Michael,
I dare to comment on your vast overhead of creating an ASID.
While I agree that creating an address space in not a cheap thing
in z/OS, it is by far not as often needed as your statement might
imply. Only if there is no idle BPXAS UNIX services initiator
available, is it that a new
From: Hunkeler Peter (KIUP 4) peter.hunke...@credit-suisse.com
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Sent: Mon, May 2, 2011 1:32:56 AM
Subject: Re: assembler batch calling unix daemon
Michael,
I dare to comment on your vast overhead of creating an ASID.
While I agree that
Ed,
Not sure I got your point. Anyway, it wasn't my intention
to make a statement on how costly address space creation actually
is (I simply don't have a clue). But, thinking highlevel that at
least some control blocks have to be build, it cannot come for
free. Then, if it wasn't something
I am out of the office until 05/05/2011.
I am out of the office. I will respond to your message when I return;
limited access to e-mail/phonemail.
Note: This is an automated response to your message IBM-MAIN Digest - 30
Apr 2011 to 1 May 2011 (#2011-121) sent on 5/2/11 0:00:04.
This is the
Ted
Since the cat's been let out of the bag once more, I'll try to clean up the
usual mess yet again!
I don't know what malign influence even led me to look at this thread which
would otherwise, from the subject line, not be of interest. It must be having
to change the archive month!
Indeed,
Kirk
I'm a USS-newbie ...
It's Unix System Services, not USS
a rather ridiculous comment
Is anybody else sick of the USS argument?
Count me as sick of it.
You are, of course, fully entitled to pick and choose whatever you wish to
make yourself ill - as long as you try not unduly to
Neale
... when I login to USS.
This doesn't make sense as written of course.
Logon by means of USS would be a correct phrase although may not be the
appropriate one here. It depends on one of two most likely possibilities,
whether accessing UNIX System Services (z/OS UNIX - some have
Neale
I'm a USS-newbie so don't know where to start looking ...
USS certainly can be a trick topic. For example
TSO APPLID(CICS)
can be used to initiate a session with CICS rather than TSO since TSO would
be a substitute for LOGON!
Chris Mason
On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 22:07:20 -0500, Neale
Anthony
I'm a USS-newbie so don't know where to start looking ...
no amount of USS training will help you.
Very true!
If USS training is really needed, it is possible to work it all out from,
say,
here:
5.11 Unformatted system services tables
Mike
USS - Unformatted Screen Services.
That's a new one!
As it happens, I have just in the last few days in conjunction with sorting out
another matter noticed that there is even a VTAM manual which gets USS
wrong!!!
In the z/OS Communications Server SNA Messages manual, we find the
In a6b9336cdb62bb46b9f8708e686a7ea005d9901...@nrhmms8p02.uicnrh.dom,
on 04/13/2011
at 07:57 AM, McKown, John john.mck...@healthmarkets.com said:
Not really. NUM ON is for history so that if you ever physically
punch the cards and drop them, you can put them back in order using
your handy card
In listserv%201104201750098101.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 04/20/2011
at 05:50 PM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com said:
I would expect your fingers would get tired before you could ever
punch so many cards. But perhaps you have the luxury of data entry
personnel to do that for you.
FSVO
In
A826B9FD78356242A9D9595912F9B23234FE325F02@DOITTMAIL03.doitt.nycnet,
on 04/29/2011
at 03:54 PM, Barkow, Eileen ebar...@doitt.nyc.gov said:
According to this chart, bit 32 should remain U (for unchanged?) even
in 31 bit mode.
No. The chart shows *** for bit 32 in 24-bit mode, BAM for bit 32
In banlktimns6vqz5o1p3rfycqcwi-n0fv...@mail.gmail.com, on 04/28/2011
at 12:32 PM, jagadishan perumal jagadish...@gmail.com said:
we dont have shared JES or sysplexed environment.
You don't need either, just an IP connection.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO
In 2d14e7856646224aacdda13ab1d355570ecd84d...@wdcv7exvs2.opm.gov, on
04/20/2011
at 08:00 AM, Richards, Robert B. robert.richa...@opm.gov said:
I just found DLIB DDDEFs in my MVST100 target zone in my z/OS 1.12
SMPEMVS CSI. And some of those entries in the SYSLIB DDDEF as well.
Has something
Chris,
I find it comforting that some things are to be relied upon. Most of us do
not have the time to continue the fairly impressive amount of writing that
you are able to produce on a subject that is well documented. I am sure
that the outcome will also be the same as usual. I wait for the
I searched IBM-MAIN on this topic and see some discussion from a couple of
years ago, so I'm hoping someone will be able to help us. We have a z10 in
which I have defined 2 FCP chpids on our FICON Express8 cards. These chpids
have NPIV enabled and I have provided the open system team with the
Cross-posting. Thank you in advance.
Hello Fellow Listers! I am in the initial stages of a thesis/project
for my Master's degree and the topic is: Evaluation of Exposing the
Mainframe to the World via SOA. With that said I would like to gather
information from this knowledge base as to the
OK, you win. USS is officially only to be used when speaking of VTAM's
table thing.
We've all seen the references, and what is official, and what is right,
and what is not, and who says it shouldn't have been. You're right. You
win!
Problem is, most of us just don't care. Really. We don't care
It has a cost which I understand is comprised of value units for the processors
on which it operates and the amount of tape and DASD which are encrypted.
Pricing encryption enablement by storage footprint is even worse than processor
capacity given the explosive data growth we see.
The one good
Thanks Tom your comments are welcomed
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-Original Message-
From: Chicklon, Thomas thomas.chick...@53.com
Sender: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Date: Mon, 02 May 2011 09:25:51
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Reply-to: IBM Mainframe
Rob - and all of your opinion
Cheers to all this fine Monday morning!
Indeed a very fine Monday morning indeed - that really can't be said at all
enough!
The contribution of a relatively modest nature - given that all the arguments
are crystal clear and have only one outcome - to which you
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2011 11:13 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: TSO Profile NUM and PACK
In
Tom
If you choose to present your face at the bars, you may be sure I will
continue to rattle - even harder and I fear your continued obduracy forces me
to drag up an embarrassment in order to show that it most definitely does
matter and the misuse should not simply be eschewed by those of us
I will preface my next comment by saying .. I haven't looked at the
licensing ..
Not that I am advocating anything illegal... but can EKM be treated like
BTAM and just pull forward the jar?
I suppose it will break at some point, but you could always use cavaj to
pull it apart and put it back
But very noticeably careless!
Chris Mason
On Mon, 2 May 2011 13:56:50 +, Mike Liberatore
vze2q...@verizon.net wrote:
Thanks Tom your comments are welcomed
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
On Mon, 2 May 2011 09:25:51 -0400, Chicklon, Thomas wrote:
OK, you win. USS is officially only to be used when speaking of VTAM's
table thing.
So, if you (and some others I'm sure) want to preserve the purity of the
acronym USS, good for you. Don't misuse it. Just leave the rest of us
out of it.
There is something to be said for Chris Mason's point of view.
It is useful, even highly desirable to provide enough context to disambiguate
an acronym when it has several senses in common use among the members of some
group, readers of IBM-MAIN posts, say.
Consider now the acronyms and
On 5/2/2011 9:11 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Mon, 2 May 2011 09:25:51 -0400, Chicklon, Thomas wrote:
OK, you win. USS is officially only to be used when speaking of VTAM's
table thing.
So, if you (and some others I'm sure) want to preserve the purity of the
acronym USS, good for you. Don't
Steve,
Not quite. The second word, System versus SystemS. It took me a while to
catch that one. :-)
And, yes, I'm tired of the bickering back and forth. Neither side will
convince the other that they're right/wrong. It would be best for everybody
involved to simply make sure that their
And when I filter by Information Technology, USS (Unix
System Services) becomes number one, and USS (Unix Systems Services)
becomes number two.
the above are the same
Now we're arguing within the acronym, itself?
-
Ted MacNEIL
eamacn...@yahoo.ca
Twitter: @TedMacNEIL
at one point there was almost PCO (personal computing option) ... sort
of TSO for VS/1 ... however it was eventually pointed out that PCO was
also initials for political party in europe ... and PCO morphed into
VS/PC.
there was one plan to have VS/1 machines already preloaded with vm/cms
(sort of
IMO we should ignore all messages which use a TLA. If the SOB can't be bothered
to type it out, then they're SOL! grin
--
John McKown
Systems Engineer IV
IT
Administrative Services Group
HealthMarkets(r)
9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010
(817) 255-3225 phone *
I suggest a SHARE requirement to get IBM to decide once and for all of a
definition for USS.
Ed
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET
Paul
... if he'd simply STFU.
Would that Ted MacNeil had followed your rather rude advice!
Incidentally, you'll find very few occurrences of the words UNIX System
Services in the neighbourhood of the dread initialism in my posts - but I
don't
suppose you had the wit to check!
I suppose
On 5/2/2011 8:44 AM, Ed Gould wrote:
I suggest a SHARE requirement to get IBM to decide once and for all of a
definition for USS.
I would like to know which use is the most offensive to the largest number of
people. That's the one I will start using most.
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software
Personally, I don't use USS at all. I use z/OS UNIX or z/OS UNIX System
Services for UNIX related posts. For CommServer, I will usually say the VTAM
message 10 screen, which is what most of the VTAM related USS message seem to
be related to. It is much more difficult for anybody, even n00bies,
On 5/2/2011 9:55 AM, Edward Jaffe wrote:
On 5/2/2011 8:44 AM, Ed Gould wrote:
I suggest a SHARE requirement to get IBM to decide once and for all of a
definition for USS.
I would like to know which use is the most offensive to the largest number of
people. That's the one I will start using
Ed
I suggest a SHARE requirement to get IBM to decide once and for all of a
definition for USS.
But there is no ambiguity - just misuse.
http://www-01.ibm.com/software/globalization/terminology/u.html#x2042481
already provides a once and for all of a definition for USS.
This was emphasised
John
However, as I have just mentioned to Ed Gould, it's only a VTAM message 10
these days because VTAM developers were prepared to allow the IP side of
Communications Server to use their macros for the purposes of providing a
table for the TN3270 server to behave like VTAM does when analysing
In p06240801c9e3cf8b6fd5@[192.168.1.11], on 05/01/2011
at 11:40 PM, Robert A. Rosenberg hal9...@panix.com said:
That is because the difference between a T3 and T4 SVC is historical
(for OS/360).
No. Even in OS/360 a type 3 SVC could do an XCTL.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg
In banlktimdji09wxhq8x6pbwtogtzbfra...@mail.gmail.com, on 05/01/2011
at 12:36 PM, Mike Schwab mike.a.sch...@gmail.com said:
USS - Unformatted Screen Services.
c/Screen/System/
USS applies to any LU that did not support Formatted System Services.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg
In
1475179985-1304271493-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-3385403...@bda2487.bisx.prod.on.blackberry,
on 05/01/2011
at 05:38 PM, Ted MacNEIL eamacn...@yahoo.ca said:
Is anybody else sick of the USS argument?
Hypocrite. It was a minor point in a larger message.
--
Shmuel
In BANLkTi=jpi-63eacaownrokwg1rajpl...@mail.gmail.com, on 05/01/2011
at 08:27 PM, Itschak Mugzach imugz...@gmail.com said:
It's not USSR (;-) ) but USS.
?
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html
We don't care.
Hi Everyone,
Currently we run with our Mainframes in a separate VLAN from other
environments, such as Intel and Unix. We have been asked to research
putting all of the environments on the same VLAN. My question is, What
are other shops doing? DO you run with your Mainframes in a separate
It was a joke. Everybodu uses USS for Unix System Services, including IBM.
ITschak
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 4:37 PM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote:
In BANLkTi=jpi-63eacaownrokwg1rajpl...@mail.gmail.com, on 05/01/2011
at 08:27 PM, Itschak Mugzach
Mark
My apologies!
I assumed that you would have read my response to Shane Ginnane in which I
have placed the results of some research - mainly searching on FFST in the
IBM web page. There you would have discovered the following:
But this starts to let the secret - a real one rather than a
Tom
What possible relevance can the Closed as canceled have to an APAR used
as a vehicle for a documentation update?
Why on earth take the trouble to post that? It is not contiguous with the
three date lines and so isn't a mistake of some sort.
I am *not* at all *impressed*!!! Sorry, I got
Ed
You didn't respond when this topic was raised first so you may not recall how
we got here.
Radoslaw Skorupka asked the questions, What is FFST for? and What would
I loose without it? in the RACF-L list as comments while answering a question
about FFST and SAF.
I hoped simply to move the
To all following this thread
I have posted the following on IBMTCP-L:
IBMTCP-L post
Why is no use made of FFST by Communications Server support?
This is clearly one for IBM insiders since the outsiders are puzzled and
confused.
It has a cost which I understand is comprised of value units for the
processors on which it operates and the amount of tape and DASD which are
encrypted.
Pricing encryption enablement by storage footprint is even worse than
processor capacity given the explosive data growth we see.
My
Itschak
Everybodu uses USS for Unix System Services, ...
There are at least four who have emerged who care not to risk confusion and
ambiguity.
Why not join is? It's a coming thing!
... including IBM.
Not an argument for perpetuating misuse!
Chris Mason
On Mon, 2 May 2011 19:49:27
You could do as Rob suggested, and retain the entire JAVA 6.0 filesystem, and
mount that at a different location, and modify EKM to point to that.
But, whether we like it or not, eventually, that version of EKM will be
unsupported.Not sure you want to jeopardize all of your companies
We have multiple VLANs. The z/OS systems are on the server VLAN. That
includes z/OS, Windows, AIX, and Linux/Intel systems which are servers as
opposed to other things such as desktops or routers.
--
John McKown
Systems Engineer IV
IT
Administrative Services Group
HealthMarkets(r)
9151
Once upon a time several buddhist novice monks who had gotten tired of chopping
wood and carrying water took a break. As they stood around, one of them espied
a flag attached to a flagpole in the distance, and he asked, is it the wind
that moves the flag, or is it the flag, flapping itself,
We run multiple VLANs. The mainframe along with the rest of the servers is on
a VLAN. We run multiple VLANs for the end users, basically splitting them by
floor into separate VLANs.
Rex
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On
Coach Foster pushed up pretty hard...
In a message dated 5/1/2011 11:03:00 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
linda.lst...@comcast.net writes:
Alabama teams were always tough :-)
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 12:22, Chris Mason chrisma...@belgacom.net wrote:
John
However, as I have just mentioned to Ed Gould, it's only a VTAM message
10
these days because VTAM developers were prepared to allow the IP side of
Communications Server to use their macros for the purposes of
Hi All,
This seems like a Friday topic, but...
I call it USS when referring to VTAM, and Z/unix when referring to OE.
Thanks!
BobL
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Don Leahy
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2011 3:36 PM
Ed,
That has to be the most sensible post of this entire idiotic kerfuffle.
I owe you a beer if I ever make it to SCIDS again.
Scott
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Edward Jaffe
edja...@phoenixsoftware.comwrote:
On 5/2/2011 8:44 AM, Ed Gould wrote:
I suggest a SHARE requirement to get IBM
Usage gives meaning. That's how languages evolve. Acronyms too,
apparently. ;-)
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 17:42, Scott Rowe scott.r...@joann.com wrote:
Ed,
That has to be the most sensible post of this entire idiotic kerfuffle.
I owe you a beer if I ever make it to SCIDS again.
Scott
On
Chris:
Just an FYI, I have opened several TCP and VTAM pmr#39;s in the years after
the install and I never had any component ask me for FFST output. Just to make
it clear these were abend type issues not incorrect out type problems.
I have asked two other sysprog friends and their experience
Ed:
Becareful you will start up another war.
I think it is a problem that IBM can decide and clarify quite nicely. IBM
should IMO do a 360 and say USS means unformatted system services. My rather
poor memory says unformatted was in use before Unix came into general use. FWIW
the UNIX people
Are you saying that most z/OS COBOL programmers are aware of what SVC and PC
routines are?
I'm sorry to sound ignorant, but none of the COBOL or z/OS applications
development training I've received has any reference to these things. I
assumed they were things that only systems programmers
On 5/2/2011 4:35 PM, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
Are you saying that most z/OS COBOL programmers are aware of what SVC and PC
routines are?
I'm sorry to sound ignorant, but none of the COBOL or z/OS applications
development training I've received has any reference to these things. I assumed they
Are you saying that most z/OS COBOL programmers are aware of what SVC and PC
routines are?
I'm sorry to sound ignorant, but none of the COBOL or z/OS applications
development training I've received has any reference to these things. I
assumed they were things that only systems programmers
Yes :) as in both
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Gates, Guy
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2011 9:40 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Vlan
Hi Everyone,
Currently we run with our Mainframes in a separate VLAN
Amen, can you say AAAMeennn
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Scott Rowe
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2011 2:42 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: USS vs USS
Ed,
That has to be the most sensible post of this entire
Hi,
I was asked today if Software AG had a sub capacity pricing model for Adabas
and Natural. My first inclination was to tell them to call SAG, but they
told me that they were unable to get any kind of response back on the
question, so I tried myself, and I have not been able to get a response
USS was WAY before Unix.the SNA 3270 days to be exact. So, IBM
Ed,
USS was WAY before Unix.the SNA 3270 days to be exact. So, IBM makes a
oops,
wouldnt be the first time...
Scott J Ford
Â
From: Ed Gould ps2...@yahoo.com
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
USS was WAY before Unix.the SNA 3270 days to be exact. So, IBM makes a
oops, wouldnt be the first time...
I don't believe it's an OOPS.
It's a reuse.
And, it's not worth all this BS.
I shall continue to use USS to relate to z/UNIX.
If that makes me a bad person: tough t*tty said the kitty!
And to expand in another direction here, file transfer (generically) is, in
my humble opinion, vastly over-used as a means to lash two systems
together. One gating question has to be asked: is the business process that
this (new) file transfer will support real time or batch in nature?
If the
Language is evolutionary. Acronyms are an extension of language. It seems to
me that the big argument here is that once an acronym is used for one thing it
may never, ever be used for any other purpose else mass confusion will result,
the earth will stop spinning on it's axis and we'll all
Rumor has it that they do. Totally unconfirmed as far as I know. Have
you heard the expression pulling hen's teeth?
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Brian Westerman
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2011 5:18 PM
To:
This question isn't any sort of official IBM survey or anything like that
-- just a question arising out of personal curiosity.
I'm wondering what IBM-MAINers like to use for editing Unicode (UTF-8,
UTF-16, and/or UTF-32) files on z/OS. There are of course graphical
options (notably Rational
http://www.softwareag.com/corporate/contact_us/default.asp
You might try to contact thr office closest to you.
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 12:30 AM, Gibney, Dave gib...@wsu.edu wrote:
Rumor has it that they do. Totally unconfirmed as far as I know. Have
you heard the expression pulling hen's teeth?
76 matches
Mail list logo
