Edward Jaffe pisze:
R.S. wrote:
It is also worth to mention that IBM is the only company which is not
try to catch the customer. I read several horror stories on this
forum, on ISVcosts list, from own experience - almost any other
company presents license agreements that HAVE to be
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 08:50:02 +0200 R.S. r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl
wrote:
:I recant.
:I shouldn't say that IBM is the only honest company. That should be the
:only honest company *I know* . This statement does not preclude other
:companies.
:Obviously I didn't mean PSI, because I had
Binyamin Dissen pisze:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 08:50:02 +0200 R.S. r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl
wrote:
:I recant.
:I shouldn't say that IBM is the only honest company. That should be the
:only honest company *I know* . This statement does not preclude other
:companies.
:Obviously I didn't
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 10:24:20 +0200 R.S. r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl
wrote:
:Binyamin Dissen pisze:
: On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 08:50:02 +0200 R.S. r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl
: wrote:
: :I recant.
: :I shouldn't say that IBM is the only honest company. That should be the
: :only honest company
Rick Fochtman wrote:
In case you forgot: regular load modules only contain a note list if
they are in OVERLAY format, which is both archaic and unnecessarily
complicated.
OVERLAY format does use a second entry in the NOTE list, but *all*
PDS load modules have at least one entry in the NOTE
I don't have to look for gotchas.
I negotiate prices, but usually not TsCs.
Boy! Are you naive!
TC are negotiable!
-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send
Hi all,
A little something I noticed...
We have some code in IEFACTRT that issues WTO messages with route code 11
(don't ask..).
When a job is running under a JES-managed initiator, the messages are
displayed fine in the JESMSGLG.
When a job is running under a WLM-managed initiator, each message
Ted MacNEIL pisze:
I don't have to look for gotchas.
I negotiate prices, but usually not TsCs.
Boy! Are you naive!
TC are negotiable!
I'm not naive. I know that TsCs are negotiable, as everything in business.
It is strange: when I complained about IBM on the list, I was scolded.
Now I said
:D
-Ursprungligt meddelande-
Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] För Steve Comstock
Skickat: den 11 september 2009 20:06
Till: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Ämne: Re: SV: SV: CLIST/REXX Library Formats
Thomas Berg wrote:
[snip]
This makes it somewhat
-Ursprungligt meddelande-
Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] För Paul Gilmartin
Skickat: den 11 september 2009 23:26
Till: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Ämne: Re: CLIST/REXX Library Formats
On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 19:38:21 +0200, Thomas Berg wrote:
We will soon be installing an EMC V-Max and SRDF/A in an DB2 environment
running on an Z/OS LPAR(s). Can anyone share what their best practices are
or Point me to where I can find any Documentation on this subject? Thanks in
advance!
You did not say if you were doing SRDF/A prior to the DB2 so
Do you still have to install Consistency Group Software?
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Terri E Shaffer
Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2009 1:31 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: SRDF/A, DB2
I think this is where I
SHARE used to publish two volumes of Proceedings: Volume I was a book
containing papers; Volume II was microfiche of everything else. I have started
to convert the Volume I Proceedings to PDF. I have Volume I from SHARE 74
(Anaheim, Winter 1990) and SHARE 77 (Chicago, Summer 1991). If you have
Peter,
Yes, all SMF records are written by SMF. However, it is system programs
or application programs that request SMF to write them. I know of many
vendor programs that request the writing of various SMF records, and
type 89 is no exception. Any program could set up the application
oriented
What is said here might be true for those products that are doing
sub-capacity pricing based on MSUs. They just need to
register/deregister their product to write the MULC data. However, as I
said in a previous post, I know that the IBM CPCS and imaging software
cause SMF89 records to be written
Hi,
A few days ago I asked a question about a replacement for Dino Software’s T-Rex.
From the way my question was phrased, it could have been inferred that I was
dissatisfied with T-Rex or Dino Software.
First I would like to apologize to the great people at Dino Software. I have
always been
Hi to all.
I've a problem when I connect via ssh my USS session to CopSSH using pubkey
and after starting a VbScript to exceute a MsExcel macro.
When I start the vbscript that make a CreateObject(Excel.Application)
it gives a Permission denied but this doesn't happens if I
authenticate using
bshan...@rocketsoftware.com (Bob Shannon) writes:
SHARE used to publish two volumes of Proceedings: Volume I was a book
containing papers; Volume II was microfiche of everything else. I have
started to convert the Volume I Proceedings to PDF. I have Volume I
from SHARE 74 (Anaheim, Winter
On Mon, 2009-09-14 at 06:48 -0400, Gil Peleg wrote:
We have some code in IEFACTRT that issues WTO messages with route code 11
Yes, we changed our ACTRT to issue messages with another route code so
to avoid those superfluous (IMO) IEF196I messages.
--
David Andrews
A. Duda and Sons, Inc.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Andreas F. Geissbuehler
Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2009 9:52 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: [turnkey-mvs] turnkey mvs and cobol/jcl environment
SNIP
I second Jo on this and URGE
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 16:00:16 +0300, #1490;#1491;#1497; amp;#1489;#1503;
#1488;#1489;#1497; gad...@malam.com wrote:
Hi,
A few days ago I asked a question about a replacement for Dino Softwares
T-Rex.
From the way my question was phrased, it could have been inferred that I
was dissatisfied with
In a message dated 9/14/2009 1:51:24 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl writes:
company. However *every* ISV's license agreement I met needed
negotiation. Not only for the price, but first of all terms and
conditions. Sometimes it was small change, but sometimes
Let's face it: some vendors are very fair and accomodating while others
have practices that can only be characterized as predatory. I've dealt
with both kinds.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
--snip--
Let me understand this correctly. You accept all IBM boilerplate
agreements with zero negotiation???
-unsnip
If so, I want whatever it is that he's smoking!
That's all well and good. However, I just did a D PROD,STATE on my
systems and several products - CPCS, the imaging software, CICS, DB2,
and MQ - are not in this list, but they are all producing SMF Type89
records. The ones for CICS, DB2, and MQ are run though SCRT every month
to produce the
On Mon, 2009-09-14 at 10:02 -0400, Mark Zelden wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 16:00:16 +0300, #1490;#1491;#1497; amp;#1489;#1503;
#1488;#1489;#1497; gad...@malam.com wrote:
From the way my question was phrased, it could have been inferred
I didn't take it that way.
For what little it may be
Here is a short version of the job...and it croaks trying to open up the tape
in
the second part of the second step. We thought maybe it was a DD name
conflict and changed the scheme for a test, same results...opened with IBM
and will do the same with FDR folks. This job will be all generated
Thompson, Steve wrote:
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Andreas F. Geissbuehler
Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2009 9:52 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: [turnkey-mvs] turnkey mvs and cobol/jcl environment
SNIP
I
On 14 Sep 2009 08:25:19 -0700, st...@trainersfriend.com (Steve
Comstock) wrote:
Marketing, probably. The current COBOL developers have been
pushing the edge of modernity constantly.
Which current CoBOL developers? The compiler writers at IBM? The
majority of people who develop CoBOL
On 11 Sep 2009 18:59:04 -0700, tom_moul...@1scom.net (Tom Moulder)
wrote:
I am working with a company that literally did this. They shipped a
very large disk array to the central computing center and placed it next
to the production array; synchronously copied all the data; found a
quiet
Just looking for input as to whether this is working as designed
before I report it as a defect...
If a program that uses CEEPIPI to call HLL subroutines abends while
*not* in any of the HLL subroutines, LE recovery processes the abend and
transforms a system abend into a LE user abend.
Let's face it: some vendors are very fair and accomodating while others
have practices that can only be characterized as predatory. I've dealt
with both kinds.
So have I.
As a Capacity Analyst, I have been more involved in costing, than I've ever
wanted to be.
I knew this was going to happen
Howard Brazee wrote:
On 14 Sep 2009 08:25:19 -0700, st...@trainersfriend.com (Steve
Comstock) wrote:
Marketing, probably. The current COBOL developers have been
pushing the edge of modernity constantly.
Which current CoBOL developers? The compiler writers at IBM? The
majority of people
Thompson, Steve wrote:
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Andreas F. Geissbuehler
Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2009 9:52 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: [turnkey-mvs] turnkey mvs and cobol/jcl environment
SNIP
I
Kelman, Tom wrote:
What is said here might be true for those products that are doing
sub-capacity pricing based on MSUs. They just need to
register/deregister their product to write the MULC data. However, as I
said in a previous post, I know that the IBM CPCS and imaging software
cause SMF89
In a message dated 9/14/2009 9:47:57 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
daniel_mclaugh...@us.crawco.com writes:
and it croaks trying to open up the tape in
the second part of the second step. We thought maybe it was a DD name
conflict and changed the scheme for a test, same results...opened with
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 09:45:35 +0200, J D Cassidy s...@jdcassidy.net wrote:
appreciate the advice, thank you. Bloody hard way to get a manual though...
Perhaps you weren't around when you had to fill out a paper form and send it
to the branch office? :-)
By the time L-class books were
Kelman, Tom wrote:
That's all well and good. However, I just did a D PROD,STATE on my
systems and several products - CPCS, the imaging software, CICS, DB2,
and MQ - are not in this list, but they are all producing SMF Type89
records. The ones for CICS, DB2, and MQ are run though SCRT every
If you change to SYSMDUMP and use the IPCS command IP VERBX LEDATA
'ALL', you may be able to get a traceback and PSW/regs at time of
ABEND.
Gord Tomlin wrote:
Just looking for input as to whether this is working as designed
before I report it as a defect...
If a program that uses CEEPIPI
Hi Daniel,
On quick look, I don't see a problem. Have you sent this problem to us at
Innovation? We haven't seen it yet. Please submit the job and output to
the support email for us to review at your convenience.
Thanks,
Joseph Butz
jb...@fdrinnovation.com
Thanks Don, but my mission here is not how to get at the LE information
in the dump, but rather to have LE's recovery routines entirely out of
the way when an abend occurs outside of the LE environment.
The LE Programming Guide says that when control is returned to the
caller of CEEPIPI, the
Wondering if Hiperbatch, smartbatch, Dynamic Cache Management are still
valid for improving performance with todays processors, DASD, OS etc... I
don't think that we use any of these and are only now starting to look at
SMB. Any feed back would be appreciated.
And yes we are having
We have 3 LPARs in our sysplex all in the same MAS. All running z/OS
1.7. We have an anomaly we can't explain.
When a job is submitted on System A, it is converted on system B. Due
to the scheduling environment, the job
executes and ABENDs on System A. Designating SYSAFF=A resolved the
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 13:21:24 -0700, Mark Yuhas mark.yu...@paccar.com wrote:
We have 3 LPARs in our sysplex all in the same MAS. All running z/OS
1.7. We have an anomaly we can't explain.
When a job is submitted on System A, it is converted on system B. Due
to the scheduling environment, the
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 13:21:24 -0700, Mark Yuhas wrote:
Even though both systems have the same PROC name. The PROCs our
different on each system. ...
Is there a way, besides an exit, to force a job without a SYSAFF
designation to be converted on the same system
that it was submitted on?
Gord Tomlin wrote:
Just looking for input as to whether this is working as designed
before I report it as a defect...
If a program that uses CEEPIPI to call HLL subroutines abends while
*not* in any of the HLL subroutines, LE recovery processes the abend and
transforms a system abend into a
In jhkka59q0bavje123mfp9mp5cgdnmhm...@4ax.com, on 09/11/2009
at 07:37 AM, Howard Brazee howard.bra...@cusys.edu said:
So how do you use it? What do you do differently when you get a 97 than
when you get a 00?
Depending on the application, I might put out a message saying to
reconstruct from
In a30a9f528e618748a8ef5199e80c4a1c69a...@wkpp1infmb03.cbsh.com, on
09/11/2009
at 02:00 PM, Kelman, Tom thomas.kel...@commercebank.com said:
Subject: Carrier Pigeon beats Internet Speed
Using RFC 1149?
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see
In lkkka5lk61hs8pbmnvs4c43gc80bnff...@4ax.com, on 09/11/2009
at 07:39 AM, Howard Brazee howard.bra...@cusys.edu said:
I also once wrote a check out using mills, when the calculation indicated
I should do so, and there were no instructions on how to round. It may
be legal tender, but they
In 4aa9651c.4010...@ync.net, on 09/10/2009
at 03:44 PM, Rick Fochtman rfocht...@ync.net said:
Which is more effieient for CLIST/REXX libraries? the choices are
RECFM=FB, LRECL=255 or RECFM=FB,LRECL=80?
If you can't use RECFM=VB, then use the smallest LRECL that your code will
fit into.
In
32208482.1252616974481.javamail.r...@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net,
on 09/10/2009
at 05:09 PM, Lizette Koehler stars...@mindspring.com said:
I think the Lrecl80 came from the punch card days. The people I worked
with back in 1980 preferred the 80 byte record because they came from
In 6134cdf9e3c17546be1c9d525bdeef95f07eebe...@hqmail.rocketsoftware.com,
on 09/10/2009
at 06:04 PM, Bob Shannon bshan...@rocketsoftware.com said:
With VLF, it pretty much doesn't matter.
For SYSPROC; it does for SYSEXEC.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position;
In dc74548a025aff4a85f46926802a9b2303723...@chsa1035.share.beluni.net,
on 09/11/2009
at 08:24 AM, Hunkeler Peter (KIUP 4)
peter.hunke...@credit-suisse.com said:
Interesting that you can see 80 characters in the 72
positions the ISPF editor has to display the data ;-)
It would have been had
In db9405830909102240xade49f9o9adc503905547...@mail.gmail.com, on
09/11/2009
at 03:40 PM, Wayne Bickerdike wayn...@gmail.com said:
So many times have novices asked me why their REXX was failing and it was
sequence numbers in 73-80. Can still happen for VB 255
No; for RECFM=VB the sequence
I didn't think you could put it on the INTRDR statement, but I've been using
$T INTRDR,SYSAFF=* in the init deck for decades, no need for a system symbol
;-)
Mark Zelden mark.zel...@zurichna.com 9/14/2009 4:36 PM
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 13:21:24 -0700, Mark Yuhas mark.yu...@paccar.com wrote:
You
Hi Steve,
You're close! I'll go through your points in order:
1. Correct. CEEPIPI is called with request code 3 (init_sub). The PIPI
table is set up correctly. For the demonstration case (IBM's sample to
keep things simple) I took a working program and added an intentional
ABENDS0C3.
For
Hello all.
I'm asking about how to obtain current TCB address in an assembly pgm.
Any help will be appreciated; thanks in advance.
__
Raúl Daniel Digestani
Bco. Santander Río S.A.
CC 011 - Desarrollo de Sistemas II
Gral. Hornos 238 - Piso 3 - Buenos Aires
The field PSATOLD in the PSA contains the address of the TCB of the
active task.
Chuck Arney
illustro Systems International, LLC
http://www.illustro.com
Internet-enable your applications with z/Ware V2
Voice: 214-800-8900 X#5562
--
This e-mail is private and may be confidential and is for the
how to obtain current TCB address in an assembly pgm.
USING PSA,0 PSA addressability
L R3,PSATOLD - Current TCB
USING TCB,R3 TCB addressability
...
IHAPSA LIST=NOPSA DSECT
IKJTCB LIST=NO
Gord Tomlin wrote:
Hi Steve,
You're close! I'll go through your points in order:
1. Correct. CEEPIPI is called with request code 3 (init_sub). The PIPI
table is set up correctly. For the demonstration case (IBM's sample to
keep things simple) I took a working program and added an intentional
On 2009-09-11 at 16:14, concerning stop-x37 type of function in
SMS, jam...gr...@efir...com wrote to IBM-Main:
While at SARE a couple weeks ago my manager was told by an IBM'er that
SMS could handle space abends like a STOP-X37 product.
Has anyone heard this and if so how is it
I agree, the cut-and-paste out of the PDF is painful. I've sent you
ASMPIPI off list. You already have HLLPIPI.
Steve Comstock wrote:
Gord Tomlin wrote:
Hi Steve,
You're close! I'll go through your points in order:
1. Correct. CEEPIPI is called with request code 3 (init_sub). The PIPI
Gord Tomlin wrote:
Hi Steve,
You're close! I'll go through your points in order:
1. Correct. CEEPIPI is called with request code 3 (init_sub). The PIPI
table is set up correctly. For the demonstration case (IBM's sample to
keep things simple) I took a working program and added an intentional
Definitely, the key item is the meaning of dormant. Clearly, the
environment exists until it is destroyed by the term call. The
question is what should happen when the environment exists but is dormant.
IBM states in the description of init_sub that it sets the environment
dormant so that
On 14 Sep 2009 07:38:40 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
Thompson, Steve wrote:
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Andreas F. Geissbuehler
Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2009 9:52 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
For DCME, have a look at Ron Hawkins' recent post:
http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0909L=ibm-mainP=R37609I=1X=-
If you are batch-constrained, the old Red Book: System/390 MVS Parallel
Sysplex Batch Performance - SG24-2557-00 has many pointers still valid
in even non-sysplexed environments.
66 matches
Mail list logo
