On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 20:54:25 +, John P Donnelly wrote:
â¦we are about 10 days into a BRE aka Disaster Recovery
Exerciseâ¦couple
things if mayâ¦
Clippage around the stuff I can't help with...
- one of our procedures is to DELETE NOSCRATCH thousands of production
datasets; catalog
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 13:03:11 -0500, Kelman, Tom wrote:
I agree with what everyone has said about z/Journal. I've gotten it for years
and have gotten the notice about Mainframe Executive. I just thought it was
interesting and a little strange that there were articles in z/Journal about
moving
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 11:11:12 -0300, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
I may be drafted to do a 1.4 to 1.7 migration. I'm concerned both about
any gotchas in the migration itself and about anything that might impede a
later migration to a supported[1] release. There are two LPAR's in a
sysplex and a
On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 16:33:56 +0200, Miklos Szigetvari wrote:
z/OS 1.8 and 1.9 , currently no FICON and we have only the HMC console.
We would like to use the same CHPID as we had in z/800 ,and dump the
IOCDS and OSA config in z800 and load in z9
That won't work. You're converting to PCHIDs.
On Thu, 3 Apr 2008 15:53:58 -0500, Yukus, Mary J CIV USMEPCOM wrote:
Can anyone give me some information on this? I'm at a loss since I don't see
an RIO** job or STC, etc.
Do you have Vanguard Security products ??? I've seen RIO* messages in
association with the RIOVision tasks. Not sure if
On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 11:49:14 -0500, Rick Fochtman wrote:
I have a problem that I hope someone has come across before and has or
knows
of a utility to program that will help me out.
I have a corrupt IMS Referral library and it seems to have been corrupted
for a long time. I have no good back
On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 22:28:14 +, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
I'm talking about an e-mail out of the blue from somebody who sent it to me
unsolicited and now wants me to protect the content.
If you don't want it disseminated, don't send it to me.
By virtue of the fact that disclaimer is in the
On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 18:55:32 -0400, Richards, Robert B. wrote:
Small prayers are appreciated that I do not cough very much in the next
few weeks. Even an ahem seems to exceed my pain threshold these days.
An actual cough is brutally painful! :-(
I'm sending big prayers for your strength in
On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 11:30:32 -0500, McKown, John wrote:
With a poor, starving z/OS sysprog? [grin]
I'm still working on our MONOPLEX to basic sysplex. We have another test
this Sunday, but it is only 4 hours. And they expect it to be perfect.
One problem that I am encountering is that I am
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 00:48:34 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:08:53 -0600, Dave Kopischke wrote:
We have a JCL checker application that verifies dataset access for a JOB.
Through routine use of this product, we end up with thousands of access
warnings on our daily RACF reports
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 08:35:10 -0600, Walt Farrell wrote:
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:08:53 -0600, Dave Kopischke
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 10:07:24 -0600, Walt Farrell wrote:
One could argue that letting you determine your access to resources
without
actually trying to use them
On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 10:07:24 -0600, Walt Farrell wrote:
One could argue that letting you determine your access to resources without
actually trying to use them (and thus without causing audit records) is a
form of hacking. You're looking around trying to figure out what you can
do, rather than
On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 15:44:43 -0600, Chase, John wrote:
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
The z9EC model number is 2097.
That's interesting Our z9EC claims to be a 2094.
And our z9BC claims to be a 2096-S07-T03.
What has the world
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:40:26 -0600, Ron Wells wrote:
likely a detractor. nah they are the next CEO's
You can also look at it as promoting them to a position where they can do less
damage. Look on the bright side.
--
For
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:57:35 -0600, Ed Gould wrote:
What wasn't posted was the fact that the salaries are being cut as a
result of a lawsuit claiming that IBM didn't pay overtime and
classified employees incorrectly so they couldn't get overtime. There
was much ado about OT (and not getting paid
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:07:24 +, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
This 'faith' is grounded in facts:
1. You require a minimal intelligence to get through formal education.
2. You need some grounding in the fundamentals of your trade.
3. You have to prove you are trainable.
If this is prejudice, so be it!
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:44:14 -0600, Ed Gould wrote:
On Jan 28, 2008, at 11:46 AM, Dave Kopischke wrote:
--SNIP
The way I understand this came about is a few salaried employees
sued IBM
because the weren't being paid overtime. The judge agreed
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 12:44:22 -0600, McKown, John wrote:
I think that they are either SCSI, or Fibre Channel. For a mere 1.2Tb,
you can use 3 500Gib eSATA drives.
I was at the PC store the other day and they had 1TB SATA drives for sale. I
didn't catch the price. I settled for a mere 250G for
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:28:28 -0500, David Andrews wrote:
I did a LISTC VOL against one of my catalogs today and was rewarded in
part with these entries:
NONVSAM --- ..'{... ..2.
HISTORY
I've seen something similar to this before. Are these catalog
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 14:13:25 -0600, Hal Merritt wrote:
Given the availability of 400 Hz components, it baffled me why IBM would
select 415. But, then, at the time, IBM was (in)famous for being
incompatible.
I just got out of a meeting with a vendor. Somehow IBM came up and he
said, It's Big
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 10:25:23 -0600, McKown, John wrote:
The manual is unclear on this. First question: Is this supported? I.e.
will SORTOUT contain only one of the records with the duplicate key?
Second question: Which record will be kept? Random, the one read from
the lowest SORTINnn or the one
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:10:34 -, Phil Payne wrote:
And the last hurdle is that you effectively have to be 'voted in' by the
incumbent team.
Somehow, that never happened.
Giggle.
While I've never met you personally, I have followed your posts on IBM-MAIN.
It's inconceivable to me that
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:05:40 -0600, McKown, John wrote:
Yes, I just didn't really see how EQUALS applies to a MERGE. Possibly
just lact of understanding on my part. I do understand how EQUALS
applies to SORT since SORT is only reading one input file, so which is
first makes sense to me. But MERGE
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:20:25 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
Related question:
Does either product support sorting on N keys and eliminating all but
the first record with the first M (N) values identical? E.g. for all
records with identical Names, keep only the one with the most recent
Date.
An
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:40:44 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:27:45 -0600, Dave Kopischke wrote:
An awkward solution would be to sort it in date sequence first, then SORT
dedupe. Multiple passes and not very elegant. But for a small file, who
cares ??
If the file is small
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:28:28 -0500, Robert A. Rosenberg wrote:
At 15:31 -0600 on 01/14/2008, Chase, John wrote about Re: IEBGENER is
BROKEN:
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Anthony Fletcher
If you use IEBGENER in straight copy mode, it does
On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 10:59:07 -0600, Yukus, Mary J CIV USMEPCOM wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I have a customer that needs to send someone (a new programmer) to COBOL
classes. They don't seem to offer any at IBM anymore. Does anyone have
any
suggestions? They are looking for something preferably in the
On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 14:08:47 -0500, Dean Montevago wrote:
Yes, I use this regulary. Can SMTP handle files other than 80 bytes ?
Yes, I send my SCRT reports to an IBM E-Mail address. The .CSV file is
variable blocked, so my E-Mail headers and trailer has to be VB for GENER.
On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:48:43 -0600, Tom Marchant wrote:
Thyere seems to be more chaff this month. Most months there are about
2000 messages. So far this month there are over 1000.
And the first week of the year was really light. Most of it is from just this
week.
I think this is what results from throwing logs on the fire and fanning the
flames.
Someone is now able to claim success. Is that really what you intended ???
And here I am adding to it.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff
On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 16:56:06 -0600, Doc Farmer wrote:
Further, as users I think we could make the argument that IBM's actions are
anti-competitive both to the principals of the case as well as to small
development shops and educational facilities.
I'm not a lawyer either, so my opinion is
On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 09:10:05 -0600, Doc Farmer wrote:
I really wish that the USERS (that's us) were able to file an amicus curiae
brief
so that OUR wishes are heard and rights protected.
I'd like to read more about what rights we think we have in this. It seems
pretty clear-cut to me. IBM
On Thu, 27 Dec 2007 10:18:14 -0600, Scott Fagen wrote:
On Thu, 27 Dec 2007 15:17:16 -, Mark Wilson wrote:
-snip-
This question relates to migrating from a Flex server with no external tape
or external disk to a new z9 + external DS6000 disk. We have no tape units
installed on the z9 and zVM
On Thu, 27 Dec 2007 13:16:34 -0600, Rick Fochtman wrote:
We did something similar. Programmer coded IDMS PREPARE and FINISH
comands inside a loop that was being executed 200,000-350,000 timer per
run! Just moving the PREPARE and FINISH commands outside the loop
cut the run time from 4+ hours to
Another year of trials and tribulations made easier and sometimes humorous by
all of you.
Thank you once again...
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 00:20:51 +, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
I calculated my minimums and caps based on a percentage of the MSU's
available on the machine. The last time we upgraded to the z9, I had to adjust
all the minimums and maximums based on the new machine. So going to a
percentage scale will
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:22:49 -0500, Conmackie, Mike wrote:
Ed Jaffe wrote:
snip
How long do they last?
/snip
According to the website they never expire.
And the money I've paid into Social Security all my life will be returned in my
retirement with interest !
I'm so sure that will
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 08:03:43 -0500, Richards, Robert B. wrote:
As you can see from my signature box, I am now in politics central. :-)
I wish all of you Happy Holidays and a prosperous New Year for 2008.
Congratulations
If I have a problem getting in touch with my representatives,
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 13:39:50 -0600, Chase, John wrote:
Actually, SocSec is a chain letter: The money you paid in was spent
on (or before) the day you sent it in. The money you get back (if
any) will be paid in by the folks still working at the time.
My point was to compare the promise of
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:22:56 -0600, Staller, Allan wrote:
I am generally opposed to resource groups, however, they do have their
uses. I find them useful for your purpose (guaranteeing a minimum amount
of service). I do not find them useful for capping a workload.
The drawbacks I see are:
1)
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 14:14:24 -0600, Staller, Allan wrote:
Dave,
Check the archives for my subsequent post. It seems IBM has addressed
these issues in z/OS 1.8
I saw that. CPU percentages are a much better methodology. They adjust
with processor changes. Very cool.
I'm working on an upgrade to
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:08:27 +, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
CPU percentages are a much better methodology. They adjust with
processor changes. Very cool.
I disagree for two reasons:
1. Some shops wish to ensure the same service for a test workload,
regardless of how many times the processor is
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 12:55:21 -0700, Kopischke, David G. wrote:
Greetings,
About six months ago, a story appeared in SearchDataCenter concerning
the NYSE migration to UNIX/LINUX platforms. Since it's been six months,
I wrote to the author this morning requesting a follow up. He responded
almost
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 13:50:09 -0500, Michael Schmutzok wrote:
And as I mentioned, there are no image specific datasets on the sysres itself.
It's not making sense as to why I'm seeing a difference between LPARs. I
guess I'll have to schedule another downtime and get a stand alone dump.
Have
On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 14:05:44 -0600, Field, Alan C. wrote:
I know this one ... He means Rugby. Football is played with a round
ball. Some people call it soccer.
No No No No No No No
Football is played with an oblong ball that's pointy on both ands and you have
to wear body armor to play it
On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 06:56:23 -0500, David Cole wrote:
WADR (BTW, I hate that phrase...)
I just didn't want to start a flame war. We probably agree more than we
disagree...
And I probably read more into your post than you intended, so I apologize for
that.
But we are all in the same boat. We
On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 05:43:41 -0500, David Cole wrote:
As Ralph Johnson noted in his post to the FLEX-ES listserv, Interesting!
http://www.sys-con.com/read/468626.htm
IBM's intransigence in its so called negotiations with FSI, its
belligerence with PSI, its bullying of T3 and its total shunning
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:52:28 -0600, Eric Bielefeld wrote:
At long last, I found a job. I'll be working for an insurance company in
Des Moines, Iowa. Its a 6 month contract with a possibility of being
longer. I'll leave the company name out for now. After I start, I'll make
sure its ok to
On Thu, 8 Nov 2007 14:53:36 -0500, Jousma, David wrote:
We expect that now that you are going part-time. :-)
Yeah, part time:
Cast out the line, Check IBM-Main
Reel in a fish, Check IBM-MAIN
Cast out the line again, Check IBM-Main
Pop the top on a frosty one, Check IBM-Main
That
On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 23:52:45 +, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
Does z/VM use virtual storage?
Is the bear catholic?
Does the Pope ...
Yes. It does.
I thought z/VM was the virtualizer ??? (if that's a word). As in z/VM allocates
real to each of its virtual guests. I'm not a z/VMer (yet), but I have a
Another take on z/os 1.9 from SearchDataCenter yesterday
A REVIEW OF Z/OS 1.9 FEATURES
Robert Crawford, Contributor
IBM's mainframe operating system, z/OS 1.9, is now generally available. This
release has its share of enhancements both large and small. What follows are
those that caught
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 09:46:36 -0600, Howard Brazee wrote:
But why should a program care about block size?
Funny you should ask this; We had a major project implement a couple weeks
ago. To deal with the number of object moves, many of the libraries were just
cloned and renamed at
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 12:56:45 -0600, Howard Brazee wrote:
On 30 Oct 2007 11:30:25 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
But why should a program care about block size?
Funny you should ask this; We had a major project implement a couple
weeks
ago. To deal with the number of object moves,
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 14:15:42 -0500, Darren Evans-Young wrote:
Some of you may be wondering what I will be doing after
my retirement.
I will be working for a company that helps companies migrate off of the
old IBM mainframe onto the much more current Microsoft .NET platform.
This will also help
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 08:51:44 -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 14:31:25 +0900, Timothy Sipples wrote:
Big news for IBM-MAINers, I suspect, since this topic has been a hot one
here recently
Please note that System z can already act as an NTP server, with either
z/OS (and its SNTPD
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 13:48:13 -0500, McKown, John wrote:
I only use transaction response time for TSO users. Everything else,
including CICS, runs with simple velocity and importance service
classes. It works well enough for us.
--
I went the other way. All of our CICS's run with a transaction
On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 09:57:51 -0500, Kenneth E Tomiak wrote:
Sounds like old news some reporter just rewrote for today. Was there
something about the PSI solution that is new, other than a new hardware box
running their same software solution? IBM recently released a Z9 that
consolidates z/OS and
On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 09:30:27 -0600, Steve Comstock wrote:
I see in the current New Yorker there is a movie coming out
called Outsourced, described as a comedy about a man whose
job is outsourced to India and he must go to India to train
his replacement. H. Barrel of laughs, I can see.
Gee,
On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 16:06:58 -0400, Richards.Bob wrote:
Dave,
Feel free to give me a call.
Bob Richards
Bob,
Thanks for your kind offer. I've contacted our IBM rep and I'm trying to get
more information on our sub-capacity agreement before I head off on a mis-
information tangent. I'll be
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 12:22:05 -0500, Kelman, Tom wrote:
And just to add to Bob's excellent explanation, as always. If you've
just upgraded your hardware and didn't have the IPLA agreement in place
you probably got extra entitlement based on the full capacity of the
processor. In that case
On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 05:27:57 -0400, Richards.Bob wrote:
But to the point, I understand there are lots reasons why shops
implement soft-capping. I contend that doing it using strictly this
methodology could inhibit a revenue generating workload from meeting the
needs of the customer.
On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 11:20:36 -0400, Gerhard Adam wrote:
I suspected that the work was not set aside from what I understood (and
from
the calculation I imagine WLM does) as this could complicate WLM or make
WLM algorithms 'weak' . So you say that there's a waste of system
resources that are
On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 10:53:44 -0700, Edward Jaffe wrote:
Dave Kopischke wrote:
As your workloads increase, the lull periods decrease and you no longer see
that ablity to run at 90 - 100% of capacity (We've had a really hard time
trying to chart this and understand it from a forecasting
On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 11:12:12 -0500, Kelman, Tom wrote:
Hi Steve and thank you a lot for your replies. I read (I think most of
)
your papers and I find them very precise and useful. Unluckily here
I'm
the only reader of them.
Max Scarpa
Beg your pardon, but I have read Steve's excellent
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 09:51:54 -0400, Warner Mach wrote:
Just a thought. If more than one user is getting this message
you might try running the following job (We have this job
scheduled to run on a regular basis to avoid 'no space in
brodcast data set' message):
//UPDATE EXEC PGM=IKJEFT01
On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 22:28:07 -0500, Rick Fochtman wrote:
I can only say THANK YOU to ALL the IBM'ers who are involved, however
peripherally, in our discussions here. And ditto to all the other
manufacturers' representatives who offer their help and advice here.
I'd like to take this opportunity
On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 12:49:58 -0400, Lizette Koehler wrote:
If the file is on DASD or TAPE and I knew the layout of the file, I would use
SAS or REXX to filter through and collect the stuff I want. I do this all the
time with SYSLOG which does not look much different than the DCB provided
On Tue, 4 Sep 2007 06:22:43 -0400, Bob Shannon wrote:
No one replied so I guess no one cares. I'm surprised.
We care. Just trying to confirm the situation. Haven't heard from our rep yet.
What's that cliche' ??? The silence is deafening
On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 12:28:12 -0500, Ulrich Krueger wrote:
OK, I have to ask ... it's been bugging me ...
There's recently been a thread asking questions about COBOL and
ACCEPT DATE apparently giving a bad date right after midnight.
Can someone tell me, where exactly the DATE is taken from when
On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 21:12:14 +0100, Perryman, Brian wrote:
RESPONSE=SYSA IEE136I LOCAL: TIME=20.58.51 DATE=2007.235 GMT:
RESPONSE=TIME=19.58.51 DATE=2007.235
If it were after midnight, the GMT date stays on 235 for an hour, whilst the
local time will have moved on to 236.
I'm not
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 15:27:06 +, john gilmore wrote:
Peter Hunkeler has suggested that I have been exhibiting too much (and
growing) impatience here, and I must agree. Good luck to all of you.
John Gilmore
Ashland, MA 01721-1817
USA
One of the many strengths of this forum is the diversity
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 16:13:59 -0400, Hare, Tim wrote:
What sizes are being used by other CA-1 shops?
We are FB 340 340. I don't know why, but it's been that way since the
beginning of time.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff
On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:41:18 -0500, McKown, John wrote:
As best as I can tell, IBM does not supply such a solution. Email
attachments are not magic, they are simply specially encoded email.
Here's what I do GENERing data to SMTP:
//SYSUT1 DD *
HELO MyServer.MyDomain.COM
MAIL FROM: [EMAIL
On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:43:17 -0500, Weidt, James wrote:
Well I just setup a rule to auto delete snubbery reports...
So take that!!!
Snubbing the Snubbery reports I sense a paradox coming on.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe
On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 11:01:43 +0200, R.S. wrote:
Why don't you teach operators how to use Load icon ?
When IPLing the system (*) one have to fill two fields:
- Load address, ie. FA1A
- Load parameters: IODF disk address, LOADxx suffix, IMSI character and
nucleus, i.e. FA10XXT1.
Those paremeters
On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 09:36:18 -0400, O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C] wrote:
Recently IBM had announced the transitioning of some 10K programmer jobs
from Europe and the US to India.
Perhaps the problems that we are seeing with IBMLINK is an outgrowth of
that decision. Perhaps that is the
On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 08:42:22 -0500, Silvio Camplani wrote:
The work environment is
pleasant and bilingual (English/French), but either language will fit in.
I can't speak French, but I can speak Canadian. Where's the coffee, eh
Give them a call Ted
On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:08:05 -0500, Eric Bielefeld wrote:
I'm pretty sure that limit is 123 extents. It may have been changed in a
later release though.
I think LINKLIST itself allows 255 extents total - including primaries. If you
went beyond that, you'd get messages telling you that though.
On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:33:08 -0500, Dave Kopischke wrote:
Have you tried SETPROG LINKLIST,DEALLOCATE and then
ALLOCATE ??? That should address any linklist library that went into an
extent,
but I'd try to find it first before doing this.
Make that:
SETPROG LNKLST,UNALLOCATE
On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 11:52:27 +0200, R.S. wrote:
However, in fact I can't see the problem: SE interface is twin to HMC
interface. Performing a POR or IPL isn't more difficult in any way,
except you have to go to server room and open the CPC doors. What's the
problem here ?
We've created IPL
On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 18:05:45 -0500, Kenneth E Tomiak wrote:
On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 14:18:33 -0600, Kopischke, David G. wrote:
When I went to IPL from the service processor, I had trouble
remembering how to fire up the image from there. None of the
load icons were in the GROUPs section. I finally
On Mon, 6 Aug 2007 07:18:31 -0500, Chase, John wrote:
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Paul Gillis
[ snip ]
Get serious fella.
Birdsville sounds good - see you at the pub.
Shane ...
If global warming causes sea levels to rise 160 feet
On Thu, 2 Aug 2007 11:33:24 -0400, Lizette Koehler wrote:
As long as each is 10 miles NE/SW from each other...
Now, did I include Vector Analysis in this question?
My issue with this problem is the it depends clause. I know that there are
hardware, telecom, power, etc... considerations.
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 07:18:01 -0500, Rich Smrcina wrote:
There may be some savings on z/OS software costs with the new hardware
as well. Do you require a full blown z/OS? If you can run z/OS.e, for
instance (it's been renamed recently and I don't recall the new name),
the savings could be quite
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 09:31:22 -0400, Thompson, Steve wrote:
With z/OS 1.8, you will be able to use an external time reference (NOT
an ETR) and provide time services to your LAN (assuming a z/9 and I'm
not up on model numbers these days, so a 2096 could be one).
The 2096 is indeed a z9.
Be
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 16:49:53 -0400, Knutson, Sam wrote:
Just ignore Ed the rest of us have been doing that for a long time...
That's pretty harsh. And untrue. Many of us have learned from Ed's
recollections and his contributions to historic threads have been useful. One
of
his contributions
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 11:55:18 -0500, Mark H. Young wrote:
What I've got to figure out is why it sometimes slips into that mode on my
z/OS 1.4 system, clear out of the blue. It's nice to now know how to fix it
quick, but WHY does it happen to begin with? Oh, another mystery. So it's
off on a
On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 12:03:16 -0400, Jim Mulder wrote:
The default was changed to ALLOWUSERKEYCSA(NO) in z/OS 1.9.
Now I've got some work to do.
Hopefully there's a recommendation and procedure to check for this prior to
making the jump ??? Something non-catastrophic that doesn't require
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:28:52 -0500, Mark Zelden wrote:
The default was changed to ALLOWUSERKEYCSA(NO) in z/OS 1.9.
Hopefully there's a recommendation and procedure to check for this prior to
making the jump ??? Something non-catastrophic that doesn't require an IPL
to get out of ???
You can
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 00:01:26 -0500, Bruce Hewson wrote:
I suppose you could call this post a little gripe. :-)
Since we're griping today
I follow the list through the web browser. Occasionally, I notice the last word
of a line is duplicated on the next line. At first I thought it was
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 15:08:32 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We recently moved from z/OS Release 1.4 running on a z900/1C8 to
running z/OS Release 1.7 on a z9/703.
Now that we know this was just not enough machine power to keep our
business
processes running as they did on the z900 we have
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 11:18:45 -0500, Mark Zelden wrote:
I too have been bitten, but I guess that is part of the chance you take
when contributing. Though it's apples and oranges - none of the code on
my web site and CBT is worth much more than the electrons it is written on.
Mark
--
I disagree.
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 15:30:09 -0500, Pommier, Rex R. wrote:
Considering that isham-research.com is actually registered to something
called Nextnet Tech in Woodside, NY (at least according to enom, the
registrar), I doubt if Phil is involved in it. It looks like somebody
registered it hoping to
On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 10:23:35 -0400, John S. Giltner, Jr. wrote:
I have at my company, to the point where I was unofficially told that
because I am not towing the company line of migrating work load off the
mainframe that I may find myself looking for a new job real soon.
If I say anything I am
On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 13:47:48 -0400, John S. Giltner, Jr. wrote:
Johnny Luo wrote:
Sorry for a newbie to jump in here...
But I have a question: why IBM doesn't increase the clock of mainframe
CPU?
There is no need or there are some technical problems?
I'm now working at one customer's site
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 22:49:43 -0500, Tom Schmidt wrote:
The term for this that I have used (stolen from the early '80's at an insurance
company in Southern California) was: First-In, Still-Here.
The acronym: FISH
Doh !!! I resemble that remark.
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 11:27:46 -0400, Richards.Bob wrote:
And all that time I thought it was a cubicle wall! grin
Back in the Green-bar days, I almost completed two walls inside my cubicle.
The door was going to be a problem. And it's surprising how sound proof a ten
inch thick stack of paper
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 16:03:14 -0500, Kelman, Tom wrote:
I'm still getting the Apache splash page.
I just checked and got his new web page. I kinda wondered if the IBM lawyers
he's so fond of finally tracked him down.
When I checked my favorites links, I still have:
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 15:55:26 -0500, McKown, John wrote:
In terms of validation, I was more thinking along the lines of I know
that RACF ids can be a maximum of 8 characters, and are composed of the
characters A-Z,@#$,0-9. So I'll check that the id doesn't contain
anything else. I don't consider
On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 23:45:40 +1000, Shane wrote:
Fishing ???.
A (first) *anonymous* post ???.
Wonder who will be inclined to respond to such ...
Maybe just my suspicious mind at work.
On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 09:58:51 -0500, Compton, John wrote:
It might help to give a proper name and possibly a
101 - 200 of 337 matches
Mail list logo
