It's ironic that despite IBM's pride in upward compatibility of its
hardware and software it makes frequent otiose changes in its
trademarks which impact its own and ISVs' software and documentation.
rant
It's the technicians who are proud about compatibility. Braindead
marketing is proud about
Hello list,
we produce monthly Sub-Capacity WLC report using the SCRT tool. Having z/OS.e
and
26 MSUs, we already reduced dramatically our costs, and WLC let us cut them
even further.
However, I wonder why Tivoli Netview for OS/390 (5697-B82) costs three times
(3!) more
than z/OS.e (5655-G52)
Hi
I am learning IPCS and formating a control block using the model in IPCS.
I wrote a model using BLSQMDEF and BLSQMFLD, and compiled linkedited it.
The command CBF xxx MODEL(MODyyy) works fine. Most of fields look good and
readable.
However some fields are a double word STCK timestamp and
Are we overlooking OUTLIM= here? Or is it a case of the OP needing a
way to deal with spool flooding regardless of totally irresponsible job owners?
I've seen JES exits and submit exits which enforce the presence of
OUTLIM on SYSOUT DD statements, with different limits mandated by
class. If
al chu wrote:
I am learning IPCS and formating a control block using the model in IPCS.
I wrote a model using BLSQMDEF and BLSQMFLD, and compiled linkedited it.
The command CBF xxx MODEL(MODyyy) works fine. Most of fields look good and
readable.
However some fields are a double word STCK
into which VOLCAT - specific, or General ?
- ravi.
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 08:53:49 -0500, Field, Alan C.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ravi,
We're doing the same thing. STK to IBM, only we got B20's.
The only solution we have found is to define the foreign volumes in
the volcats. Use IDCAMS CREATE
as this happens several times (10) a month we're thinking of:
1. let the restoration job have a preamble/postamble steps to define the
external tape to VGENERAL, and to remove the entry after the job completes.
2. define all Prod tapes to Devt into specific VOLCATs.
arguments:
for 1:
share it across SYSPLEX ?
considering whether to define the Prod ranges as private to Devt - but
maintenance can be painful.
- ravi.
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 09:28:36 -0500, Darth Keller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Have you considered sharing the TCDB's?
Just brain-storming here, but if you can't
Walter,
It is more expensive because there are two different pricing metrics in
force. z/OS.e, I believe, is under a NALC agreement and Netview is under
the Variable WLC agreement. z/OS.e is cheaper because IBM offered it
that way as an incentive. Otherwise, you would be complaining the OS is
too
All,
We just completed implementation of a 3-way TS7700 grid servicing 6
CEC's. A problem we see is that a newly created tape dataset created in
Grid-1 is being referenced by a second job, but out of Grid-2 before the
replication of the data has completed. The end result is really poor
snip
'Endorsed by Microsoft.. Now I feel much better.
What are we going to do without Microsoft's endorsement.. ?
--unsnip-
Endorsed by Microsoft, to me, sounds about as trivial as a train
wreck! And about
On Oct 16, 2007, at 7:10 AM, Rick Fochtman wrote:
snip
'Endorsed by Microsoft.. Now I feel much better.
What are we going to do without Microsoft's endorsement.. ?
--unsnip-
Endorsed by Microsoft, to me,
---snip
We just completed implementation of a 3-way TS7700 grid servicing 6
CEC's. A problem we see is that a newly created tape dataset created in
Grid-1 is being referenced by a second job, but out of Grid-2 before the
replication of the data has
Tape comes up for scratch in VTS. TLMS knows it's a scratch, but in ISMF
when displaying the volume it still shows as PRIVATE. We run a TLMS job
which synchs up the ATL and TLMS. I'm looking for a similar process for my
VTS, or is it magic within the VTS that he knows a volume is scratch in
We upgraded from z/OS 1.6 to 1.8 over the weekend. We have run into one
really bad problem. The z/OS 1.6 JES2 was running in R4 mode. We have a
product which sends output to a specialized printer. This product does
not support the z level of the checkpoint. We are adverse to upgrading
the product
What is the tape status in volcat?
Itschak
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Daniel McLaughlin
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 2:42 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: VTS - DQOTD (Dumb Question of the Day)
Tape comes up
Hi all,
We update a compressed KSDS under CICS. I want to know whether CICS writes
to its recovery log stream compressed record images, or decompressed
records? I.e., could we read from the stream without decompression?
Best Regards
Arie Kremer
Jousma, David [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
fo53.com...
All,
We just completed implementation of a 3-way TS7700 grid servicing 6
CEC's. A problem we see is that a newly created tape dataset created
in
Grid-1 is being referenced by a second job, but out of Grid-2
Daniel McLaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Tape comes up for scratch in VTS. TLMS knows it's a scratch, but in
ISMF
when displaying the volume it still shows as PRIVATE. We run a TLMS
job
which synchs up the ATL and TLMS. I'm looking for a similar process
We're using General
-Original Message-
into which VOLCAT - specific, or General ?
- ravi.
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 08:53:49 -0500, Field, Alan C.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ravi,
We're doing the same thing. STK to IBM, only we got B20's.
The only solution we have found is to define the
Date:Mon, 15 Oct 2007 10:57:09 +0200
From:Barbara Nitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Are there tasks that don't play by WLM's rules
We run one of those newfangled things called WBIFN (MQS-Merva-Bridge to
swiftnet). That productive service class runs IMP1 exvel 40% (I believe,
not that
Roland Schiradin wrote:
Craig,
interesting I thought NUMPROC(PFD) would cause an abend but PACK wouldn't
get a data exception (0C7).
Roland
There does not appear to be a combination of NUMPROC and OPT that will
cause
an abend.
NUMPROC(PFD) tells the compiler all your numeric
- Original Message
From: Richards.Bob [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It is more expensive because there are two different pricing metrics in
force. z/OS.e, I believe, is under a NALC agreement and Netview is
under
the Variable WLC agreement.
Bob,
I was unaware about Netview being VWLC. Still
Walter,
Look at it this way. IBM has essentially provided you with a near-free
z/OS. On my systems, z/OS is FIVE times more expensive than Netview!
:-)
Bob Richards
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Walter Marguccio
Sent:
Design counts - always has - always will.
ADABAS got rewritten to 64bit addressability bufferpools with what they call
ADABAS 2006. I don't know how widely implemented it is.
The design target for ADABAS is closer to IMS than DB2 because it supports
multiple occurences for fields in the same
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 23:37:50 -0500, Joel C. Ewing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Every time you mount a tape there is a small but non-zero probability
that the tape will be physically or logically damaged by a drive (or by
an Operator or robot mishandling the tape).
Not with virtual tape (which is
Thanks for the replies. If I am reading the replies correctly, a move statement
of:
01 FIELD-1 PIC 9(3).
01 FIELD-2 PIC 9(3) COMP-3.
MOVE FIELD-1 TO FIELD-2.
Will not abend regardless of the data in FIELD-1, unless the fields are signed.
There is no way to control this trough a COBOL compiler
Mark Zelden wrote:
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 23:37:50 -0500, Joel C. Ewing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Every time you mount a tape there is a small but non-zero probability
that the tape will be physically or logically damaged by a drive (or by
an Operator or robot mishandling the tape).
Not with
- Original Message
From: Richards.Bob [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bob,
Look at it this way. IBM has essentially provided you with a near-free z/OS.
This is indeed true. Management could not believe their eyes as their received
the first invoice after we moved to z/OS.e. 2/3 of the cost
Peter Ten Eyck wrote:
Thanks for the replies. If I am reading the replies correctly, a move statement
of:
01 FIELD-1 PIC 9(3).
01 FIELD-2 PIC 9(3) COMP-3.
MOVE FIELD-1 TO FIELD-2.
Will not abend regardless of the data in FIELD-1, unless the fields are signed.
There is no way to control this
-8snip-
Thanks for the replies. If I am reading the replies correctly, a move
statement
of:
01 FIELD-1 PIC 9(3).
01 FIELD-2 PIC 9(3) COMP-3.
MOVE FIELD-1 TO FIELD-2.
Will not abend regardless of the data in FIELD-1, unless the fields are
signed.
-8snip-
As Bill Klein pointed
I have had some programmers come to me with this issue. It appears that we
have a new system (web app.) which is sending bad data in several locations
to our mainframe (COBOL programs). The proper thing to do is to correct the
web app. so that it send the data correct. While we wait for that
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 09:09:04 -0500 Schneiderwent, Craig
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
:Apparently I mistakenly took the OS/VS COBOL compiler's behavior as standard
:and correct.
As the results are undefined, pretty much any behavior is correct.
--
Binyamin Dissen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:54:50 +0200, R.S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark Zelden wrote:
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 23:37:50 -0500, Joel C. Ewing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Every time you mount a tape there is a small but non-zero probability
that the tape will be physically or logically damaged by a
Peter Ten Eyck wrote:
I have had some programmers come to me with this issue. It appears that we
have a new system (web app.) which is sending bad data in several locations
to our mainframe (COBOL programs). The proper thing to do is to correct the
web app. so that it send the data correct.
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 09:13:52 -0500, Peter Ten Eyck wrote:
I have had some programmers come to me with this issue. It appears that we
have a new system (web app.) which is sending bad data in several locations
to our mainframe (COBOL programs). The proper thing to do is to correct the
web app. so
Mark Zelden wrote:
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:54:50 +0200, R.S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark Zelden wrote:
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 23:37:50 -0500, Joel C. Ewing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Every time you mount a tape there is a small but non-zero probability
that the tape will be physically or
On 11 Oct 2007 04:33:34 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
The real question is the cost to run whatever is chosen.
...
OK, so for technology sake, it is great to know who would win if some race
were run.
But speed is a criterion used to determine:
1. Whether it is fast enough.
2.
On 12 Oct 2007 07:07:18 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (R.S.) wrote:
Bad assumption IMHO. Mainframe is a dino, a lot of things still exist on
mainframe because of conservative users. At a risk of starting new war I
can provide some examples:
a) VSE. It is obsolete, insecure, in fact moribound.
You might use a Compute Statement to force an abend if unsigned data, if
you don't want to do a Numeric check. Not sure this will do what your
asking but it might.
Compute Field-2 = Field-1.
Darren
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
I am going to consider this matter closed. After reading the various replies,
it
is the programs responsibility to verify it's input data in this case. Thanks
for
the help.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access
I believe that it is documented in the z/OS 1.8 migration guide that you
need to be in z2 mode to use the 1.8 version of SDSF. See APAR PK27162
for HQX7720.
Bill
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 07:51:48 -0500, McKown, John
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We upgraded from z/OS 1.6 to 1.8 over the weekend. We have
Sorry for the vague terminology. A 'tape' in the VTS is uncataloged or rolls
off
for GDG activity. In TLMS it would show as scratch because of catalog
control. In the OAM view from ISMF it still shows as PRIVATE. However,
another poster asked about the VOLCAT and we don't have one specific to
Hi Tom!
Tom wrote:
I have seen this same effect with a Peoplesoft
customer trying to use velocity for the DDF enclaves.
Tom, I'd be encouraging Peoplesoft customers to use CMTSTAT=INACTIVE (A
DB2 ZPARM) and the usual panoply of Multiperiod Response Time / Percentile
goals.
But this is all
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 16:49:29 +0200, R.S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can you use tapes when i.e. moving HSC CDS files ?
Why would I need to move them?
You can have multiple boxes, but usually you have only one NCS
environment (HSC, VTCS, LS). More precisely: possibly multiple HSC
instances
Peter,
It appears that the consensus is that there really isn't a way to abend your
program in this case. But do you really have to?
IMHO, if the issue is that the web application sends valid, but poorly
formatted data (in your example, 86b [where b=blank] is valid but should
have been sent as
Daniel,
The VTS tape status will be updated in the VTS/ATL by TLMS
during the scratch of the volume if the TLU3495 USERMOD is installed. When
TLMS changes the status of a volume to scratch in the TLMS Volume Master
File (VMF), the USEMOD will issue an LCS call to update the TCDB
I would like to use IARVSERV to share memory across address spaces but I
cannot find a sample or explanation on how to do so. The MVS Auth Assembler
Services Guide, chapter 16, figure 16-1 shows Addr Space A and Addr Space
B sharing data but the example in the chapter discusses sharing data
* code an Assembler program named PGMA that checks
the data (if you're on z, then a simple TP instruction
should do it)
TP checks for valid signed-packed-decimal data. The OP's input
data was in character form. TRT would be more appropriate.
From: Steve Comstock [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-snip-
We upgraded from z/OS 1.6 to 1.8 over the weekend. We have run into one
really bad problem. The z/OS 1.6 JES2 was running in R4 mode. We have a
product which sends output to a specialized printer. This product does
not support the z level of the
OK, you lost me on the status of a tape in the volcatwe have a volcat
defined for the ATL, but not the VTS...
SYS1.VOLCAT.VGENERAL
SYS1.VOLCAT.V220 series for ATL
Our VTS tapes are 40...this is new to me.
I'll read up on this. We created the SYS1.VOLCAT.V4 entry and recycled OAM,
but there is still some kind of disconnect between TLMS and scratching the
tapes. Maybe they'll get picked up by tomorrow's library runs?
--
For
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 10:37:48 -0500, Roland Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I would like to use IARVSERV to share memory across address spaces but I
cannot find a sample or explanation on how to do so. The MVS Auth Assembler
Services Guide, chapter 16, figure 16-1 shows Addr Space A and Addr Space
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 09:19:52 -0500, Ed Gould [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
OK, I was looking at it from the SMF side. If you want to do other
things with it then that is a different creature. I suppose you could
route transactions with it as well but it would have to be written to
DASD first and then
Blaicher, Chris wrote:
OK, I'll admit my ignorance, what is zPDT?
System z Personal Development Tool
http://www.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=pub1sc23526200
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800
Los Angeles, CA 90045
310-338-0400 x318
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 10:37:48 -0500, Roland Martin wrote:
I would like to use IARVSERV to share memory across address spaces but I
cannot find a sample or explanation on how to do so. The MVS Auth
Assembler
Services Guide, chapter 16, figure 16-1 shows Addr Space A and Addr Space
B sharing data
On Oct 16, 2007, at 12:22 PM, Scott Fagen wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 09:19:52 -0500, Ed Gould [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
OK, I was looking at it from the SMF side. If you want to do other
things with it then that is a different creature. I suppose you could
route transactions with it as well
Roland,
This IBM Health Check is checking to see if your CSM FIXED or ECSA
maximums (generally, as defined in the IVTPRMxx PARMLIB file) are below
100M. IBM has determined that setting the maximum below 100M can lead to
storage shortage situations within VTAM or TCP/IP. IBM recommends that you
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Edward Jaffe
Blaicher, Chris wrote:
OK, I'll admit my ignorance, what is zPDT?
System z Personal Development Tool
http://www.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=pub1sc23526200
And of course, if you click on
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 16:19:52 -0500, Mark Zelden
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
Yep. Although either one seems to lead to an IPL in most cases (in
my experience). But at least if MVS doesn't run out other subsystems
can be brought down more gracefully prior to the IPL.
...
Even better, you can
We recently upgraded from z/OS 1.4 to z/OS 1.7 and are now seeing
phantom active jobs that look like the following in response to a
JES2 $ DA command:
MAB 0290 $ DA
JOB0 0090 $HASP890 JOB(**TEMP**) 109
109 0090 $HASP890 JOB(**TEMP**) STATUS=(ON
We upgraded a couple of weeks ago, and I have not seen this.
Bill Carroll
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Mark Bodenstein
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 3:21 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Phantom jobs after upgrade
Mark Zelden wrote:
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 16:49:29 +0200, R.S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can you use tapes when i.e. moving HSC CDS files ?
Why would I need to move them?
It was only example. Another example would be CDS backup. During the
backup one cannot use HSC functions. So, currently
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 13:22:08 -0500, Ed Gould
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess I was not clear in my entry. I was talking across systems
being able to read the smf file. My understanding (it may be
mistaken) is that the smf data is written to the logstream on system
a and read from the logstream
Easy answer,
NO there is no way to handle bad data as input - without either
changing the COBOL code or introducing some sort of validation' routine
between the sending web application and the COBOL program.
FYI,
Adding an IF NUMERIC test in the COBOL program (at one place - where the
data
Mark,
Does a display on the VM/RSCS ( if you are using RSCS ) 'side' of the link
confirm that RSCS believes it is transmitting a job ( the L99.JR1 L99.SR4
being job receivers from the JES2 point-of-vew )?
Are you able to successfully $PL99.JR1 and $PL99.JR4?
Does RSCS show it has 'queued' VM
THANKS Bob, it's working..
Al Chu
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Robert Wright
Sent: Tuesday, 16 October 2007 9:34 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IPCS CBF question
al chu wrote:
I am learning IPCS and formating a
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 21:45:48 +0200, R.S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark Zelden wrote:
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 16:49:29 +0200, R.S. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Can you use tapes when i.e. moving HSC CDS files ?
Why would I need to move them?
It was only example. Another example would be CDS backup.
We've always had the following statement in our IEASYS00 member:
CMB=(UNITR,COMM,GRAPH,CHRDR)
I've never questioned it before but I'm trying to clean old info out of these
parmlib members. It sounds like it stores measurement data for these devices
in addition to DASD and TAPE. It appears to
David Cole wrote on 12/31/2006 5:57 AM:
It [z/XDC] probably is a quite adequate tool for other environments
when the application code does not have ESTAE's that sometimes retry).
Yes, z/XDC is at least that.
But for myself and my customers (a fairly large number these days),
the presence of
G'day,
We are looking for some kind of generic estimation model / document for
allocating the resources on system admin.
Inputs we have are, number of LPARs, number of CICS regions, number of
DB2 regions, number of batch jobs running, number of online
applications, storage size, MIPS
71 matches
Mail list logo
