Our customer was also running SAP with lots of DB2.
Yup, I think the bug has been there since 1.7 base; there was some
change in multivolume dataset processing, pre 1.7 systems could cope
with datsets being catalogued with volumes in the wrong sequence, but
1.7 can't.
I believe there is a ++APAR
The message regards tape device.
How to find out what system holds the device ?
(except from checking it on every system console)
Radoslaw Skorupka
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to
Radoslaw, and all the curious,
Lxxxyy is a system generated volser created by OPEN/EOV when a non-
specific request is made with label type NL. In addition, even though you can
create a TAPEVOL profile it cannot provide protection because OPEN never
calls SAF for LABEL=NL.
One of the
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 04:15 -0500, R.S. wrote:
The message regards tape device.
How to find out what system holds the device ?
(except from checking it on every system console)
What's with all the crazy questions Radoslaw ???.
Things a bit slow in Poland mate ??? ;-)
Shane ...
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 04:15 -0500, R.S. wrote:
The message regards tape device.
How to find out what system holds the device ?
(except from checking it on every system console)
And to (partially) answer the question ...
When we have seen this, we weren't able to ascertain the holding system
If the unit is being used in a sysplex then the following command issued
on one system should suffice :
RO *ALL,D U,,,addr
However, as Shane points out if the unit is online to a system outside
the sysplex, then I cannot think of a better procedure than :
(a) Gulp
(b)
- Original Message
From: Logaa .T [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If I log on to 2 diff LPAR with same id , and I change my password in one of
the session. Will the password be updated?
If you share the same RACF (or other security product) database across the
LPARs, the answer is yes.
ISPF
-- snip --
If the unit is being used in a sysplex then the following command issued
on one system should suffice :
RO *ALL,D U,,,addr
However, as Shane points out if the unit is online to a system outside
the sysplex, then I cannot think of a better procedure than :
(a) Gulp
(b) Issue the D
Can anyone tell me what the ETCRC address space I see on our z/OS 1.7
system is for? There are varying numbers of these running and I can
find nothing in the z/OS documentation. They sometimes use a large
amount of CPU. Currently one of these has a load library allocated that
I need to rename
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED].
...
-- snip --
If the unit is being used in a sysplex then the following command
issued
on one system should suffice :
RO *ALL,D U,,,addr
However, as Shane points out if the unit is online to a system outside
the sysplex, then
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED].
...
-- snip --
If the unit is being used in a sysplex then the following command
issued
on one system should suffice :
RO *ALL,D U,,,addr
However, as Shane points out if the unit is online to a system outside
the sysplex, then
These are Unix System Services processes initiated from the /etc/rc script
at IPL time. You can find out more about them from the SDSF PS display or
the system command D OMVS,A=ALL or by using the ps shell command
and by browsing /etc/rc. They can be restarted if necessary but you need
to find out
Thanks, Bill. That's exactly what I needed.
William
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Big Iron
Sent: 23 April 2007 13:11
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: ETCRC address space
These are Unix System Services processes
From my limitied knowledge you will only have to perform the ACTIVATE.
Howard Rifkind [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just added a volume to my SMS
SGDEVE goup and after looking for it with ISMF I saw that it was there.
All id did was run an ickdsf job (init) with the STGR parameter.
My question
Issue command D SMS,VOL(volser) on your console. If it comes back with
CBR1064I Command rejected. Volume serial number volser undefined.
You need to validate and activate the updated sms configuration. You
don't need to translate the ACS routine(s) unless you made a change to
them.
Regards,
John
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 09:10:20 +0100, Beesley, Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Our customer was also running SAP with lots of DB2.
Yup, I think the bug has been there since 1.7 base; there was some
change in multivolume dataset processing, pre 1.7 systems could cope
with datsets being catalogued with
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 12:32:52 -0500, Brian Peterson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
NIPCON is a red herring - and has nothing to do with the original post's issue.
The z/OS Console component PINs UCBs. Not NIP. Doesn't matter what is
listed in NIPCON. Not at all.
From MVS Planning: Operations
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 05:18:43 -0500, Logaa .T [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi List,
I believe after Zos1.4 it is possible to log on to multiple LPAR with same id.
I have some questions here,
If I log on to 2 diff LPAR with same id , and I change my password in one of
the session. Will the password
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 07:10:39 -0500, Big Iron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
These are Unix System Services processes initiated from the /etc/rc script
at IPL time. You can find out more about them from the SDSF PS display or
the system command D OMVS,A=ALL or by using the ps shell command
and by
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Gould
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2007 10:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: The Sky is indeed Falling
On Apr 14, 2007, at 3:57 AM, Phil Payne wrote:
Forget PSI. Forget
Hi,
Products that measure LPAR activity may get an ABEND or bad data due to bad
data in the LCCA control block. We saw this with CA-SYSVIEW (ABEND S0C9) and
IBM APAR OA19440 was recommended.
OA19440 LCCAWTIM INVALID LARGE NEGATIVE VALUE - X'FF0 0 '
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tim Hare
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 9:07 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Ln tapes mystery
Is there ever really a reason for using NL tape, these days? I may be
wrong, but it seems
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thompson, Steve
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 10:02 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Ln tapes mystery
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
This may be somewhat of a religious question, Is it better to be right up to
the current level of available maintenance or is it better to hang back a few
months worth so as not to apply a PTF that goes PE? Is Z/OS 1.8 so buggy that
current maintenance is required?
Mark Zelden [EMAIL
Ed Gould wrote:
Any guesses what will come after zSeries?
After zSeries comes System z.
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800
Los Angeles, CA 90045
310-338-0400 x318
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 08:40:54 -0700, Craig Bakken [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This may be somewhat of a religious question, Is it better to be right up
to the current level of available maintenance or is it better to hang back a
few months worth so as not to apply a PTF that goes PE? Is Z/OS 1.8 so
IMHO while the IBM APAR is good anyone fishing in the LCCA should be
prepared to clean whatever they catch :-)
Since you mention fishing in the LCCA, I would add that anyone fishing
in the
LCCA or PCCA should consider using a 31-bit (addressing mode) pole.
In z/OS 1.9, there are parmlib
Hi Timothy,
Thanks very much for your reply, your questions make me lean towards keeping
SCLM. My site is concerned about the long term value in doing this, which
you also suggest will be ok. We are meeting with IBM this afternoon,
however, we are still interested in speaking with anybody
In a recent note, McKown, John said:
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 10:08:51 -0500
Not all systems that can write tape that is sent to a mainframe
(specifically, z/OS) write labels. It may be an application design
issue, but never-the-less, it happens.
Like many Windows and Linux
On Apr 23, 2007, at 11:42 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
-SNIP
And, I wish z/OS supported volsers _much_ longer than six
characters. Then
a vendor could incorporate a registered trademark in product
volsers and
let the USPTO moderate conflicts.
-- gil
Well, there go my aspirations for attending NIU after I retire.
Tim Hare
Senior Systems Programmer
Florida Department of Transportation
(850) 414-4209
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email
NOTICE:
All information in and attached to the e-mail(s) below may be proprietary,
confidential, privileged and otherwise protected from improper or erroneous
disclosure. If you are not the sender's intended recipient, you are not
authorized to intercept, read, print, retain, copy, forward, or
We recently did an upgrade to CA-MIM and encountered a problem with multiple
logins.
MIM added the following
SYSIKJBC GDIF=YES, /* Needed when SYS1.BRODCAST
SCOPE=SYSTEMS, /* data set is shared between
EXEMPT=NO, /* multiple systems, per
The new updated to the z/Architecture Principles of Operation is now
available at
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/epubs/pdf/a2278325.pdf
John Ehrman
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send
In a message dated 4/23/2007 12:17:43 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
1 college down, 50,000 to go.
Wonder why they went with z900? No zIIPs or zAAPs. Maybe for the price they
just added another couple CPUs and let VM figure it out.
Actually many of the
Wonder why they went with z900?
Because they went out of support/marketting last year?
(Sorry, did I say that out loud?)
-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
Where is bit 27 of STORE FACILITY LIST in figure 4-18? We have a 2094-S18
with it on!
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU wrote on 04/23/2007
06:13:09 PM:
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:10:15 -0700, John R. Ehrman wrote:
The new updated to the z/Architecture Principles of Operation
Tom Schmidt wrote:
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:10:15 -0700, John R. Ehrman wrote:
The new updated to the z/Architecture Principles of Operation is now
available
...
So where is the MVCOS instruction? (I was expecting to find it in this
update.)
Good point! I haven't gotten around to
In a recent note, Ed Gould said:
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 11:56:24 -0500
And, I wish z/OS supported volsers _much_ longer than six characters. ...
An idea but you might wish to think it through a little bit. Remember
that someone would have to key it in (either on a keyboard or a
Here is another take on the TJX security breach...
http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/14294
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Tom Schmidt
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 12:54 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re:
On Apr 23, 2007, at 7:08 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
---SNIP
I understand. Let me try to rescue my proposal:
Allow the RMS-wary programmer to enter a shorter string as the
volser, which
the system or application would pad on the
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 04/16/2007
at 09:22 AM, Paul Gilmartin [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On the z/OS side, consider that OPEN has (yet, after 4 decades) no
way to report an error to the caller other than just crashing.
That's wrong; read up on the DCB exit list in general and on the ABEND
exit
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on
04/17/2007
at 11:17 AM, Craddock, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
IEFBR14 is a front-end to allocation Wow! Who knew?
Snopes.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html
We don't care. We
Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
In
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
on 04/16/2007
at 05:45 PM, Kirk Talman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
As IEFBR14 is a frontend to SVC 99 (allocation),
It isn't. It does what the name suggests, with a zero return code, and
that's all it does.
In PCP, MFT and
In PCP, MFT and MVT, SVC 99 didn't even exist! Nor TSO.
I guess one could say, in a round about sort of way, that IEFBR14 was
the front end to invoking the DASD allocation, scratch and catalog SVCs?
I'm sorry, but you still can't say it no matter how round_about your
explanation. IEFBR14
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.foklore.comupters as well.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Clem Clarke) writes:
In PCP, MFT and MVT, SVC 99 didn't even exist! Nor TSO.
just for laughs here is the (Hercules) build install procedure for
46 matches
Mail list logo
