Hello,
First a big thank to Jan, Ravi and Tom for their lights on this subject !
I will try to make a diagram of the different times involved in the SMF30
records before initiation time to complete my analyses thanks to your
informations.
Another question about these following lines from Tom
Anyone else getting this error attempting to perform SMP/E RECEIVE ORDER
for service?
GIM68700IORDER ORD00034 HAS BEEN SENT TO THE SERVER AT
https://eccgw01.boulder.ibm.com/services/projects/ecc/ws/.
GIM69144IORDER ORD00034 IS READY FOR DOWNLOAD.
GIM45201S ** 530 Download
On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 08:21:23 -0700, Edward Jaffe wrote:
Anyone else getting this error attempting to perform SMP/E RECEIVE ORDER
for service?
GIM68700IORDER ORD00034 HAS BEEN SENT TO THE SERVER AT
https://eccgw01.boulder.ibm.com/services/projects/ecc/ws/.
GIM69144IORDER
I asked Someone Who Would Know, and was told that it's an offering from a
different division than the one that offers the traditional zPDT. It seems to
have blindsided some folks (the usual IBM is many different companies
syndrome!). To qualify you have to have a System z CPU and license the
I ge the same error
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Edward Jaffe
Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2010 8:21 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: GIM45201S ** 530 Download not currently allowed for your
location.
George
There's no need to apologise. There's been a misunderstanding based on my
lack of elaboration in my initial statement:
'Everything obvious' includes particularly any error messages
should have been
I would have imagined that 'Everything obvious' would have included
particularly
On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 04:07:23 -0500, Thierry Deleris
thierry.deleris_s...@i-bp.banquepopulaire.fr wrote:
Hello,
First a big thank to Jan, Ravi and Tom for their lights on this subject !
I will try to make a diagram of the different times involved in the SMF30
records before initiation time to
Chris,
I like Richard Puerifoy's suggestion, which cuts to the chase, to check
that the LOGAPPL parameter for these devices in VTAMLST is not coded with
something strange.
How many times have we seen that happen?
The LOGAPPL acts like a VARY ACT, ACQ and if the APPL it is trying to Bind
the
Dave
These VTAM message groups do not feature an IST890I[1] message. I think
you should expect to see that message if you have the ASIRFMSG start option
with the default value of OLUSSCP or you have specified ASIRFMSG=ALLSSCP
and the session setup which fails is caused by a LOGAPPL
George
Yes, I thought about LOGAPPL as something to mention in my first response
but then I rejected it - and that was before I spotted that the dog didn't
bark in the night, that is, the IST890I message was missing.
The reason I rejected it was that, in order for the mechanism associated with
Dave
Something I forgot to add to my previous post:
What do you see in NetView Session Manager (Network Logical Data Manager
= NLDM) regarding the activation of the resources corresponding to your
secondary LUs over the time following the IPL? This product was designed
exactly in order to
If you omit SORTWKnn DDnames then - assumed default values used - DFSORT
will use 3 datasets, in LARGE format. Every sort work dataset is single
volume, so the limit for default sort work space depends on size (and
free space) of work volumes.
Q: Am I right with the above?
For example, I have
12 matches
Mail list logo
