We are z/OS 1.11, just implemented STP with our z114 in Dec. No issues...
On 2/28/2012 1:03 PM, John Norgauer wrote:
We just ipl'ed our z/OS 1.11 system and our STP facility is not usable. I
tried to get PSP buckets for STP but no luck.
I went to
We just moved from a z9 to a z114 running z/OS1.11 and z/VM 5.4. We put
on the PSP maint, installed STP for the first time and all went pretty
smooth. We had the nice option of running our z9's while we cut over to
the z114's. So our testplex went first. Really no issues I can think of.
Couple
Mauri/all,
I missed this earlier. We are a basic sysplex only, no CF running
here. Just wanted you to know this...
On 1/8/2012 12:02 PM, Mark Zelden wrote:
On Sun, 8 Jan 2012 06:53:12 -0600, Mauri Kanteritzuv...@013.net.il wrote:
Just one more addition ...
Maintenance was applied to
By dumping the SMF data for that time frame and looking at the Resource
report, that would verify what Mark has suggested.
On 8/16/2011 2:01 PM, Mark Jacobs wrote:
Off the top of my head it sounds like the SAF call that Hour Glass is
making is including garbage in the field. Have you checked
I have one of those paper signs taken from my first ever Share conf in
New York City back in the late 80's hanging on my door...
On 10/15/2010 10:34 AM, David Alcock wrote:
Howard Dean probably had a funny button that defined the meaning of SCIDS.
--
This is not an exit from SCIDS.
We do as you do and just did. z/OS 1.9 to z/OS 1.11. BUT, we also do 2
maint updates between upgrades.
On 8/17/2010 10:32 AM, Bill Johnson wrote:
We currently upgrade our zOS every 2 years, for instance we just went from zOS
1.9 to 1.11. Does anyone upgrade yearly? Are there any benefits to
john gilmore wrote:
Brian Peterson wrote:
begin quotation
It seems to me that one of the most significant results of this common installation tool
initiative is actually not the tool itself. Rather, in my opinion, it is the fact that
all of the tribes within the CA family now have ONE
IF your LPARS are in the same Jes plex, ( we are a basic sysplex ),
we use the sysaff ( system affinity) under the /*jobparm statement.
We don't check for programs, rather we just run the entire job, how
ever many steps it has to execute on that system. When we run outside
of a plex, say our
We are MIM 11.6, SP1 with z/OS 1.9 in about 1 1/2 mos ago. 0703 was
the Service level with the Serverpak. If yor really need the exact
level I will try to get it for you.
At 01:25 PM 7/28/2008, Rabbe, Luke wrote:
We've attempted to implement z/OS 1.9 throughout our sysplex twice and
twice
SORRY One should re-read before sending. In addition to that
info please know we've had no problems.
At 01:43 PM 7/28/2008, Brian France wrote:
We are MIM 11.6, SP1 with z/OS 1.9 in about 1 1/2 mos ago. 0703 was
the Service level with the Serverpak. If yor really need the exact
level I
I'm ass/u/me/ing this is from IBM. You should get to emails, the
second one gives you the site to go to other info on how to download it.
At 03:23 PM 5/20/2008, Jerry Fuchs wrote:
My co-worker just ordered electronically a PTF. The order status shows it
is ready.
OK. Now how do I get it?
Matt,
At the end of October we did just what you're doing. No
problems putting in on the existing OS on the existing frame. As far
as I know, and I've done this several times before, that PSP maint is
not a problem to go on ahead to time as unless you're actually
running the machine that
We do it with ACF2 resource calls just in case your an ACF2 user.
At 04:04 AM 3/12/2008, you wrote:
gsg wrote:
Is there a way to restrict jobs from running it a particular job
class? Is there more than one way and if so, what is the easiest? TIA
Yes. I don't know the ranking of the
At 09:20 AM 3/12/2008, you wrote:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 06:55:44 -0400, Brian France [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We do it with ACF2 resource calls just in case your an ACF2 user.
You need an optional exit for this correct? But ACF2 supplies it ... or
at least used to. I believe they called
At 03:20 PM 3/12/2008, you wrote:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:14:22 -0400, Brian France [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 09:20 AM 3/12/2008, you wrote:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 06:55:44 -0400, Brian France [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We do it with ACF2 resource calls just in case your an ACF2 user.
You need
UCLIN
There is a dump of the DDDEF's, you can bring that into ISPF, add the
volume, then run it back thru UCLIN.
At 10:27 AM 11/7/2007, Mark S. House wrote:
I am cloning a target region for maintenance. I would like to find a
utility that will insert a VOLSER in the VOLUME parameter on the
We're running Upstream to move our files to a MFL
(MainFrameLinux) image for pgp encryption and then ftp them from it.
We also go the reverse with the process, ftp, pick up the file,
decrypt and then move to z/OS.
At 02:29 PM 5/1/2007, you wrote:
What are folks using for data transfers
At 04:00 PM 4/11/2007, you wrote:
We use Top Secret. A consultant made a recommendation late last year
that Top Secret should be the first task started during the IPL
procedure. The Security Administrator has requested this change.
Currently, we start Top Secret after JES2 completes its start
At 09:57 AM 4/12/2007, you wrote:
- Original Message - From: Rick Fochtman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 7:37 PM
Subject: Re: When to start security product?
---snip--
We use Top Secret. A
How about a yes to all. Have been doing the below for more years than
I can go back in my head. Now, what we have here are 2 prod lpars
sharing sysres and master cat. We have 2 test lpars sharing sysres
and master cat. We also have a target sysres for SMP/e work. Our
SMP/e world points to the
change info, I can get it. Just
don't have it at the moment.
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2006 17:18:30 -0400
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
From: Brian France [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: 0c1's jes2 offload
We upgraded our last system today to z/OS 1.7. At this point, we are
unable to successfully do
Functionally stabilized usually leads to dismissal. So, I ass/u/me/d
it was. I actually don't remember anyone saying it was going away.
Seems that at some point it would be wise to make the move.
At 11:03 PM 9/11/2006, you wrote:
Brian France wrote:
Okay, I know (hope) I'll see
Okay, I know (hope) I'll see this in the manual, but would like to
ask ahead of time. IF HFS is indeed going away and zFS is the way to
go, does that mean there is a shared zFS ala HFS?
At 11:47 AM 9/11/2006, you wrote:
Tom Marchant wrote:
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 10:40:18 -0400, Bruce Black
At 03:56 PM 9/6/2006, you wrote:
We are a relatively small shop. We have need for PGP encryption to send
payroll files to various banks, but can not afford an expensive
solution.
We installed PGP from 'Tools and Toys' and one of the banks accepts the
resulting files. The TT solution is
At 06:18 AM 8/16/2006, you wrote:
Hello;
In Z/OS 1.7 we are facing problem in bringing down JES2, if some
one knows the solution please let us know, it is as follows :
After bringing VTAM down, system displayed message:
IST102I VTAM is now inactive
we display that no device, line or
Howdy. Here's the follow up I promised. THANX to all who've taken
time to post and think about this. We opened an issue with IBM, got a
dump, they looked at it and believe the issue to be in ACF2. We are
version 9 sp0. I have opened an issue with CA. Currently there aren't
any open events on
At 06:18 PM 8/7/2006, Ed Finnell wrote:
In a message dated 8/7/2006 4:18:58 P.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
writes:
the nite and another guy is moving some things off to JSF. Just
thought I'd ask the question here before opening an issue with IBM.
We did a search at the IBM
Well, I hopefully will be able to answer this sometime next week. Our
plan is a Monday morning z/OS 1.5 to 1.7 upgrade on our last
production (2 of them ) image where CA-7 just happens to be running.
Nothing in test but then again this is one of those that might be
hard to see in test.
At
At 06:52 AM 7/26/2006, you wrote:
Hi,
We are in the final stages of our upgrade project.
The powers that be want to know if anyone has performed such an upgrade?
Were there any significant problems?
Are there any known bug is z/OS 1.7 that we should look out for?
Our current environment is:
At 11:02 AM 3/9/2006, you wrote:
We are z/OS V1R4. Last night we received the message:
IEA061E REPLACEMENT ASID SHORTAGE HAS BEEN DETECTED
The manual states that the RSVNONR is used to replace entries that are
marked non-reusable. I understand why we have entries that are marked
non-reusable,
We had this happen when we MOVED to I think z/OS 1.3 from ( sorry, I forget
which release ). We're an ACF2 shop and the change I needed to make was to
set up a default uid and gid. Then, FTP was okay for the masses.
At 12:40 PM 2/1/2006, you wrote:
Hi.
I have a strange one. z/OS 1.4 on a
Folks,
Some years ago I created a partition for our then test IFL to bring up
z/VM and Linux. I still can't remember the whys but it ended up being
defined as MVS. We've had no problems until now. We want to connect to a
san fabric to get to open systems data on our shark. We have found
Mark,
No, we missed that too. AND, I see there is now an AUTH=(ALLOPER) and an
AUTH=(ALLUSER), which I now need to investigate and see what's under them.
At 03:53 PM 10/4/2005, you wrote:
Speaking of SDSF authorizations...
Did anyone using ISFPRMxx or ISFPARMS notice that you can now
33 matches
Mail list logo
