We gave up when the first "not SYS1" started and just use IBM's names. I
think that in the long run, we're ahead of the naming convention game.
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
> Sent: Saturday, April 12, 2008 7
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
> Is there somewhere a customer who has an esthetic dislike for
> "SYS1" and uses an alternative HLQ for production data sets?
I promise you, they are all over the place. If we could somehow
gather all IBM z/OS customers together in one place (like SHARE)
and then arrange th
2008/4/12 Jim Elliott, IBM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 18:05:56 -0400, Tony Harminc wrote:
> > ...
> > Some non-US IBM lab sites I know appear unfuzzy: the Toronto lab:
> > http://maps.google.com/?&ll=43.818489,-79.33676&z=17
>
> That link is to IBM Canada HQ at 3500 and 3600 Steel
>I often see SYS1.ISF.SISF* , SYS1.ISP.SISP*, SYS1.GIM.SGIM* etc. even though
>the MLQ is redundant.
I agree with the redundancy argument; what's wrong with each product having the
same library name(s) at every site?
>Hard to change that stuff in a production environment... well, maybe not har
On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 11:26:26 -0500, Mark Zelden wrote:
>
> ...
>
>Of course this is dependent on using the default names of SYS1.SBLS*.
>One shop I was at used SYS1.BLS.SBLS* or BLS.SBLS*. I think at one time it
>may have been delivered in CBIPO as BLS.SBLS* (like other products)
>and some shops j
On Sat, 12 Apr 2008, Gilbert Cardenas wrote:
> We also resolved large allocations requests from DB2 as well as TMM tape
> requests which can get fairly high by filtering those datasets and assigning
> them a special dataclass as David suggested.
>
> As a sidebar, does anyone use anything higher
We also resolved large allocations requests from DB2 as well as TMM tape
requests which can get fairly high by filtering those datasets and assigning
them a special dataclass as David suggested.
As a sidebar, does anyone use anything higher than a mod 9 volume to allow
for these higher allocati
Mark Zelden wrote:
On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 08:45:21 -0700, Edward Jaffe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One of the easier "hacks" ...
Even easier than that.
If you start with EX 'SYS1.SBLSCLI0(BLSCLIBD)' it does the libdefs and
executes BLSCDDIR for you.
Thanks for pointing that out!
On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 08:45:21 -0700, Edward Jaffe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Out of curiosity, I ran an experiment to find out how hard it would be
>to "poke around" and make IPCS work in an unfamiliar environment.
>
>OK. Let's give it a try:
>
>|ipcs
>| BLS21001I IPCS for z/OS 01.09.00
>| IK
Mark Zelden wrote:
So it probably isn't intentional hiding, but if the programmers don't see IPCS
on the menu, it doesn't exist for them and even if they have seen it at another
shop may assume they can't use it where they are at.
Great points Mark!
You said, "... note that IPCS is on the [EMA
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 18:05:56 -0400, Tony Harminc wrote:
> ...
> Some non-US IBM lab sites I know appear unfuzzy: the Toronto lab:
> http://maps.google.com/?&ll=43.818489,-79.33676&z=17
That link is to IBM Canada HQ at 3500 and 3600 Steeles, Markham, ON. The IBM
Toronto Lab is at 8200 Warden Ave, Ma
On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 17:49:02 -0700, Edward Jaffe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I'd like to know just how evil, 21st-century, Darth-Vader-like sysprogs
>use "ignorance and information hiding" to prevent application
>programmers from knowing anything about IPCS.
I would say the majority of the sho
>The list prices for IFL, zIIP & zAAP have no bearing on ICF. IBM charges more
>for an ICF than the other specialty engines, and I'm not sure that the "free
>upgrade" applies either.
Are you sure?
The whole pricing algorithm started with ICF's (the first specialty engine).
But, I can't find th
13 matches
Mail list logo
