Robert A. Rosenberg wrote:
At 15:13 -0500 on 01/07/2011, Bob Rutledge wrote about Re: can I
dynamically increase tso size:
Krishnan wrote:
Hi All
I am having a similar problem. I am unable to edit a dataset and
instead am getting the 'browse substituted message'
The ISPF edit was
On Sat, 8 Jan 2011 08:22:33 -0500, Bob Rutledge wrote:
Try it.
Or search the archives of ISPF-L where you will find...
The amount of storage required by the ISPF editor approximates to the
following equation:
(Number of records * (40 + record length))
Note that sites can limit the amount of
On 01/07/2011 05:42 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jan 2011 17:12:46 -0600, Joel C. Ewing wrote:
On 01/07/2011 02:48 PM, Tony Harminc wrote:
On 7 January 2011 14:36, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jan 2011 08:33:58 -0700, Larry Dinwiddie wrote:
Run the following PIPE from your Ready
jcew...@acm.org (Joel C. Ewing) writes:
ISPF directory dates are stored in the highly-peculiar IBM Julian Date
format variant used for SMF timestamps: a positive-signed PL4 field
currently defined as 0cyydddF. Although the formal definition at this
point only allows for 0c being 00 for 19xx
Just because it's Friday or you put OT in the subject line,
does not mean it's ok to post off-topic subjects.
Please kill the OT geological thread before it mushrooms.
Thanks.
And don't respond to this message either.
Darren Evans-Young
IBM-MAIN List Owner
Rexx is indeed the new Cobol. It is stable, reliable and productive when
used within the problem space for which it was designed. :-)
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 07:18, Shane Ginnane ibm-m...@tpg.com.au wrote:
Following on from my (most recent) jousting with Martin ...
I find myself inexorably
In ul5ei6t2poqs32hc2nfq04rmin8f7k5...@4ax.com, on 01/07/2011
at 03:36 PM, Binyamin Dissen bdis...@dissensoftware.com said:
This issue is that the binder considers this kind of error to be
merely a warning.
What kind of error and why should it be more than a warning?
--
Shmuel
In listserv%201101071742500520.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 01/07/2011
at 05:42 PM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com said:
So how does ISPF store the year in PDS directories?
Recklessly? In less than 100 centuries there will be problems.
Y10K is not a concern because it's unlikely the Gregorian
On Sat, 8 Jan 2011 17:34:34 -0500, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
In ul5ei6t2poqs32hc2nfq04rmin8f7k5...@4ax.com, on 01/07/2011
at 03:36 PM, Binyamin Dissen said:
This issue is that the binder considers this kind of error to be
merely a warning.
What kind of error and why should it be more
I have not tried this since 2009 but if the user is able to access Unix
System Services and the environment is _BPX_SHAREAS=YES, then you
could dynamically increase the TSO region size by increasing rlimit_as
(address space size). Sample REXX code at
http://billlalonde.tripod.com/rexx/setrlim.txt
At 08:22 -0500 on 01/08/2011, Bob Rutledge wrote about Re: can I
dynamically increase tso size:
Robert A. Rosenberg wrote:
At 15:13 -0500 on 01/07/2011, Bob Rutledge wrote about Re: can I
dynamically increase tso size:
Krishnan wrote:
Hi All
I am having a similar problem. I am unable to
On 1/8/2011 8:55 PM, Robert A. Rosenberg wrote:
That formula seems to assume RECFM=FB. Since the RECFM is VB,
the formula would seem to me to actually be (Number of
records*40) + File-Size. Since the average file size is 33 bytes
not 5000 bytes, that FB formula yields 70MB (which is also what
my
--- On Tue, 1/4/11, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com wrote:
From: Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com
Subject: Re: New IBM Memory surper fast?
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Date: Tuesday, January 4, 2011, 1:12 AM
On Mon, 3 Jan 2011 22:35:36 -0800, Ed Gould wrote:
13 matches
Mail list logo
