I must return to this problem!
Now we are below the 5 seconds boundary. But when we get some data, the ETS
Results page shows a deviation -4.999, (instead of around -4.000). I
realized that the data the ETS is giving us show the Local Time, instead of
the UTC data. For example:
...
Timer
Depends what you mean by Shared HFS.
If you want to use shared file system support as IBM describe it in the
USS Planning, it has sysplex scope.
End of story.
Ok, then. That was what I was looking for.
Thank you very much!
Yeah, I know the matter are the names, but while this is my first HFS
sharing, and I had these problems, I thought of having an expert opinion.
2007/5/14, Mark Zelden [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
To be honest, I don't know for sure (and didn't even try RTFM-ing). I
was
going to say try and test it...
Hi all again!
I looked through the archives for a solution for my question, but with no
luck...
I want to prepare a Monoplex system for a easy migration into a Sysplex. So
I want to implement Shared HFS without being in a Sysplex, but the IPL
failed when starting USSs. My question is: Can I use
Sorry!
I forgot this thread!
Finally I managed to get what I needed. I'm recovering the gap manually (5
by 5 seconds). When I use Calculate Button most of times I get an error and
no stream data from my ETS. But sometimes I get the data, so I know my
deviation from this ETS.
My problem is solved
Hello!
I recently installed RSU0702 and previous in my z/OS 1.7. Since that, I've
seen this error:
CEE3703I In HPCB Control Block, the Eye Catcher is damaged.
CEE3704I Expected data at 84B033C2 : HPCB.
It happens when I try to rebuild the books catalog, or in some cases when
I'm reading a book.
Hi!
I'm installing maintenance in our Test Machine, which is the one with the
Book Server. And I was wondering if is there any way of updating the books
when you install a ptf? I mean if you can pass the DOC HOLDs to the
books...
Thank you all...again!
Hi all!
We're having a strange WLM behaviour. We're using a Resource Group for a
Service Class. We use this SC for controlling certain user jobs that could,
eventually, fill our CPU capacity. So the RG has a Maximum Capacity of 5000
Service Units. We have a z9 703 = approx. 6 SU. So,
As you said, the SC had no other jobs executing except that one; but that
one has been running at percentages between 30 and 60% for several minutes,
so the SU max quantity is surpassed!
About the total SU/sec, I think both calculations are right. The problem was
in my first post I used a (bad)
Our Soft Capping works at 150 MSU. If (as Kees said) 1 MSU = 100 SU/hour
= 277'78 SU/sec, and we have 150 MSU = 41666'67 SU/sec.
Is that what you're asking?
2007/4/13, Shane [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 12:19 +0200, Víctor de la Fuente wrote:
By the way, as far as we
Yes, there are 3 LPs on the LPAR. This LPAR is the only MVS LPAR running on
the CPC. It's capped to 150 MSUs.
The percentages where took from SDSF. I know I should have gone through RMF,
but I didn't go then and now I can't.
Nevertheless, now we are seeing a normal behaviour in jobs associated
Well, Soft-Capping doesn't affect the SU delivery capacity of the machine
but the SUs the machine delivers at all. I mean, the SU capacity of the
machine is given by the number and model of its CPUs, but with Capping you
can limit its real power to the one you need. If you put 150 MSU
Hi again!
Yesterday we tried to synchronize our Sysplex Timers with an ETS, but we
couldn't get it. My problem is I didn't find any manuals with help. It shows
an error window, but I don't know where to look for information about it.
Could you tell me where can I look for?
Thank you very much!
Yeah, we are planning STP, but now we need to synchronize our clocks. I know
we can't automatically update time if it's deviation is higher than 5
seconds, but I SUPPOSE you can connect to the ETS. Nevertheless, now we are
doing manual synchronization. My problem is we couldn't find a manual
I think this is the answer I need! I'll look for those Maintenance Book
tomorrow.
By the way, please don't think I use the list as a Google's substitution. I
think in the list as a last try before giving up. I went into Google for
hours, but couldn't find why the query was failing. Before that,
In fact, the esoteric is due to my SMS-man is going to change ACS rules
filtering by unit name. But, AFAIK, you only can use unit names that are
real esoteric names or device types...
2007/3/23, Veilleux, Jon L [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Is your allocation being overridden by SMS? What does the
I know the command. My only doubt is if I opened the current IODF in HCD or
if I opened the last one I've created.
2007/3/23, R.S. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Víctor de la Fuente wrote:
Yes, I know IODF is the best place; but I have already looked it and I
could
find this esoteric. I'll try again
Hi all!
I don't know if I'm getting mad. Some days ago one of my mates was able to
use the esoteric X5 for one allocation, but I'm almost sure it's
not defined in current IODF.
Is there any way of listing esoterics defined in current configuration?
Thank you very much!
Yes, I know IODF is the best place; but I have already looked it and I could
find this esoteric. I'll try again, just in case I looked the wrong IODF...
2007/3/23, R.S. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Vernooy, C.P. - SPLXM wrote:
Víctor de la Fuente [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED
---
Ok!
Seeing that there is no agreement on one of the ways, I'd choose the one I
think would be better for my installation, which is no-SMS.
Thank you very much!
2007/2/11, Shane [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 20:28 -0600,
I'm here again. Hope one day I can be the answerer...
I couldn't find a place with a recommendation for HFS allocation. So I'd
like to hear your opinions about it. Do you prefer SMS or non-SMS? Why?
Also, I found that if you choose SMS, at time of SSA definition you can't
place the catalog for
Hello again!
These days I'm having a lot of new doubts...
This one is about WLM and CPC Capacity.
We are using WLC for software pricing, so we have all our partitions with a
defined capacity. Now we want to dynamically change defined capacity for two
LPARs in the same CPC, so that the
No, no. I'm including those datasets into the necessary set. I was talking
about adding more data sets to the MCAT.
2007/2/1, Mark Zelden [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, 1 Feb 2007 08:21:27 +0100, Víctor de la Fuente
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From my little knowledge, I prefer not cataloging more
I read all your responses. I'm not sure I've understood all of them, but I
could learn a couple of things. By the way, I've several doubts about
installing the system, and as long as I'm talking to the best of the best
in system programmer's world, I'll send you another question. Hope you don't
I am a newbie on Server Pac, and I read a lot of documentation related to
Server Pac; I was trying to get a good approach. One of the things I read (I
think it was on Planning for Installation book) was related to catalogs. The
recommendation was having one or more disks for Target Libraries, one
From my little knowledge, I prefer not cataloging more datasets than
necessary in the master. I don't know if this is a wrong positioning. Is it?
Nevertheless, my main doubts are the catalogs I should use...
--
For IBM-MAIN
Hello!
I have just seen in an APAR the term SPC (System Programmer's C).
What is it?
I'm sure I should know it, I'm sorry...
Thank you very much!
Víctor.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
As always you all were correct!
We finally did not stop giving service, but we missed changing the policy so
the IPL in the new machine took a bit longer than needed!
When any of you is changing your box, at the time of changing CFRM policy,
double-check plant-id field
2006/6/16, Bruce
Hi all!
We are in the process of upgrading our machines. We are in a Sysplex, with a
z990 and a z900, each with a Coupling Facility for the Sysplex. The IODF is
shared by both machines. We are changing z990 to z9.
My doubt is if in IODF is coded the remote machine. I mean, when we change
z990
For sure RACF message is pointing JOB and STEP. My problem is not grant
access, it is/was knowing why VTAM is trying to use ICSF.
I already said I'm not the VTAM guy, so I don't know about APPL definitions.
But I was looking at some definitions and I realized the nodes with
ENCRYPTION=OPTIONAL
Hi all!
We have annoying RACF-error messages for some time. These are related to
ICSF. They look like...
ICH408I JOB(VTAM) STEP(VTAM1D ) CSFKGN CL(CSFSERV )
INSUFFICIENT ACCESS AUTHORITY
FROM CSF* (G)
ACCESS INTENT(READ ) ACCESS ALLOWED(NONE )
ICH408I JOB(VTAM) STEP(VTAM1D )
Hi Chris!
I'm not an expert with VTAM, but I was investigating and I'm almost sure the
'problem' is there are several VTAM APPLs defined with ENCRYPTION optional.
I readed when two APPLs are defined as OPTIONAL, if there is some
cryptographic software installed on the system, they try to use it.
Yes, we changed those dsnames recently...
2006/1/23, Imbriale, Donald (Exchange) [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
It's possible the problem is with your IEFU29 exit. There's an item on
IBMLink that mentioned this. Try starting SMF without the IEFU29
exit. When a switch from one of your SMF dump data
Yes, we are using it:
MEMBER =3D SMFPRM1E
MULCFUNC -- DEFAULT
MEMLIMIT(0M) -- DEFAULT
DDCONS(YES) -- DEFAULT
LASTDS(MSG) -- DEFAULT
NOBUFFS(MSG) -- DEFAULT
SYNCVAL(00) -- DEFAULT
INTVAL(30) -- DEFAULT
DUMPABND(RETRY) -- DEFAULT
SUBSYS(TSO,NOTYPE(16,19,90,99)) -- SYS
SUBSYS(TSO,DETAIL) --
I'm not sure, but, yes I think so.
2006/1/18, Imbriale, Donald (Exchange) [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Are you using any SMF exits such as IEFU29?
Don Imbriale
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf
Of Víctor de la Fuente
Sent: Wednesday
Hi!
I readed quickly all your answers!Thanks to all!
My problem with the CLOSE PENDING is the file is not going DUMP REQUIRED
forever...until it wants! I mean we don't know when it is going to change
its status. Sometimes we waited for 20 minutes or more! So we need to
know why it's not
What do you mean with None clear encryption? Are you talking about ICSF?
2006/1/18, Ward, Mike S [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hello all. I was wondering if anyone could explain to me what Clear Key
Encryption VS None clear Encryption is. I looked in the archives, but
only found a reference that clear
Then I have another problem...we use z/OS 1.4!
Nevertheless, we already thought about the problem you said. But our system
is about 80% CPU, and we are used to be in 100%. I know there is no
implication with cpu and smf writing, but I can suppose we had more smf
writing per second a lot of times.
OK! Thanks all!
One of the problems is gone.
We found some DASD problem, we solved them and...voilà!
Now we only have the problems of the DUMP files in CLOSE PENDING STATUS. The
solved problem was only today's problem, the CLOSE PENDING's one is much
older...
Who is the responsible for changing
Thanks for the link! It'll be my most visited page!!!
XD
2006/1/17, Knutson, Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
IIRC = If I Recall Correctly
You can lookup acronym's here http://www.acronymfinder.com/
Thanks, Sam
-Original Message-
P.D.: I'm not a good English speaker. What does IIRC
Hi all!
I was wondering which is the process of clearing SMF datasets. We are having
a problem, and I'd like to know the process to see which is that problem.
When one SMF dataset is full, it should get into DUMP REQUIRED state to be
cleared. The problem we are having is that, sometimes (randomly
Required state, and also SMF has used
all of his space available...
Any idea?
2006/1/17, Robert A. Rosenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
At 14:54 +0100 on 01/16/2006, Víctor de la Fuente wrote about How
SMFDUMP works?:
Hi all!
I was wondering which is the process of clearing SMF datasets. We
42 matches
Mail list logo
