I just read that in detail again. The automount lead me to consider if
you're really in the HFS file system when you di the get. Try a
"whatever the print local directory command is after the locsite and
before the get.
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:i
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
> Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
> Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2009 7:34 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
> Subject: Re: FTP and SMS (and DYNALLOC)
>
> >No joy, I'm afraid. Set it up as documented, but get the sam
On 5/23/09, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
> When I started in this business, working as an operator was almost a
> requirement before becoming a SYSPROG.
Absolutely.
>
> BTDT. GTTS.
;-)
>
> But, my management (at the time) still gave them the call of if/which
> changes would be implemented.
> And, which
>No joy, I'm afraid. Set it up as documented, but get the same error.
>I think I'm getting bit by this statement in the doc.
I haven't really been following this thread, so please forgive me as I ask for
clarification.
Are you saying that if an FTP outfile is allocated, under z/OS, that DFSMS d
>I saw, firsthand, the dumbing down of OPS and it disturbed me greatly.
When I started in this business, working as an operator was almost a
requirement before becoming a SYSPROG.
>I had mgmt come into Operations where I worked that *never* wanted to be at
>fault... that was truly their #1 pri
Hi Greg,
No joy, I'm afraid. Set it up as documented, but get the same error.
I think I'm getting bit by this statement in the doc.
---snip---
Volumes in dummy storage groups cannot be used when performing
volume allocations. For example, the following DD statement,
where DUMMY1 is a volum
At 16:07 -0500 on 05/18/2009, Paul Gilmartin wrote about Re: BLOCK CONTAINS:
On Mon, 18 May 2009 18:18:20 +0200, Gilbert Saint-Flour wrote:
On Monday 18 May 2009 18:04, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
What a stupid necessity that programmers have to code BLOCK CONTAINS 0 !
What happens if the progr
At 20:24 -0300 on 05/18/2009, Clark Morris wrote about Re: BLOCK CONTAINS:
On 18 May 2009 13:35:40 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
>Ah! NOBLOCK had F/80/80 whereas BLOCK1 had FB/80/80. BLOCK0 still
had FB/80/27920. But it is still interesting, to me, that BLOCK
CONTAINS 1 and no B
Sorry should have said "restarted the CATALOG address space".
On 5/23/09, Scott T. Harder wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I have a couple of points to make on this topic:
>
> 1) For all the well documented (and well taken) information about the
> importance of shutting down a system orderly and cleanly
Hi All,
I have a couple of points to make on this topic:
1) For all the well documented (and well taken) information about the
importance of shutting down a system orderly and cleanly, I find it
hard to remember when - in my experience - the system ever had
problems coming back up after a hard c
Why not simply fix the problems in the power systems, and test them
regularly?
If this had been the case in the last 3 places I have worked, I would
have been escorted off the premises, and my stuff thrown out after me.
Doug
snip
Kelly Bert Manning wrote:
Please don't laugh.
I
Ted MacNEIL pisze:
You seem to be agreeing with Steve Thompson that "In the MVS world, we are not
device dependant," only insofar as there is only one type of device. A weak
assertion indeed.
Not at all.
There are at least two device types -- tape and disk.
And, I can convert to either witho
John
I'm glad you managed to get it all working. You obviously don't need it but,
for
completeness for the archives, I may as well air the IP considerations for
Enterprise Extender:
1. Clearly you need to define a static VIPA, the IP address given in the XCA
GROUP statement.
DEVICE device_na
>You seem to be agreeing with Steve Thompson that "In the MVS world, we are not
>device dependant," only insofar as there is only one type of device. A weak
>assertion indeed.
Not at all.
There are at least two device types -- tape and disk.
And, I can convert to either without re-compiling.
Th
On Sat, 23 May 2009 19:12:19 +, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
>>All things being equal, I would much rather not use my scarce time dealing
>>with DASD architecture migration.
>
>Having gone from 3330 --> 3350 --> 3380 --> 3390 (emulation mode) --> 3390
>(native), I agree 100%!
>
>IBM promised, years ag
>All things being equal, I would much rather not use my scarce time dealing
>with DASD architecture migration.
Having gone from 3330 --> 3350 --> 3380 --> 3390 (emulation mode) --> 3390
(native), I agree 100%!
IBM promised, years ago, to not change the geometry again.
Better the devil you know
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 09:27:42 -0400, Thompson, Steve wrote:
Welcome to the MVS world. In the MVS world, we are not device dependant,
nor are we data definition locked/blocked. We generally don't have to
recompile our programs, change the DTF contents (DCB in MVS), etc. just
Hi Ron,
At DR I have the capability to Recall migrated datasets as well as Recover any
that might be mistakenly deleted. To be completely safe, Yes, I believe both
ML2 and Backups should be duplexed. Tape is cheap, recreating data if possible
is not.
Dave O'Brien
NIH Contractor
___
Ron Hawkins pisze:
David,
If you are using DFSMShsm duplex tapes for ML2 do you really need to have a
third copy as a DFSMShsm backup?
Human error. Even duplex copy can be deleted by mistake. Backup requires
another action.
--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland
--
BRE Bank SA
ul. Senatorska 1
While YMMV, out experience has been that any utility power failure
lasting more than 5-15 seconds is a solid failure and the outage will
invariably be an hour or more while the utility company locates and
fixes the problem. This means that unless you have an extraordinary
UPS, or functional ge
David,
If you are using DFSMShsm duplex tapes for ML2 do you really need to have a
third copy as a DFSMShsm backup?
Ron
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of
> O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Over a year ago one of our DBA's converted us from OAM and the 3995 to
remote DB2 objects on DASD on a non-mainframe server platform (as the
whole point of the 3995 was long-term archival on random access media
cheaper than mainframe DASD). Our case might have been simpler than
yours in that
Ed,
And yet, IBM is hiring 1,300 people in Dubuque Iowa. I'm sure they will
hire some who got laid off in other areas of the country, but it is a good
sign.
Eric Bielefeld
Sr. Systems Programmer
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
414-475-7434
- Original Message -
From: "Ed Gould"
Excellent qu
Richards, Robert B. pisze:
That is only true if you are paying full cap. Enterprise COBOL is a
Variable Workload License Charge (VWLC) product. You only pay for what
you use if you are doing sub-capacity pricing. Plus, if you are careful
to restrict the lpars that you allow compiler execution on,
Vivian wrote:
On May 22, 2:31 pm, pauls2...@yahoo.com wrote:
When we run in straight batch PGM=MyPgm, it works.
When we run using IKJEFT01 with a call, it works.
When we run it as a DB2 job (IKJEFT01 with Run), it fails S047. But,
all of our DB2 libs are also APF authorized and in the linklist.
25 matches
Mail list logo
