern using TS so
> you don't have to make an expensive call to DB2 or IMS. The customer
> solution is not call the mainframe for read transactions. It's not
> uncommon, it starting to become pervasive. Writes are a different matter.
>
>
>> However the management was not happy because of that, just because
>> they want to switch the mainframe off.  Nevermind, the new transaction
>> system has response times 35-140ms (compared to 4-5ms on mainframe).
>>
>>
>>
> --
> 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

--
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

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[David Crayford]

Haha, you don't give up. How about this. HSBC has nearly $3T dollars in 
assets. They have integrated their mainframe with Amazons AWS cloud. 
You've been pwned man, take a breather.


"For large financial institutions, it can be extremely hard to predict 
when your architecture may need to scale to process millions of 
financial transactions per day. HSBC addressed this challenge by 
integrating its on-premises mainframe with AWS services such as AWS 
Lambda, Amazon Kinesis, and Amazon DynamoDB."


https://www.slideshare.net/AmazonWebServices/how-hsbc-uses-serverless-to-process-millions-of-transactions-in-real-time-fsv305-aws-reinvent-2018


On 22/10/2021 7:51 pm, Bill Johnson wrote:

Australia’s largest bank is Commonwealth Bank of Australia with a little over 1 
trillion in assets in Aussie dollars. ANZ banking group #2 at slightly over a 
trillion in assets. Wetpac banking 3rd at around 900 billion in assets. Which 
doesn’t put any of them in the top 20. The 20th bank in the real top 20 is 
Group BPCE of France at approx 1.5 trillion. These numbers are as of October 
10th, 2021.

Millions of transactions a day is comical. Millions per hour is what many banks 
process. 1 billion credit card transactions happen daily. Just credit cards.

I look forward to seeing your proof of an Aussie bank in the top 20.



The link I provided was Australia's largest (and a world top 20) bank
with millions of transactions a day. They're not stupid, production
technology choices are critical which is probably why IBM have spent $$
making sure Kafka runs ok on z/OS.

Caching isn't a new idea. It's a common CICS design pattern using TS so
you don't have to make an expensive call to DB2 or IMS. The customer
solution is not call the mainframe for read transactions. It's not
uncommon, it starting to become pervasive. Writes are a different matter.



However the management was not happy because of that, just because
they want to switch the mainframe off.  Nevermind, the new transaction
system has response times 35-140ms (compared to 4-5ms on mainframe).




--
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


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Andrew Rowley]

On 22/10/2021 8:21 pm, David Crayford wrote:


I wouldn't consider a drag race using a prime number sieve a good
indication of the overall performance of Java on z/OS. That's a very 
specific use case and not one that anybody would ever use on the 
mainframe.


That's true, and that's the reason it's referred to as a drag race. A 
test of speed at a particular task without much greater meaning.


But I would have expected it to favour C++. Everything is machine code 
in the end, so I am sure that you could write faster C++ than Java for 
almost anything. But I think it shows that it is wrong to assume Java is 
slow, and it is fast enough that choice of algorithms and data 
structures have more influence than the language.




IBM also talks a lot about RNI and processor cache... it turns out 
garbage collection is good for cache efficiency too. It moves all the 
active data into a smaller chunk of memory, which makes better use of 
processor cache and is good for your RNI.


That sounds far fetched! Java's stop the world GC cycles are not good 
for performance. Java doesn't support reference types so all of it's 
data even if it's local is on the heap.


I understand the JIT compiler will use the stack for local objects i.e. 
where they cannot escape a limited scope.


New/delete, GETMAIN/FREEMAIN etc. all have overhead. How much? Can you 
measure it? GC just moves the overhead to one point where it can be 
measured. The pause is a problem for some work, but for e.g. batch it 
doesn't matter.


Locality of reference for memory does have a big influence on speed (IBM 
even gives numbers for the cache levels) so I would expect compacting 
the heap should make the program faster. Potentially much faster, 
depending on allocation patterns.


Andrew Rowley
Black Hill Software

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Licensing a back-level z/OS

[Gibney, Dave]

Back when we had a Business Partner, they handled such questions for us, and 
were usually able to help

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On
> Behalf Of Charles Mills
> Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 11:02 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Licensing a back-level z/OS
> 
> When you "just called IBM" was that the actual IBM Corporation?
> 
> Their sole point of "IBM" contact seems to be a Business Partner. I figured
> out that when they say "IBM said" they mean the BP said. And apparently
> the
> BP has told them "no way." Perhaps they are confused, perhaps the BP is
> tired of them, perhaps the BP wants to sell them new hardware; I don't
> know.
> 
> Can they go around the BP and open a dialog with "real IBM"? How?
> 
> Charles
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
> On
> Behalf Of Tony Thigpen
> Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 10:27 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Licensing a back-level z/OS
> 
> We have done it on multiple occasions for 'way back' releases. Another
> guy in my org just called IBM and told them our problem. Now, only in
> one case did we need tapes and happily IBM was able to send them to us.
> 
> Tony Thigpen
> 
> Charles Mills wrote on 10/22/21 12:52 PM:
> > I have a client who has a customer that is in a pickle. Yes, of their own
> > making, but it is what it is. Government agency, limited budgets, long
> > procurement cycles, personnel constraints, etc. They are running z/OS
> V1R10
> > on a z114. They now have an urgent need to be able to run COBOL 6
> > executables. (Yes, there is a longer story here, but I think I have
> covered
> > the technical essentials.)
> >
> > COBOL 6 executables absolutely require LE V2R1 or above. (Someone
> please
> > correct me if I am wrong.)
> >
> > The z114 will support up to z/OS V2R2. V2R2 is of course withdrawn from
> > marketing. Can I get some help here? What are the chances that they could
> > obtain V2R2 media? Can anyone help me out? There is no desire to run
> pirated
> > software. Is there any route by which one obtains a license from IBM for
> > back-level z/OS?
> >
> > One bit of good news: They are running V1R10 under VM so it would be
> > possible to install a new instance of V2R2; it is not necessary to upgrade
> > their running system.
> >
> > Any other suggestions -- other than don't get yourself into pickles --
> would
> > be welcomed. The use of an off-premises box does not appear to be a
> good
> > option because the COBOL 6 executables will have to read and update data
> > sets that are also used by online systems running on the existing V1R10 --
> > although not necessarily simultaneously.
> >
> > Feel free to respond off-line if appropriate. Charlesm at mcn dot org
> 
> --
> 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

Re: Licensing a back-level z/OS

[Charles Mills]

When you "just called IBM" was that the actual IBM Corporation?

Their sole point of "IBM" contact seems to be a Business Partner. I figured
out that when they say "IBM said" they mean the BP said. And apparently the
BP has told them "no way." Perhaps they are confused, perhaps the BP is
tired of them, perhaps the BP wants to sell them new hardware; I don't know.

Can they go around the BP and open a dialog with "real IBM"? How?

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Tony Thigpen
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 10:27 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Licensing a back-level z/OS

We have done it on multiple occasions for 'way back' releases. Another 
guy in my org just called IBM and told them our problem. Now, only in 
one case did we need tapes and happily IBM was able to send them to us.

Tony Thigpen

Charles Mills wrote on 10/22/21 12:52 PM:
> I have a client who has a customer that is in a pickle. Yes, of their own
> making, but it is what it is. Government agency, limited budgets, long
> procurement cycles, personnel constraints, etc. They are running z/OS
V1R10
> on a z114. They now have an urgent need to be able to run COBOL 6
> executables. (Yes, there is a longer story here, but I think I have
covered
> the technical essentials.)
> 
> COBOL 6 executables absolutely require LE V2R1 or above. (Someone please
> correct me if I am wrong.)
> 
> The z114 will support up to z/OS V2R2. V2R2 is of course withdrawn from
> marketing. Can I get some help here? What are the chances that they could
> obtain V2R2 media? Can anyone help me out? There is no desire to run
pirated
> software. Is there any route by which one obtains a license from IBM for
> back-level z/OS?
> 
> One bit of good news: They are running V1R10 under VM so it would be
> possible to install a new instance of V2R2; it is not necessary to upgrade
> their running system.
> 
> Any other suggestions -- other than don't get yourself into pickles --
would
> be welcomed. The use of an off-premises box does not appear to be a good
> option because the COBOL 6 executables will have to read and update data
> sets that are also used by online systems running on the existing V1R10 --
> although not necessarily simultaneously.
> 
> Feel free to respond off-line if appropriate. Charlesm at mcn dot org

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: C signal() and abends not being signaled

[Seymour J Metz]

S0C1 and S0C4 are ABENDs and caught by SIGABND; what SIGSEGV catches are 
program checks via an (E)SPIE exit. I'm not sure whether it catches every 
relevant PIC or only 04.

As a side issue, can you catch a data exception, fix the data in the handler 
and retry the way that you can in a PL/I ON unit?


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
David Crayford [dcrayf...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2021 8:22 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: C signal() and abends not being signaled

You're using the wrong signal. SIGABND catches abends such as x37. If
you want to catch machine checks use SIGSEGV (0C4), SIGILL (0C1) etc.

On 19/10/2021 11:03 pm, Jantje. wrote:
> Esteemed listers,
>
> I have the situation that in the vast majority of cases the C program just 
> works fine, but in an infinitesimal small number of cases, it gets a S0C4 
> abend. I could perhaps, through intricate testing and comparing of lots of 
> things -- and burning huge amounts of CPU in doing so -- prevent the abend 
> from happening, but I would rather avoid the cost of that testing and instead 
> privilege the normal case.
>
> So, I thought to use the signal() function to take control in those very few 
> cases where the abend occurs.
>
> However...
>
> signal or no signal, LE takes that CEEDUMP and the program stops, no matter 
> what.
>
> What am I missing?
>
> I reduced my program to bare minimum to prove the point. Here is the code:
>
> #include 
> #include 
> #include 
> #ifdef __cplusplus
>extern "C" void StrAbn(int);
> #else
>void StrAbn(int);
> #endif
> int main(int argc, char *argvݨ) {
>printf("Setting abend handler\n");
>if (signal(SIGABND, StrAbn) == SIG_ERR) {
>  perror("Could not signal user signal");
>  abort();
>} else {
>  printf("Abend handler set\n");
>}
>printf("This must cause an abend\n");
>strcpy(0,"Coucou");
>printf("Continuing after abend\n");
>return(0);
> }
> void StrAbn(int SIG_TYPE) {
>printf("Trapped a vicious abend\n");
>signal(SIG_TYPE, SIG_IGN);
>printf("Exiting after the abend\n");
>exit(0);
> }
>
> The output says:
>
> Setting abend handler
> Abend handler set
> This must cause an abend
>
> and it does cause an abend. But control does not come to my signal handling 
> routine. The "Trapped a vicious abend" never appears.
> I have been reading up on LE condition handling and on the use of the 
> signal() function, and I have searched the archives of this very list. All to 
> no avail.
>
> For what it is worth: I do see the following LE options:
>
> ABPERC(NONE)
> ABTERMENC(ABEND)
> DEBUG
> POSIX(OFF)
> NOTEST(ALL,"*","PROMPT","INSPPREF")
> TRAP(ON,SPIE)
>
> So, what do I need to do to actually trap that abend and get control back in 
> my program when it happens?
>
> Any and all suggestions are welcome.
>
> Thanks and very best regards,
>
> Jantje.
>
> --
> 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

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Licensing a back-level z/OS

[Tony Thigpen]

We have done it on multiple occasions for 'way back' releases. Another 
guy in my org just called IBM and told them our problem. Now, only in 
one case did we need tapes and happily IBM was able to send them to us.


Tony Thigpen

Charles Mills wrote on 10/22/21 12:52 PM:

I have a client who has a customer that is in a pickle. Yes, of their own
making, but it is what it is. Government agency, limited budgets, long
procurement cycles, personnel constraints, etc. They are running z/OS V1R10
on a z114. They now have an urgent need to be able to run COBOL 6
executables. (Yes, there is a longer story here, but I think I have covered
the technical essentials.)

COBOL 6 executables absolutely require LE V2R1 or above. (Someone please
correct me if I am wrong.)

The z114 will support up to z/OS V2R2. V2R2 is of course withdrawn from
marketing. Can I get some help here? What are the chances that they could
obtain V2R2 media? Can anyone help me out? There is no desire to run pirated
software. Is there any route by which one obtains a license from IBM for
back-level z/OS?

One bit of good news: They are running V1R10 under VM so it would be
possible to install a new instance of V2R2; it is not necessary to upgrade
their running system.

Any other suggestions -- other than don't get yourself into pickles -- would
be welcomed. The use of an off-premises box does not appear to be a good
option because the COBOL 6 executables will have to read and update data
sets that are also used by online systems running on the existing V1R10 --
although not necessarily simultaneously.

Feel free to respond off-line if appropriate. Charlesm at mcn dot org

Charles

--
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

Licensing a back-level z/OS

[Charles Mills]

I have a client who has a customer that is in a pickle. Yes, of their own
making, but it is what it is. Government agency, limited budgets, long
procurement cycles, personnel constraints, etc. They are running z/OS V1R10
on a z114. They now have an urgent need to be able to run COBOL 6
executables. (Yes, there is a longer story here, but I think I have covered
the technical essentials.)

COBOL 6 executables absolutely require LE V2R1 or above. (Someone please
correct me if I am wrong.)

The z114 will support up to z/OS V2R2. V2R2 is of course withdrawn from
marketing. Can I get some help here? What are the chances that they could
obtain V2R2 media? Can anyone help me out? There is no desire to run pirated
software. Is there any route by which one obtains a license from IBM for
back-level z/OS?

One bit of good news: They are running V1R10 under VM so it would be
possible to install a new instance of V2R2; it is not necessary to upgrade
their running system.

Any other suggestions -- other than don't get yourself into pickles -- would
be welcomed. The use of an off-premises box does not appear to be a good
option because the COBOL 6 executables will have to read and update data
sets that are also used by online systems running on the existing V1R10 --
although not necessarily simultaneously.

Feel free to respond off-line if appropriate. Charlesm at mcn dot org

Charles 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Colin Paice]

Rather than load jar files  from disk - it may copy from the data space.
When you "save" an image it may write it to the dataspace.  When you
preload from the saved file on disk, it may just load into the dataspace.

On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 at 16:45, Tony Harminc  wrote:

> On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 at 05:22, Colin Paice  wrote:
> >
> > With Java and shared classes, it keeps a copy of the compiled classes in
> a
> > data space.
>
> How does it execute code from a dataspace?
>
> Tony H.
>
> --
> 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

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Tony Harminc]

On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 at 05:22, Colin Paice  wrote:
>
> With Java and shared classes, it keeps a copy of the compiled classes in a
> data space.

How does it execute code from a dataspace?

Tony H.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Seymour J Metz]

Go? Lua? Ruby? Rust?


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3



From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
David Crayford 
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2021 8:51 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Mainframe Modernization

I think "Mainframe Modernization" is an umbrella term that can be used
to describe many different things. That may be new UIs  or application
modernization such as adding a REST API to a legacy application. IBM are
doing a great job adding modern languages to z/OS that have features
traditional mainframe languages like COBOL lack.
I'm currently working on a product that takes monitoring data from
legacy products and streams it to analytics platforms such as Elastic,
Splunk or publises metrics for Prometheus/Grafana. Customers already use
these platforms for their distributed applications which interact with
the mainframe and it's important for them to see the entire stack using
modern solutions.

I don't consider 'cloud' or 'devops' to be BS. Devops has transformed
the way we work. We use Git, Jira, Bitbucket, Jenkins, Artifactory etc.
When we merge a branch in Git it fires off an automated Jenkins build
that can package our product and run tests. The old way of doing things
manually using batch jobs was error prone and tedious.
WRT cloud, I can stand up a personal development z/OS VM using Ansible
Tower in less than 2 minutes. I can do that from a web UI or by calling
a REST API. On the distributed side I'm a big fan of orchestration
technologies such a Kubernetes.  I run a single command to stand up a
cluster of VMs to deploy a software stack for testing.


On 21/10/2021 6:50 am, David Elliot wrote:
> Does anyone out there know what is meant by the expression "Mainframe
> Modernization' '? It seems  to be catching on with the Bobs but when you
> ask exactly how they propose to modernize their systems all you get is
> silence. As in if you don"know we shouldn't even be talking about it.
> Any ideas ? Or is it just more BS like 'cloud' or 'devops'?
>
> --
> 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

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Bob Bridges]

Wow!  That one goes in my bookmarks!

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* Beware of any Christian leader who does not walk with a limp.  -Bob Mumford 
*/

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
allan winston
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2021 12:55

   I stand corrected.  Thanks for the link to https://ibmdocs.pocnet.net/, 
which I was previously unaware of.

--- On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 12:35 PM Ed Jaffe  
wrote:
> Google Schmoogle...
>
> The message id shown in my example (BPW00256I) is documented in 
> Appendix C of IBM BatchPipes OS/390 V2R1 BatchPipeWorks Users Guide:
> https://ibmdocs.pocnet.net/SA22-7457-00.pdf

> --- On 10/21/2021 9:16 AM, allan winston wrote:
> > When I Google "TSO PIPE", I found that it is a command within Netview.
> > BatchPipes is a completely different program product.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Authentication negotiation failed - FTP

[Manoj Bandi]

Sure Thank you. 

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Allan Staller
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 6:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Authentication negotiation failed - FTP

Sent by an external sender
--

Classification: Public

Open a ticket with SHOPz support and let them figure it out.
The SHopz folks a re pretty good within their sphere of knowledge.

HTH,

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Manoj Bandi
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 6:26 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Authentication negotiation failed - FTP

[CAUTION: This Email is from outside the Organization. Unless you trust the 
sender, Don’t click links or open attachments as it may be a Phishing email, 
which can steal your Information and compromise your Computer.]

Hi,

What are the action we need to take for this  " secure_socket_init failed with 
rc = 410 (SSL message format s incorrect)  ".

could you please suggest.

FC1108 authServer: secure_socket_init failed with rc = 410 (SSL message format 
s incorrect)
FC1597 endSecureConn: entered
Authentication negotiation failed
FC1629 endSecureEnv: entered
SC4242 inSession: entered
CZ0734 SETCEC code = 17
Unable to successfully negotiate required authentication
CX0380 main: error and exit on error
SC4194 getLastReply: entered
CX0394 main: RC=-0001 cmd_in_progress=10
CX0397 main: last_reply= 234 err=17
PC0945 setClientRC: entered
SC4194 getLastReply: entered
PC1015 setClientRC: std_rc=10234, rc_type=STD, rc=10234 Std Return Code = 
10234, Error Code = 00017


Thanks & Regards,
Manoj

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Manoj Bandi
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 3:56 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Authentication negotiation failed - FTP

Sent by an external sender
--

Hi,

Am not able to download the software from ShopZ using FTP. Am getting  
Authentication negotiation failed  error message. Kindly help me out.


'TCPIP.SHOPZ.FTP.DATA' file having below parameters.

SECURE_FTPALLOWED
SECURE_MECHANISM  TLS
TLSRFCLEVEL   CCCNONOTIFY
TLSMECHANISM  FTP
SECURE_DATACONN   PRIVATE
KEYRING   *AUTH*/*
EPSV4 TRUE

Using 'TCPIP.SHOPZ.FTP.DATA' for local site configuration parameters.
IBM FTP CS V2R4
FTP: EXIT has been set.
Connecting to: dispby-117.boulder.ibm.com 170.225.15.117 port: 21.
220 ProFTPD Server (proftpd) Ý170.225.15.117¨
>>> AUTH TLS
234 AUTH TLS successful
Authentication negotiation failed
Unable to successfully negotiate required authentication Std Return Code = 
10234, Error Code = 00017


Thanks & Regards,
Manoj




--
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
::DISCLAIMER::

The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are confidential and intended 
for the named recipient(s) only. E-mail transmission is not guaranteed to be 
secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, 
destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or may contain viruses in transmission. 
The e mail and its contents (with or without referred errors) shall therefore 
not attach any liability on the originator or HCL or its affiliates. Views or 
opinions, if any, presented in this email are solely those of the author and 
may not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of HCL or its affiliates. Any 
form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, 
distribution and / or publication of this message without the prior written 
consent of authorized representative of HCL is strictly prohibited. If you have 
received this email in error please delete it and notify the sender 
immediately. Before opening any email and/or attachments, please check them for 
viruses and other defects.


--
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

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Seymour J Metz]

OREXX in OS/2 writes the tokenized form into extended attributes on the first 
call. Could Java do something similar? RFE?


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Colin Paice [colinpai...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 6:54 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Mainframe Modernization

"... With Java and shared classes, it keeps a copy of the compiled
classes in a data space. "
Hmm ... Sounds (functionally) like LLA/VLF.

yes - but better.   It keeps improving the hot spot code to make it more
efficient.
If IBM were to ship the "saved" classes, it would make every one's system
run faster from day 1, rather than have a slow first few days.

On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 at 11:25, David Spiegel  wrote:

> "... With Java and shared classes, it keeps a copy of the compiled
> classes in a data space. "
> Hmm ... Sounds (functionally) like LLA/VLF.
>
> On 2021-10-22 05:21, Colin Paice wrote:
> > With Java and shared classes, it keeps a copy of the compiled classes in
> a
> > data space. You can now "save" the latest image to disk, and reload that
> > next time you run.  If you save it every day, you  will be able to
> restore
> > the latest and greatest optimised version.
> > Without the shared classes, the first use  after IPL is slow, the second
> is
> > much faster.  See "Some of the mysteries of Java shared classes"
> > <
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcolinpaice.blog%2F2021%2F05%2F24%2Fsome-of-the-mysteries-of-java-shared-classes%2Fdata=04%7C01%7C%7C51fe13f38fde46feae6b08d9953d67de%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637704913299328393%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000sdata=64i2zFrbqIdMwZ%2BokN3va%2B3NjZTpinrfu8tXWZ74rHY%3Dreserved=0
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 at 08:52, Andrew Rowley <
> and...@blackhillsoftware.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 22/10/2021 2:46 am, A T & T Management wrote:
> >>>  Java, it has to be translated each time it run, provided you know
> >> the language and it's been debugged.  Schools may teach it but they too
> >> want to make money and look good because they can say it's modern and
> that
> >> is what they push.  Any CEO or executive who doesn't look at the total
> cost
> >> is doomed to fail.
> >> Don't write off Java too quickly. I previously posted about Software
> >> Drag Racing, which was a competition to test the speed of different
> >> languages.
> >>
> >> In the initial test on z/OS, Java was over 3 1/2 times faster than C++.
> >> With some tweaking, C++ ran as fast as Java, but not significantly
> faster.
> >>
> >> The results are written up here:
> >>
> >>
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.blackhillsoftware.com%2Fnews%2F2021%2F08%2F10%2Fjava-vs-c-drag-racing-on-z-os%2Fdata=04%7C01%7C%7C51fe13f38fde46feae6b08d9953d67de%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637704913299328393%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000sdata=P8SGNWwrhdsY4zjIL9a0PTOhnihTknXaYivvWbEaA7M%3Dreserved=0
> >>
> >> If you have a zIIP and your general purpose CPs are not full speed, Java
> >> might be the fastest language on your system by a big margin... and it
> >> doesn't count against general purpose CP usage.
> >>
> >> Java will compile to machine code where it makes a difference to
> >> performance. Just in Time compilation has some performance advantages:
> >> - it can optimize for the exact hardware
> >> - it can leave out infrequently used code paths and compile them later
> >> if they are actually required, making the machine code smaller and more
> >> efficient
> >> - it can monitor the code execution and recompile the hottest parts with
> >> extra optimizations
> >>
> >> IBM also talks a lot about RNI and processor cache... it turns out
> >> garbage collection is good for cache efficiency too. It moves all the
> >> active data into a smaller chunk of memory, which makes better use of
> >> processor cache and is good for your RNI.
> >>
> >> If you have well defined, well understood programs that are big CPU
> >> users, it certainly could be worth rewriting them in Java.
> >>
> >> (Knowing the language and debugging programs applies to any language...
> >> and I'm not denying you can write large programs and inefficient code in
> >> Java as much as in any other language.)
> >>
> >> Andrew Rowley
> >> Black Hill Software
> >>
> >> --
> >> 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 

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Bill Johnson]

Why the future belongs to banks, and not Fintechs 
  
|  
|   
|   
|   ||

   |

  |
|  
|   |  
Why the future belongs to banks, and not Fintechs
 
With emerging Fintech services taking the world of finance by storm, it might 
seem like banks are in...
  |   |

  |

  |

  



Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Friday, October 22, 2021, 6:35 AM, David Crayford  
wrote:

On 22/10/2021 5:59 pm, Radoslaw Skorupka wrote:
> W dniu 22.10.2021 o 03:12, David Crayford pisze:
>> On 21/10/2021 7:31 am, Bill Johnson wrote:
>>> I do almost everything important via app with a mainframe on the 
>>> back end. Banking, health records, retail shopping, insurance 
>>> claims, investing. And with very high confidence the transactions 
>>> are secure, fast, & always available. Not sure how more modern the 
>>> mainframe could be actually.
>>> Bill J
>>
>> I would suggest that almost all of those companies (banks, retail, 
>> insurance etc) that run mainframes run a significant portion of their 
>> IT systems on distributed systems. I recently met a software 
>> architect from a bank who told me that the explosion of internet 
>> banking app usage has pushed up the TCO of their mainframe to 
>> unacceptable levels. 70% of those transactions were reads (folks 
>> checking their bank balances on their phones). Their solution was use 
>> Apache Kafka to replicate the data to Apache Cassandra and only hit 
>> the mainframe for writes.
>
> BTDT, but not on Kafka. Indeed, the "cache system" ran up to 40% 
> transaction.
> Sounds good? Imagine: 40% less workload...
> NO
> There are light and heavy CICS transactions and cached ones were light.
> Proof: some day the cache stopped working due to system failure. 
> During rush hours.
> Observations from mainframe side: number of transactions per second 
> blew up. Average response time ...decreased a little bit.
> I was really happy reporting it to management.


The link I provided was Australia's largest (and a world top 20) bank 
with millions of transactions a day. They're not stupid, production 
technology choices are critical which is probably why IBM have spent $$ 
making sure Kafka runs ok on z/OS.

Caching isn't a new idea. It's a common CICS design pattern using TS so 
you don't have to make an expensive call to DB2 or IMS. The customer 
solution is not call the mainframe for read transactions. It's not 
uncommon, it starting to become pervasive. Writes are a different matter.


>
> However the management was not happy because of that, just because 
> they want to switch the mainframe off.  Nevermind, the new transaction 
> system has response times 35-140ms (compared to 4-5ms on mainframe).
>
>
>

--
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

Fw: Mainframe Modernization

[Bill Johnson]

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


Begin forwarded message:

On Friday, October 22, 2021, 9:39 AM, Bill Johnson  wrote:

Fintechs will never replace or even challenge banks.
Why the future belongs to banks, and not Fintechs 
  
|  
|  
|  
|   ||

  |

  |
|  
|   |  
Why the future belongs to banks, and not Fintechs
 
With emerging Fintech services taking the world of finance by storm, it might 
seem like banks are in...
  |   |

  |

  |

  


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Friday, October 22, 2021, 6:35 AM, David Crayford  
wrote:

On 22/10/2021 5:59 pm, Radoslaw Skorupka wrote:
> W dniu 22.10.2021 o 03:12, David Crayford pisze:
>> On 21/10/2021 7:31 am, Bill Johnson wrote:
>>> I do almost everything important via app with a mainframe on the 
>>> back end. Banking, health records, retail shopping, insurance 
>>> claims, investing. And with very high confidence the transactions 
>>> are secure, fast, & always available. Not sure how more modern the 
>>> mainframe could be actually.
>>> Bill J
>>
>> I would suggest that almost all of those companies (banks, retail, 
>> insurance etc) that run mainframes run a significant portion of their 
>> IT systems on distributed systems. I recently met a software 
>> architect from a bank who told me that the explosion of internet 
>> banking app usage has pushed up the TCO of their mainframe to 
>> unacceptable levels. 70% of those transactions were reads (folks 
>> checking their bank balances on their phones). Their solution was use 
>> Apache Kafka to replicate the data to Apache Cassandra and only hit 
>> the mainframe for writes.
>
> BTDT, but not on Kafka. Indeed, the "cache system" ran up to 40% 
> transaction.
> Sounds good? Imagine: 40% less workload...
> NO
> There are light and heavy CICS transactions and cached ones were light.
> Proof: some day the cache stopped working due to system failure. 
> During rush hours.
> Observations from mainframe side: number of transactions per second 
> blew up. Average response time ...decreased a little bit.
> I was really happy reporting it to management.


The link I provided was Australia's largest (and a world top 20) bank 
with millions of transactions a day. They're not stupid, production 
technology choices are critical which is probably why IBM have spent $$ 
making sure Kafka runs ok on z/OS.

Caching isn't a new idea. It's a common CICS design pattern using TS so 
you don't have to make an expensive call to DB2 or IMS. The customer 
solution is not call the mainframe for read transactions. It's not 
uncommon, it starting to become pervasive. Writes are a different matter.


>
> However the management was not happy because of that, just because 
> they want to switch the mainframe off.  Nevermind, the new transaction 
> system has response times 35-140ms (compared to 4-5ms on mainframe).
>
>
>

--
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

Re: Authentication negotiation failed - FTP

[Allan Staller]

Classification: Public

Open a ticket with SHOPz support and let them figure it out.
The SHopz folks a re pretty good within their sphere of knowledge.

HTH,

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Manoj Bandi
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 6:26 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Authentication negotiation failed - FTP

[CAUTION: This Email is from outside the Organization. Unless you trust the 
sender, Don’t click links or open attachments as it may be a Phishing email, 
which can steal your Information and compromise your Computer.]

Hi,

What are the action we need to take for this  " secure_socket_init failed with 
rc = 410 (SSL message format s incorrect)  ".

could you please suggest.

FC1108 authServer: secure_socket_init failed with rc = 410 (SSL message format 
s incorrect)
FC1597 endSecureConn: entered
Authentication negotiation failed
FC1629 endSecureEnv: entered
SC4242 inSession: entered
CZ0734 SETCEC code = 17
Unable to successfully negotiate required authentication
CX0380 main: error and exit on error
SC4194 getLastReply: entered
CX0394 main: RC=-0001 cmd_in_progress=10
CX0397 main: last_reply= 234 err=17
PC0945 setClientRC: entered
SC4194 getLastReply: entered
PC1015 setClientRC: std_rc=10234, rc_type=STD, rc=10234 Std Return Code = 
10234, Error Code = 00017


Thanks & Regards,
Manoj

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Manoj Bandi
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 3:56 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Authentication negotiation failed - FTP

Sent by an external sender
--

Hi,

Am not able to download the software from ShopZ using FTP. Am getting  
Authentication negotiation failed  error message. Kindly help me out.


'TCPIP.SHOPZ.FTP.DATA' file having below parameters.

SECURE_FTPALLOWED
SECURE_MECHANISM  TLS
TLSRFCLEVEL   CCCNONOTIFY
TLSMECHANISM  FTP
SECURE_DATACONN   PRIVATE
KEYRING   *AUTH*/*
EPSV4 TRUE

Using 'TCPIP.SHOPZ.FTP.DATA' for local site configuration parameters.
IBM FTP CS V2R4
FTP: EXIT has been set.
Connecting to: dispby-117.boulder.ibm.com 170.225.15.117 port: 21.
220 ProFTPD Server (proftpd) Ý170.225.15.117¨
>>> AUTH TLS
234 AUTH TLS successful
Authentication negotiation failed
Unable to successfully negotiate required authentication Std Return Code = 
10234, Error Code = 00017


Thanks & Regards,
Manoj




--
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
::DISCLAIMER::

The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are confidential and intended 
for the named recipient(s) only. E-mail transmission is not guaranteed to be 
secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, 
destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or may contain viruses in transmission. 
The e mail and its contents (with or without referred errors) shall therefore 
not attach any liability on the originator or HCL or its affiliates. Views or 
opinions, if any, presented in this email are solely those of the author and 
may not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of HCL or its affiliates. Any 
form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, 
distribution and / or publication of this message without the prior written 
consent of authorized representative of HCL is strictly prohibited. If you have 
received this email in error please delete it and notify the sender 
immediately. Before opening any email and/or attachments, please check them for 
viruses and other defects.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Bill Johnson]

Australia’s largest bank is Commonwealth Bank of Australia with a little over 1 
trillion in assets in Aussie dollars. ANZ banking group #2 at slightly over a 
trillion in assets. Wetpac banking 3rd at around 900 billion in assets. Which 
doesn’t put any of them in the top 20. The 20th bank in the real top 20 is 
Group BPCE of France at approx 1.5 trillion. These numbers are as of October 
10th, 2021.

Millions of transactions a day is comical. Millions per hour is what many banks 
process. 1 billion credit card transactions happen daily. Just credit cards.

I look forward to seeing your proof of an Aussie bank in the top 20.



The link I provided was Australia's largest (and a world top 20) bank 
with millions of transactions a day. They're not stupid, production 
technology choices are critical which is probably why IBM have spent $$ 
making sure Kafka runs ok on z/OS.

Caching isn't a new idea. It's a common CICS design pattern using TS so 
you don't have to make an expensive call to DB2 or IMS. The customer 
solution is not call the mainframe for read transactions. It's not 
uncommon, it starting to become pervasive. Writes are a different matter.


>
> However the management was not happy because of that, just because 
> they want to switch the mainframe off.  Nevermind, the new transaction 
> system has response times 35-140ms (compared to 4-5ms on mainframe).
>
>
>

--
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

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Radoslaw Skorupka]

W dniu 22.10.2021 o 12:35, David Crayford pisze:

On 22/10/2021 5:59 pm, Radoslaw Skorupka wrote:

W dniu 22.10.2021 o 03:12, David Crayford pisze:

On 21/10/2021 7:31 am, Bill Johnson wrote:
I do almost everything important via app with a mainframe on the 
back end. Banking, health records, retail shopping, insurance 
claims, investing. And with very high confidence the transactions 
are secure, fast, & always available. Not sure how more modern the 
mainframe could be actually.

Bill J


I would suggest that almost all of those companies (banks, retail, 
insurance etc) that run mainframes run a significant portion of 
their IT systems on distributed systems. I recently met a software 
architect from a bank who told me that the explosion of internet 
banking app usage has pushed up the TCO of their mainframe to 
unacceptable levels. 70% of those transactions were reads (folks 
checking their bank balances on their phones). Their solution was 
use Apache Kafka to replicate the data to Apache Cassandra and only 
hit the mainframe for writes.


BTDT, but not on Kafka. Indeed, the "cache system" ran up to 40% 
transaction.

Sounds good? Imagine: 40% less workload...
NO
There are light and heavy CICS transactions and cached ones were light.
Proof: some day the cache stopped working due to system failure. 
During rush hours.
Observations from mainframe side: number of transactions per second 
blew up. Average response time ...decreased a little bit.

I was really happy reporting it to management.



The link I provided was Australia's largest (and a world top 20) bank 
with millions of transactions a day. They're not stupid, production 
technology choices are critical which is probably why IBM have spent 
$$ making sure Kafka runs ok on z/OS.


Caching isn't a new idea. It's a common CICS design pattern using TS 
so you don't have to make an expensive call to DB2 or IMS. The 
customer solution is not call the mainframe for read transactions. 
It's not uncommon, it starting to become pervasive. Writes are a 
different matter.


The link I did not provide was a bank with hundreds of millions 
transactions a day.

And I didn't say caching is stupid or "they" are stupid.
I just told a story. Real story. And paid attention to misleading 
indicator.


--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

TSO Pipe command (Was: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Mainframe Modernization)

[Hobart Spitz]

Ed, Johnathan;

You guys are *so *lucky.

A few quick notes to get you started:

   - Unlike Unix piping, terminal output from the last stage is not
   implied.  (You'll find this makes sense later.)
   pipe < some.dsn | count words lines | term
   - The <, >, and >> are filters on their own, also unlike Unix.  (You'll
   see this makes sense later.)
   - Pipes I/O is better than execio.  You can read and write both datasets
   and DD names:
   "pipe < ddname=sysut1 | translate lower | > lower.case"
   - Pipes is integrated with REXX.  You can use variables and stems:
   "pipe var fred | split | stem fredwords."
   -
   - Stay with single stream piping for now.  You can do a lot with single
   streams before you need to go to the next level.
   - Stages can be aware of their position in the stream.  Some stages
   behave differently depending where they appear, especially in first
   position.  (You'll also see that this makes sense later.)
   - *pipe help   count* and/or *pipe ahelp translate* is a full-screen
   resource.   *pipe help*  for a menu.

Take a look at the marist.edu pipeline site, especially Melinda Varian's
introduction to pipes.

Be prepared to blow the minds of your coworkers and your management

I'll be happy to help in any way I can.

When I first tried Pipes, not giving a pipe specification just gave an
obscure syntax error.

Good luck.

OREXXMan
Would you rather pass data in move mode (*nix piping) or locate mode
(Pipes) or via disk (JCL)?  Why do you think you rarely see *nix commands
with more than a dozen filters, while Pipelines specifications are commonly
over 100s of stages, and 1000s of stages are not uncommon.
REXX is the new C.


On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 10:59 AM Ed Jaffe 
wrote:

> On 10/21/2021 8:18 AM, Nash, Jonathan S. wrote:
> > ... I just tried TSO PIPE and it worked
>
>   READY
> pipe
>   BPW00256I Enter a pipeline specification
>   READY
>
> --
> Phoenix Software International
> Edward E. Jaffe
> 831 Parkview Drive North
> El Segundo, CA 90245
> https://www.phoenixsoftware.com/
>
>
>
> 
> This e-mail message, including any attachments, appended messages and the
> information contained therein, is for the sole use of the intended
> recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient or have otherwise
> received this email message in error, any use, dissemination, distribution,
> review, storage or copying of this e-mail message and the information
> contained therein is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended
> recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies
> of this email message and do not otherwise utilize or retain this email
> message or any or all of the information contained therein. Although this
> email message and any attachments or appended messages are believed to be
> free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system
> into
> which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient
> to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by the
> sender for any loss or damage arising in any way from its opening or use.
>
> --
> 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

Re: Authentication negotiation failed - FTP

[Manoj Bandi]

Hi, 

What are the action we need to take for this  " secure_socket_init failed with 
rc = 410 (SSL message format
s incorrect)  ". 

could you please suggest. 

FC1108 authServer: secure_socket_init failed with rc = 410 (SSL message format
s incorrect)  
FC1597 endSecureConn: entered 
Authentication negotiation failed 
FC1629 endSecureEnv: entered  
SC4242 inSession: entered 
CZ0734 SETCEC code = 17   
Unable to successfully negotiate required authentication  
CX0380 main: error and exit on error  
SC4194 getLastReply: entered  
CX0394 main: RC=-0001 cmd_in_progress=10  
CX0397 main: last_reply= 234 err=17   
PC0945 setClientRC: entered   
SC4194 getLastReply: entered  
PC1015 setClientRC: std_rc=10234, rc_type=STD, rc=10234   
Std Return Code = 10234, Error Code = 00017   


Thanks & Regards,
Manoj 

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Manoj Bandi
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 3:56 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Authentication negotiation failed - FTP

Sent by an external sender
--

Hi,

Am not able to download the software from ShopZ using FTP. Am getting  
Authentication negotiation failed  error message. Kindly help me out.


'TCPIP.SHOPZ.FTP.DATA' file having below parameters.

SECURE_FTPALLOWED
SECURE_MECHANISM  TLS
TLSRFCLEVEL   CCCNONOTIFY
TLSMECHANISM  FTP
SECURE_DATACONN   PRIVATE
KEYRING   *AUTH*/*
EPSV4 TRUE

Using 'TCPIP.SHOPZ.FTP.DATA' for local site configuration parameters.
IBM FTP CS V2R4
FTP: EXIT has been set.
Connecting to: dispby-117.boulder.ibm.com 170.225.15.117 port: 21.
220 ProFTPD Server (proftpd) Ý170.225.15.117¨
>>> AUTH TLS
234 AUTH TLS successful
Authentication negotiation failed
Unable to successfully negotiate required authentication Std Return Code = 
10234, Error Code = 00017


Thanks & Regards,
Manoj




--
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

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Colin Paice]

"... With Java and shared classes, it keeps a copy of the compiled
classes in a data space. "
Hmm ... Sounds (functionally) like LLA/VLF.

yes - but better.   It keeps improving the hot spot code to make it more
efficient.
If IBM were to ship the "saved" classes, it would make every one's system
run faster from day 1, rather than have a slow first few days.

On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 at 11:25, David Spiegel  wrote:

> "... With Java and shared classes, it keeps a copy of the compiled
> classes in a data space. "
> Hmm ... Sounds (functionally) like LLA/VLF.
>
> On 2021-10-22 05:21, Colin Paice wrote:
> > With Java and shared classes, it keeps a copy of the compiled classes in
> a
> > data space. You can now "save" the latest image to disk, and reload that
> > next time you run.  If you save it every day, you  will be able to
> restore
> > the latest and greatest optimised version.
> > Without the shared classes, the first use  after IPL is slow, the second
> is
> > much faster.  See "Some of the mysteries of Java shared classes"
> > <
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcolinpaice.blog%2F2021%2F05%2F24%2Fsome-of-the-mysteries-of-java-shared-classes%2Fdata=04%7C01%7C%7C51fe13f38fde46feae6b08d9953d67de%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637704913299328393%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000sdata=64i2zFrbqIdMwZ%2BokN3va%2B3NjZTpinrfu8tXWZ74rHY%3Dreserved=0
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 at 08:52, Andrew Rowley <
> and...@blackhillsoftware.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 22/10/2021 2:46 am, A T & T Management wrote:
> >>>  Java, it has to be translated each time it run, provided you know
> >> the language and it's been debugged.  Schools may teach it but they too
> >> want to make money and look good because they can say it's modern and
> that
> >> is what they push.  Any CEO or executive who doesn't look at the total
> cost
> >> is doomed to fail.
> >> Don't write off Java too quickly. I previously posted about Software
> >> Drag Racing, which was a competition to test the speed of different
> >> languages.
> >>
> >> In the initial test on z/OS, Java was over 3 1/2 times faster than C++.
> >> With some tweaking, C++ ran as fast as Java, but not significantly
> faster.
> >>
> >> The results are written up here:
> >>
> >>
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.blackhillsoftware.com%2Fnews%2F2021%2F08%2F10%2Fjava-vs-c-drag-racing-on-z-os%2Fdata=04%7C01%7C%7C51fe13f38fde46feae6b08d9953d67de%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637704913299328393%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000sdata=P8SGNWwrhdsY4zjIL9a0PTOhnihTknXaYivvWbEaA7M%3Dreserved=0
> >>
> >> If you have a zIIP and your general purpose CPs are not full speed, Java
> >> might be the fastest language on your system by a big margin... and it
> >> doesn't count against general purpose CP usage.
> >>
> >> Java will compile to machine code where it makes a difference to
> >> performance. Just in Time compilation has some performance advantages:
> >> - it can optimize for the exact hardware
> >> - it can leave out infrequently used code paths and compile them later
> >> if they are actually required, making the machine code smaller and more
> >> efficient
> >> - it can monitor the code execution and recompile the hottest parts with
> >> extra optimizations
> >>
> >> IBM also talks a lot about RNI and processor cache... it turns out
> >> garbage collection is good for cache efficiency too. It moves all the
> >> active data into a smaller chunk of memory, which makes better use of
> >> processor cache and is good for your RNI.
> >>
> >> If you have well defined, well understood programs that are big CPU
> >> users, it certainly could be worth rewriting them in Java.
> >>
> >> (Knowing the language and debugging programs applies to any language...
> >> and I'm not denying you can write large programs and inefficient code in
> >> Java as much as in any other language.)
> >>
> >> Andrew Rowley
> >> Black Hill Software
> >>
> >> --
> >> 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
> > .
>
> --
> 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: 

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[David Crayford]

On 22/10/2021 5:59 pm, Radoslaw Skorupka wrote:

W dniu 22.10.2021 o 03:12, David Crayford pisze:

On 21/10/2021 7:31 am, Bill Johnson wrote:
I do almost everything important via app with a mainframe on the 
back end. Banking, health records, retail shopping, insurance 
claims, investing. And with very high confidence the transactions 
are secure, fast, & always available. Not sure how more modern the 
mainframe could be actually.

Bill J


I would suggest that almost all of those companies (banks, retail, 
insurance etc) that run mainframes run a significant portion of their 
IT systems on distributed systems. I recently met a software 
architect from a bank who told me that the explosion of internet 
banking app usage has pushed up the TCO of their mainframe to 
unacceptable levels. 70% of those transactions were reads (folks 
checking their bank balances on their phones). Their solution was use 
Apache Kafka to replicate the data to Apache Cassandra and only hit 
the mainframe for writes.


BTDT, but not on Kafka. Indeed, the "cache system" ran up to 40% 
transaction.

Sounds good? Imagine: 40% less workload...
NO
There are light and heavy CICS transactions and cached ones were light.
Proof: some day the cache stopped working due to system failure. 
During rush hours.
Observations from mainframe side: number of transactions per second 
blew up. Average response time ...decreased a little bit.

I was really happy reporting it to management.



The link I provided was Australia's largest (and a world top 20) bank 
with millions of transactions a day. They're not stupid, production 
technology choices are critical which is probably why IBM have spent $$ 
making sure Kafka runs ok on z/OS.


Caching isn't a new idea. It's a common CICS design pattern using TS so 
you don't have to make an expensive call to DB2 or IMS. The customer 
solution is not call the mainframe for read transactions. It's not 
uncommon, it starting to become pervasive. Writes are a different matter.





However the management was not happy because of that, just because 
they want to switch the mainframe off.  Nevermind, the new transaction 
system has response times 35-140ms (compared to 4-5ms on mainframe).






--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Authentication negotiation failed - FTP

[Manoj Bandi]

Hi,

Am not able to download the software from ShopZ using FTP. Am getting  
Authentication negotiation failed  error message. Kindly help me out.


'TCPIP.SHOPZ.FTP.DATA' file having below parameters.

SECURE_FTPALLOWED
SECURE_MECHANISM  TLS
TLSRFCLEVEL   CCCNONOTIFY
TLSMECHANISM  FTP
SECURE_DATACONN   PRIVATE
KEYRING   *AUTH*/*
EPSV4 TRUE

Using 'TCPIP.SHOPZ.FTP.DATA' for local site configuration parameters.
IBM FTP CS V2R4
FTP: EXIT has been set.
Connecting to: dispby-117.boulder.ibm.com 170.225.15.117 port: 21.
220 ProFTPD Server (proftpd) Ý170.225.15.117¨
>>> AUTH TLS
234 AUTH TLS successful
Authentication negotiation failed
Unable to successfully negotiate required authentication
Std Return Code = 10234, Error Code = 00017


Thanks & Regards,
Manoj




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[David Spiegel]

"... With Java and shared classes, it keeps a copy of the compiled 
classes in a data space. "

Hmm ... Sounds (functionally) like LLA/VLF.

On 2021-10-22 05:21, Colin Paice wrote:

With Java and shared classes, it keeps a copy of the compiled classes in a
data space. You can now "save" the latest image to disk, and reload that
next time you run.  If you save it every day, you  will be able to restore
the latest and greatest optimised version.
Without the shared classes, the first use  after IPL is slow, the second is
much faster.  See "Some of the mysteries of Java shared classes"


On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 at 08:52, Andrew Rowley 
wrote:


On 22/10/2021 2:46 am, A T & T Management wrote:

 Java, it has to be translated each time it run, provided you know

the language and it's been debugged.  Schools may teach it but they too
want to make money and look good because they can say it's modern and that
is what they push.  Any CEO or executive who doesn't look at the total cost
is doomed to fail.
Don't write off Java too quickly. I previously posted about Software
Drag Racing, which was a competition to test the speed of different
languages.

In the initial test on z/OS, Java was over 3 1/2 times faster than C++.
With some tweaking, C++ ran as fast as Java, but not significantly faster.

The results are written up here:

https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.blackhillsoftware.com%2Fnews%2F2021%2F08%2F10%2Fjava-vs-c-drag-racing-on-z-os%2Fdata=04%7C01%7C%7C51fe13f38fde46feae6b08d9953d67de%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637704913299328393%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000sdata=P8SGNWwrhdsY4zjIL9a0PTOhnihTknXaYivvWbEaA7M%3Dreserved=0

If you have a zIIP and your general purpose CPs are not full speed, Java
might be the fastest language on your system by a big margin... and it
doesn't count against general purpose CP usage.

Java will compile to machine code where it makes a difference to
performance. Just in Time compilation has some performance advantages:
- it can optimize for the exact hardware
- it can leave out infrequently used code paths and compile them later
if they are actually required, making the machine code smaller and more
efficient
- it can monitor the code execution and recompile the hottest parts with
extra optimizations

IBM also talks a lot about RNI and processor cache... it turns out
garbage collection is good for cache efficiency too. It moves all the
active data into a smaller chunk of memory, which makes better use of
processor cache and is good for your RNI.

If you have well defined, well understood programs that are big CPU
users, it certainly could be worth rewriting them in Java.

(Knowing the language and debugging programs applies to any language...
and I'm not denying you can write large programs and inefficient code in
Java as much as in any other language.)

Andrew Rowley
Black Hill Software

--
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
.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: C signal() and abends not being signaled

[David Crayford]

On 22/10/2021 5:18 pm, Jantje. wrote:

That said, as @Joe says, the C signal handling is not real conducive to "make note 
of the problem and continue on where you were" processing.


O, and returning from the signal handler does indeed resume processing after 
the instruction that caused the abend. No need jumping through neither SPIE nor 
STAE hoops.


Not a good idea. If your program fails with an 0C4 then it's broken and 
the output is not reliable. Best thing to do is print a message and shut 
down. But then if you don't have a dump you've thrown off the life 
jacket before you've set sail.




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Radoslaw Skorupka]

W dniu 22.10.2021 o 03:12, David Crayford pisze:

On 21/10/2021 7:31 am, Bill Johnson wrote:
I do almost everything important via app with a mainframe on the back 
end. Banking, health records, retail shopping, insurance claims, 
investing. And with very high confidence the transactions are secure, 
fast, & always available. Not sure how more modern the mainframe 
could be actually.

Bill J


I would suggest that almost all of those companies (banks, retail, 
insurance etc) that run mainframes run a significant portion of their 
IT systems on distributed systems. I recently met a software architect 
from a bank who told me that the explosion of internet banking app 
usage has pushed up the TCO of their mainframe to unacceptable levels. 
70% of those transactions were reads (folks checking their bank 
balances on their phones). Their solution was use Apache Kafka to 
replicate the data to Apache Cassandra and only hit the mainframe for 
writes.


BTDT, but not on Kafka. Indeed, the "cache system" ran up to 40% 
transaction.

Sounds good? Imagine: 40% less workload...
NO
There are light and heavy CICS transactions and cached ones were light.
Proof: some day the cache stopped working due to system failure. During 
rush hours.
Observations from mainframe side: number of transactions per second blew 
up. Average response time ...decreased a little bit.

I was really happy reporting it to management.

However the management was not happy because of that, just because they 
want to switch the mainframe off.  Nevermind, the new transaction system 
has response times 35-140ms (compared to 4-5ms on mainframe).




--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IHS Apache - authentication via LDAP

[Jantje.]

On Tue, 19 Oct 2021 16:21:46 -0500, Alan Altmark  
wrote:


>Does anyone know if the z/OS IHS (Apache) server supports password expiry and 
>change when performing authentication via LDAP?   That is, if the web server 
>prompts for credentials and the pw is expired, will it enter into a dialog to 
>get it changed?
>
I am not using LDAP at all, authentication is done against RACF in our 
installation. But here goes anyway, maybe you can get some ideas from it...

  

SAFRunAsEarly On
SAFRunAs %%CLIENT%%
AuthName ServerStatus
AuthTypeBasic
AuthBasicProvider saf
AuthSAFExpiredForm /change-saf-password
Require saf-group GSYST
Require saf-group GSECADM
SetHandler server-status

  

This is a little part of my httpd.conf, where the server status link is 
defined. The SAFRunAs makes the request being run with the identity of the 
client (the browser). UserID and password are asked for if needed (using Basic 
Authenthication, see the AuthType clause), authentication is done against RACF 
(SAF, that is...). If the password is expired, a redirect is done towards the 
/change-saf-password location where the built-in password change page is 
defined:

  
SetHandler saf-change-pw
# AuthSAFExpiredForm specified here to ensure that
# mod_authnz_saf can redirect back to the form if there was an
# error when trying to update the password.
AuthSAFExpiredForm /change-saf-password
  

Hope this helps.

Cheers,

Jantje.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Colin Paice]

With Java and shared classes, it keeps a copy of the compiled classes in a
data space. You can now "save" the latest image to disk, and reload that
next time you run.  If you save it every day, you  will be able to restore
the latest and greatest optimised version.
Without the shared classes, the first use  after IPL is slow, the second is
much faster.  See "Some of the mysteries of Java shared classes"


On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 at 08:52, Andrew Rowley 
wrote:

> On 22/10/2021 2:46 am, A T & T Management wrote:
> > Java, it has to be translated each time it run, provided you know
> the language and it's been debugged.  Schools may teach it but they too
> want to make money and look good because they can say it's modern and that
> is what they push.  Any CEO or executive who doesn't look at the total cost
> is doomed to fail.
> Don't write off Java too quickly. I previously posted about Software
> Drag Racing, which was a competition to test the speed of different
> languages.
>
> In the initial test on z/OS, Java was over 3 1/2 times faster than C++.
> With some tweaking, C++ ran as fast as Java, but not significantly faster.
>
> The results are written up here:
>
> https://www.blackhillsoftware.com/news/2021/08/10/java-vs-c-drag-racing-on-z-os/
>
> If you have a zIIP and your general purpose CPs are not full speed, Java
> might be the fastest language on your system by a big margin... and it
> doesn't count against general purpose CP usage.
>
> Java will compile to machine code where it makes a difference to
> performance. Just in Time compilation has some performance advantages:
> - it can optimize for the exact hardware
> - it can leave out infrequently used code paths and compile them later
> if they are actually required, making the machine code smaller and more
> efficient
> - it can monitor the code execution and recompile the hottest parts with
> extra optimizations
>
> IBM also talks a lot about RNI and processor cache... it turns out
> garbage collection is good for cache efficiency too. It moves all the
> active data into a smaller chunk of memory, which makes better use of
> processor cache and is good for your RNI.
>
> If you have well defined, well understood programs that are big CPU
> users, it certainly could be worth rewriting them in Java.
>
> (Knowing the language and debugging programs applies to any language...
> and I'm not denying you can write large programs and inefficient code in
> Java as much as in any other language.)
>
> Andrew Rowley
> Black Hill Software
>
> --
> 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

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[David Crayford]

On 22/10/2021 3:51 pm, Andrew Rowley wrote:

On 22/10/2021 2:46 am, A T & T Management wrote:
    Java, it has to be translated each time it run, provided you know 
the language and it's been debugged.  Schools may teach it but they 
too want to make money and look good because they can say it's modern 
and that is what they push.  Any CEO or executive who doesn't look at 
the total cost is doomed to fail.
Don't write off Java too quickly. I previously posted about Software 
Drag Racing, which was a competition to test the speed of different 
languages.


In the initial test on z/OS, Java was over 3 1/2 times faster than 
C++. With some tweaking, C++ ran as fast as Java, but not 
significantly faster.


The results are written up here:
https://www.blackhillsoftware.com/news/2021/08/10/java-vs-c-drag-racing-on-z-os/ 



Disclaimer. I've been writing 90% of my code in the last couple of years 
using Java. I really like it and having a language specification with no 
undefined behavior is awesome. It's also brilliant for multi-threaded 
code and the open source frameworks and libraries are endless. Having 
said that, I wouldn't consider a drag race using a prime number sieve a 
good
indication of the overall performance of Java on z/OS. That's a very 
specific use case and not one that anybody would ever use on the 
mainframe. I've been playing around with IBMs new port of golang and in 
lots of benchmarks it beats the JVM as does C++. Our machines all run 
full-capacity so Java has a huge advantage for sub-capacity customers.





If you have a zIIP and your general purpose CPs are not full speed, 
Java might be the fastest language on your system by a big margin... 
and it doesn't count against general purpose CP usage.


+1M



Java will compile to machine code where it makes a difference to 
performance. Just in Time compilation has some performance advantages:

- it can optimize for the exact hardware
- it can leave out infrequently used code paths and compile them later 
if they are actually required, making the machine code smaller and 
more efficient
- it can monitor the code execution and recompile the hottest parts 
with extra optimizations


IBM also talks a lot about RNI and processor cache... it turns out 
garbage collection is good for cache efficiency too. It moves all the 
active data into a smaller chunk of memory, which makes better use of 
processor cache and is good for your RNI.


That sounds far fetched! Java's stop the world GC cycles are not good 
for performance. Java doesn't support reference types so all of it's 
data even if it's local is on the heap.



If you have well defined, well understood programs that are big CPU 
users, it certainly could be worth rewriting them in Java.


(Knowing the language and debugging programs applies to any 
language... and I'm not denying you can write large programs and 
inefficient code in Java as much as in any other language.)


Andrew Rowley
Black Hill Software

--
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

Re: C signal() and abends not being signaled

[Jantje.]

On Tue, 19 Oct 2021 09:13:09 -0700, Charles Mills  wrote:

>I have a lot of experience with catching signals in a "conventional MVS" 
>started task written in C++. (Signal handling is a C function but also 
>available in C++.) In my experience the signal handler was perfect at catching 
>S0C4 type exceptions with SIGSEGV.
>
Catching the SIGSEGV does the job. *THANKS!*


>That said, as @Joe says, the C signal handling is not real conducive to "make 
>note of the problem and continue on where you were" processing. 
>
O, and returning from the signal handler does indeed resume processing after 
the instruction that caused the abend. No need jumping through neither SPIE nor 
STAE hoops.

Cheers,

Jantje.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Andrew Rowley]

On 22/10/2021 2:46 am, A T & T Management wrote:

    Java, it has to be translated each time it run, provided you know the 
language and it's been debugged.  Schools may teach it but they too want to 
make money and look good because they can say it's modern and that is what they 
push.  Any CEO or executive who doesn't look at the total cost is doomed to 
fail.
Don't write off Java too quickly. I previously posted about Software 
Drag Racing, which was a competition to test the speed of different 
languages.


In the initial test on z/OS, Java was over 3 1/2 times faster than C++. 
With some tweaking, C++ ran as fast as Java, but not significantly faster.


The results are written up here:
https://www.blackhillsoftware.com/news/2021/08/10/java-vs-c-drag-racing-on-z-os/

If you have a zIIP and your general purpose CPs are not full speed, Java 
might be the fastest language on your system by a big margin... and it 
doesn't count against general purpose CP usage.


Java will compile to machine code where it makes a difference to 
performance. Just in Time compilation has some performance advantages:

- it can optimize for the exact hardware
- it can leave out infrequently used code paths and compile them later 
if they are actually required, making the machine code smaller and more 
efficient
- it can monitor the code execution and recompile the hottest parts with 
extra optimizations


IBM also talks a lot about RNI and processor cache... it turns out 
garbage collection is good for cache efficiency too. It moves all the 
active data into a smaller chunk of memory, which makes better use of 
processor cache and is good for your RNI.


If you have well defined, well understood programs that are big CPU 
users, it certainly could be worth rewriting them in Java.


(Knowing the language and debugging programs applies to any language... 
and I'm not denying you can write large programs and inefficient code in 
Java as much as in any other language.)


Andrew Rowley
Black Hill Software

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[David Crayford]

On 22/10/2021 11:13 am, Bill Johnson wrote:

Reasonable? People who weren’t aware of 5-9’s, who thought pharmacies weren’t 
open 24 hours a day. Silly you.


Being obnoxious and abusive isn't going to help your cause Bill! 99.999% 
of the folks the frequent this forum are mainframe advocates.  And the 
non-retires are more than aware distributed systems are important 
components of their IT operations. Spouting the same old hackneyed 
nonsense is a waste of time.


BTW, Amazon AWS, MS Azure, VMware etc all offer 99.999% uptime SLAs in 
their cloud products. It's not cheap but nor is any enterprise computing 
platform. I would rather run a mainframe but start-ups are not going to 
do that. Netflix is a $B business and I would be p**sed if I couldn't 
stream movies without and outage ;)






Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Thursday, October 21, 2021, 11:07 PM, Tom Brennan 
 wrote:

And here I thought you could have a reasonable conversation about an
important topic.  Silly me.

On 10/21/2021 7:59 PM, Bill Johnson wrote:

I don’t really care Tom. Any more than I cared in 1995 when people like you 
told me the mainframe was going to be gone in 5 years and I better look for my 
next profession. I’m not looking for agreement like most of you.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Thursday, October 21, 2021, 10:50 PM, Tom Brennan 
 wrote:

Then you're lucky because my view is more like what David said.

On 10/21/2021 6:49 PM, Bill Johnson wrote:

Plus, I’ve worked in 15 shops in my career, including banking, insurance, 
retail, and health care. In all of them, the mainframe is the most important 
and most used platform. And it’s not even close.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Thursday, October 21, 2021, 9:13 PM, David Crayford  
wrote:

On 21/10/2021 7:31 am, Bill Johnson wrote:

I do almost everything important via app with a mainframe on the back end. Banking, 
health records, retail shopping, insurance claims, investing. And with very high 
confidence the transactions are secure, fast, & always available. Not sure how 
more modern the mainframe could be actually.
Bill J

I would suggest that almost all of those companies (banks, retail,
insurance etc) that run mainframes run a significant portion of their IT
systems on distributed systems. I recently met a software architect from
a bank who told me that the explosion of internet banking app usage has
pushed up the TCO of their mainframe to unacceptable levels. 70% of
those transactions were reads (folks checking their bank balances on
their phones). Their solution was use Apache Kafka to replicate the data
to Apache Cassandra and only hit the mainframe for writes.

Apache Kafka can be deployed on z/OS but it was crippled due to the
BPX1MMP (mmap) service being contained to 2GB. IBM have recently fixed
that which is another good example of mainframe modernization
https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/apar/PH32235.



Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Wednesday, October 20, 2021, 7:18 PM, Rich Smrcina 
 wrote:

That can certainly be part of it.

But it can also mean providing applications (typically web based) with access 
to z/OS data, or interfaces. Whether that’s direct access to the data, or 
access through a REST type interface. That way the mainframe can retain it’s 
role as the system of record, and at the same time put a more modern face on 
the applications.

Rich Smrcina



On Oct 20, 2021, at 6:08 PM, Mark Jacobs 
<0224d287a4b1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

I think it's related to the push for the z/OS Management Facility (z/OSMF) and 
Zowe over traditional system administration and programming methods.

Mark Jacobs

Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email.

GPG Public Key - 
https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get=markjac...@protonmail.com

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐

On Wednesday, October 20th, 2021 at 6:50 PM, David Elliot 
 wrote:


Does anyone out there know what is meant by the expression "Mainframe

Modernization' '? It seems to be catching on with the Bobs but when you

ask exactly how they propose to modernize their systems all you get is

silence. As in if you don"know we shouldn't even be talking about it.

Any ideas ? Or is it just more BS like 'cloud' or 'devops'?

---

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

Re: Mainframe Modernization

[Andrew Rowley]

On 22/10/2021 12:37 am, kekronbekron wrote:

Your customers with newer software don't need to be 'punished with' binaries 
made for/from older Java, when newer Java versions might offer some sort of 
instruction-level enhancements.


It's really the other way round... compiled languages like C++ and COBOL 
have to be compiled to support the lowest instruction set. Java can JIT 
compile at runtime for the hardware it is running on.


I think the enhancements in later versions of Java are more to make 
things easier for the programmer than to produce more efficient byte code.


Andrew Rowley
Black Hill Software

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: C signal() and abends not being signaled

[Robin Atwood]

You will also want TRAP(OFF) in your LE options otherwise LE will always 
intercept any abend.

Robin

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
David Crayford
Sent: 22 October 2021 07:23
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: C signal() and abends not being signaled

You're using the wrong signal. SIGABND catches abends such as x37. If you want 
to catch machine checks use SIGSEGV (0C4), SIGILL (0C1) etc.

On 19/10/2021 11:03 pm, Jantje. wrote:
> Esteemed listers,
>
> I have the situation that in the vast majority of cases the C program just 
> works fine, but in an infinitesimal small number of cases, it gets a S0C4 
> abend. I could perhaps, through intricate testing and comparing of lots of 
> things -- and burning huge amounts of CPU in doing so -- prevent the abend 
> from happening, but I would rather avoid the cost of that testing and instead 
> privilege the normal case.
>
> So, I thought to use the signal() function to take control in those very few 
> cases where the abend occurs.
>
> However...
>
> signal or no signal, LE takes that CEEDUMP and the program stops, no matter 
> what.
>
> What am I missing?
>
> I reduced my program to bare minimum to prove the point. Here is the code:
>
> #include 
> #include 
> #include 
> #ifdef __cplusplus
>extern "C" void StrAbn(int);
> #else
>void StrAbn(int);
> #endif
> int main(int argc, char *argvݨ) {
>printf("Setting abend handler\n");
>if (signal(SIGABND, StrAbn) == SIG_ERR) {
>  perror("Could not signal user signal");
>  abort();
>} else {
>  printf("Abend handler set\n");
>}
>printf("This must cause an abend\n");
>strcpy(0,"Coucou");
>printf("Continuing after abend\n");
>return(0);
> }
> void StrAbn(int SIG_TYPE) {
>printf("Trapped a vicious abend\n");
>signal(SIG_TYPE, SIG_IGN);
>printf("Exiting after the abend\n");
>exit(0);
> }
>   
> The output says:
>
> Setting abend handler
> Abend handler set
> This must cause an abend
>
> and it does cause an abend. But control does not come to my signal handling 
> routine. The "Trapped a vicious abend" never appears.
> I have been reading up on LE condition handling and on the use of the 
> signal() function, and I have searched the archives of this very list. All to 
> no avail.
>
> For what it is worth: I do see the following LE options:
>
> ABPERC(NONE)
> ABTERMENC(ABEND)
> DEBUG
> POSIX(OFF)
> NOTEST(ALL,"*","PROMPT","INSPPREF")
> TRAP(ON,SPIE)
>   
> So, what do I need to do to actually trap that abend and get control back in 
> my program when it happens?
>
> Any and all suggestions are welcome.
>
> Thanks and very best regards,
>
> Jantje.
>
> --
> 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

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN