We ran into a problem with Connect Direct at the 4.6 release level. The
problem
is fixed in Connect Direct 4.7 and 4.8.
- Original Message
From: Vernooij, CP - SPLXM kees.verno...@klm.com
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Sent: Thu, October 28, 2010 2:43:33 AM
Subject: Re: z/os 1.11 and
Thanks everyone for the info.
--- On Thu, 4/2/09, Diehl, Gary gary.di...@allstate.com wrote:
From: Diehl, Gary gary.di...@allstate.com
Subject: Re: Documentation Delivered as ISO files
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Date: Thursday, April 2, 2009, 7:58 AM
I wasn't going to jump in here, but since you
Now that we are using electronic delivery for all of our maintenance a lot of
documentation is coming on files with a ISO file extension. I am wondering how
other sites are handling these files?
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe /
We are using SMB with no performance or CPU problems.
1. We are using HFS.
2. Windows
3. The HFS that is accessed is 5780 cylinders and has thousands of small files.
4. We are parrellel sysplex with shared HFS.
--- On Fri, 10/3/08, Jim Marshall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Jim Marshall
Are there any caveats to moving the ownership of the filesystem while the file
system is in use or is OMVS pretty well behaved? When we do rolling IPLs the
TWS/TWSE2E tasks are moved to an active system. Should we move the
filesystem prior to the start of the TWS tasks or can it be done
Anyone with slow response on the ST and I panels should take a look at PK69442.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the
PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Craig Bakken
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 1:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: PK69442 SDSF Slow Response
Anyone with slow response on the ST and I panels should take a look at
PK69442.
--
For IBM-MAIN
We are also experiencing this slowdown on our Z/OS 1.9 sandbox, when users
enter ST JOBNAME and have their SDSF options set to PREFIX=* OWNER=*.
Max Scarpa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all
Thank you all for replies. Unluckily PTF PK52910 indicated was applied (with no
luck) and we're waiting
Image Focus is very different from the IBM Health Checker. Image Focus does a
virtual IPL of you system. It will find problems in SYS1.IPLPARM, SYS1.PARMLIB
and IPL volumes which is critical if you have a small window to implement your
maintenance on the weekends. Image Focus also has the
Search on Z/OS or ZOS or OS390 or OS/390 on the site www.monster.com there is
over 400 jobs, with jobs in just about any populated area of the US.
r hey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there a city/country in the world with a
real shortage of M/F
sysprogs?
TIA,
Rez
Petersen, Jim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Wonder if anyone else has
experienced this. We just rolled out z/OS
1.8 to our 1st two Test/Dev LPARs and we have encountered a problem.
Our DB2 folks were copying a PDSE loadlib and got an IGW message in the
IEBCOPY followed by recursive S0C4 and S0C1
We experienced data loss on 3390 mod54 described by APAR OA20333. This APAR is
now closed. If you are a user of mod54s you should review this APAR. We have
applied the fix and it does correct the problem.
-
Park yourself in front of a world of choices
You might want to checkout the IBM Migration Checker for Z/OS
at http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries/zos/downloads/
There are some specific checks for USS.
Daniel McLaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Moving to ZOS 1.7 in a couple of weeks. Don't know what, if anything, has
Thanks Scott, (and all those who responded) I will consider myself blessed.
Scott Fagen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 08:40:54 -0700,
Craig Bakken wrote:
This may be somewhat of a religious question, Is it better to be right up
to the
current level of available maintenance
This may be somewhat of a religious question, Is it better to be right up to
the current level of available maintenance or is it better to hang back a few
months worth so as not to apply a PTF that goes PE? Is Z/OS 1.8 so buggy that
current maintenance is required?
Mark Zelden [EMAIL
We are investigating implementing JES2 seven digit job numbers. Has anyone
experienced any difficulties with this conversion or found any software that is
not compatible?
-
Don't get soaked. Take a quick peak at the forecast
with theYahoo! Search
We would like to develop some scenarios to help train our operations staff in
situations were the operators need to diagnose a problem and take such actions
as taking a standalone dump, partitioning an ill system out of a sysplex or
identifying a task causing a problem (ie looping or holding a
Each controller and tracker will need a separate subsystem. The data store
does not need a subsystem. The tracker names must match the subsystem names,
this is not a requirement of the data store.
Perryman, Brian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Do I have to define a subsystem definition for
We have had problems with batch jobs doing multiple concurrent updates of
PDSE's. When the failure occurs the failing job holds a PDSE latch thus
causing other PDSE users to fail. Serializing the updates seems to have
resolved the problems. IBM recommended applying the fixes for APARs
please contact me offline.
http://tinyurl.com/bng53
Craig Bakken
United Health Group
6150 Trenton Lane North
Plymouth, MN 55442
763-744-1769
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Check with IBM on their services to convert from CA7 to OPC.
To list all the job information use a CA7 batch terminal job with input
LJOB,JOB=*,LIST=ALL
This will give you enough information to add jobs to OPC and detemine the
internal and external predecessors. You will also need to list CA7
21 matches
Mail list logo
