else noticed this? Is there a
workaround?
Thanks,
Cathy Taddei
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http
Not sure how I would use ISRDDN in a clist? I've considered parsing LISTALC
output, but was just wondering if there was an easier way.
Thanks,
Cathy
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email
Thanks, Mark. The problem is with a vendor-provided clist. They've given me
a workaround that involves locally modifying a bunch of their clists, which
I'll
have to track and refit if they should provide PTF's (it's not SMP-maintained).
I thought I'd make it easier on myself by updating
Thanks, Lionel. Nice and compact!
Cathy
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 13:30:56 -0700, Lionel B Dyck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Cathy - try this simple exec that you can call from your exec. If you get
a return code of 0 then it is allocated and if you get a 4 then it is not
allocated
/* rexx to test if
Hi Binyamin. LISTDSI only works on DASD -- it gives RC=16 for VIO.
Cathy
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 23:58:33 +0300, Binyamin Dissen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ALLOC F(ddname) DA(*) will generate RC0 if the DDNAME is already
allocated.
What happens when LISTDSI is issued against VIO? RC=4 would
Thanks for your feedback, Ted. I have passed it along to my MVS systems
programmers.
Cathy
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 22:00:23 +, Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Although I am starting to question the value of VIO...
As well you should.
As a performance/capacity analyst for over 27 years,
defining multilevel
aliases, review your data set naming conventions.
If MLA's will solve a problem for you, great, but I wouldn't do it lightly.
Regards,
Cathy Taddei
On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 13:10:04 -0400, Jousma, David [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
All,
We are evaluating making a change from MLA(1
. On the other hand, IBM-Main IS full of, well, I'd rather not go
there. ;)
Cathy Taddei
On Sun, 9 Apr 2006 11:43:35 -0500, Sebastian Welton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Sat, 8 Apr 2006 09:13:43 -0400, Aaron Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I am
reasonably competent with Perl, and I have looked
LibStation running under z/OS.
Are you going to share tapes between z/OS and Intel??? Sounds a little
scary to me.
Cathy Taddei
On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 11:07:46 -0200, Bodra - Pessoal [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi,
Anyone using 3590 shared between z/OS (z800) and Intel servers?
Please contact me
Oh really? I'm not familiar with the 2086-450 minus 25% model.
According to the aforementioned zSeries 890 and z/OS Reference Guide, you
can put a Coupling Facility in a standard LPAR (i.e., using CPs instead of
ICFs), but whether those CPs are dedicated or shared, IBM software charges
apply.
Well, one reason why is that I only want to bring up my CF LPAR in case of
an extended outage on my external CF.
We investigated all kinds of combinations and permutations, one of them
being to upgrade our 2086-450, having 4 engines and 650 mips, to 2 engines
and 700 mips, and convert one of the
My research tells me you can do this with General Purpose CP's as well as
IFL's. The down side of using CP's instead of IFL's is that the CPU
capacity used by the Coupling Facility are counted in the total size of the
machine for software licensing purposes. You can even share CP's between
an
12 matches
Mail list logo
