Hello list,
has anyone noticed a higher number of real frames usage in the zFS address
space on z/OS 2.1 compared to z/OS 1.13? I already opened a PMR with IBM, but
wanted to ask for any feedbacks/gotchas.
Kind regards,
Whatever core your LPAR has needs to be backed by paging space 1X.
If you want to take a Stand Alone Dump, you need another copy of the
core and the paging space so 3X.
When it goes to write, it spreads the writes over all files. When one
write gets done, it gets another CI.
On Mon, Jul 6, 2015
Maybe Shane's asleep. I was doing 'automation' for a shipping company and
we were OK on technical side but were having trouble finding IT people with
good crossover skills. Anyway long story short Mgmt put out a job opening
in trade papers for a good salary and benefits. Guy they hired had
Well, I can't sleep. So I'll put in my small change. What IT management
wants is what the truly powerful people (the 0.5% who have 90+% of the
world's wealth) want: Serfs. Not slaves, serfs. Slaves rebel. Serfs
generally are resigned to their position in life. Well, that put me on the
hit list,
Ed Gould wrote:
Not quite. One of the companies that does this lays out in specifics that you
can hire cheaper labor with H1B's after you have advertised at a grossly
unfair rate local people who wouldn't think of working at the rate of H1B's .
At first I hardly swallowed what you said, but
Walter
What are your values for
-user_cache_size
-vnode_cache_size
-meta_cache_size
-metaback_cache_size
I recently changed them to the defaults and got back some of the memory from
zFS.
You can go into OMVS on TSO/ISPF and issue the zfsadm configquery
To obtain these values
Lizette
There is this in the JCL User's Guide:
A statement requesting exclusive control overrides any number of
statements requesting shared control. One of two methods can be used
to request exclusive control:
DISP=NEW, DISP=MOD or DISP=OLD on a JCL DD statement.
DISP=NEW, DISP=MOD or
On Mon, 6 Jul 2015 07:22:17 -0400, Steve wrote:
There is this in the JCL User's Guide:
A statement requesting exclusive control overrides any number of
statements requesting shared control. One of two methods can be used
to request exclusive control:
DISP=NEW, DISP=MOD or
On Sun, 5 Jul 2015 03:42:19 -0500, Shane Ginnane ibm-m...@tpg.com.au wrote:
No doubt the deal was trumpeted by IBM, but it's another site that will be ex
soon. How does that build the platform ?.
Shane ...
I don't think IBM wants to build the platform. They are placing all bets on
cloud,
snip
I said it's best to use same-size DS have usage of under 30% (each DS), but
it was rejected as old-recommendation.
/snip
This is/was AFAIK, the current recommendation.
As to whether the small page ds is problem, the answer is it depends.
Perhaps the people in charge are unaware that
On 7/6/2015 9:24 AM, Staller, Allan wrote:
snip
I said it's best to use same-size DS have usage of under 30% (each DS), but
it was rejected as old-recommendation.
/snip
This is/was AFAIK, the current recommendation.
As to whether the small page ds is problem, the answer is it depends.
Welcome to the Mainframe.
I would need more information on what you are looking to do
1) Are these emails coming through SMTP?
2) Is there a product, like XMITP, that is being used to send the emails?
3) Do you need a message sent to the JCL or USERID on the job that says the
email was
Look into the PAGENT configuration to prevent connecting to non authorized SMTP
Servers. From there would need to be Firewall rules to prevent connections to
the forbidden mail domains.
Jerry Whitteridge
Lead Systems Engineer
Safeway Inc.
925 738 9443
Corporate Tieline - 89443
If you feel in
At 11:31 -0700 on 07/06/2015, Lizette Koehler wrote about Re: IDCAMS
LISTCAT LEVEL and z/OS 2.1:
If so, have you tried
A.B.C(0) in a listing function?
This may return a false negative/result. Since the intent is to check
for the existence of a GDG Base, if the base exists but is empty (ie:
Lizette,may I ask you which level is your zFS at?And how much CS does your LPAR
have assigned? Walter Marguccio
z/OS Systems Programmer
BELENUS LOB Informatic GmbH
Munich - Germany
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive
Hello all,
We have many jobs that use LISTCAT LEVEL(A.B.C) GDG to chek if a GDG base
has any GDS (RC 0) or not (RC 4).
With z/OS 2.1, RC is always 0; this is a know issue.
IBM says :
1/ USE IDCNOFGL instead of IDCAMS (but not sure that this will not be
removed in a future release)
2/ USE LISCAT
I use REXX and LISTC function. It works fine.
Since you have this process in place, do you want a solution that will NOT
change all of your jobs or other processes?
Or are you looking for a solution even if it requires a change to all of your
jobs and other processes?
I have not heard of
Looks like you can, as long as you use WIDE=NO. CHNGDFLD=YES.
Of course what I really want is to display one particular unchanged field (the
record key) and then just the changed fields. Haven't figured that one out yet!
One other...Is there a way to suppress a compare for a particular field
Sorry it is IDCNOGFL, another entry point for IDCAMS, the behavior is the
same that is was in z/OS 1.x (so RC4 when no GDS). You can use it instead
of IDCAMS.
I think that IDCNOGFL could disappear in a next release of z/OS, so i don't
want to use it.
We have thousands of JCL's that use LISCAT
Hello everybody,
I am a Master the Mainframe student and I am currently an intern at a mainframe
site. I have been tasked to ask for a referral on how to block, or white list
certain domains when sending email from JCL. Can anyone be so kind as to refer
me to the URL of any manual I should be
I know that I could write some REXX...
I just asked if something like // EXEC
PGM=MAGIG_UTILITY,PARM='MYGDG.TO.CHECK' was existing somewhere ...
2015-07-06 20:31 GMT+02:00 Lizette Koehler stars...@mindspring.com:
Are you using a MASK?
Or is a.b.c a specific GDG name?
If so, have you tried
Are you using a MASK?
Or is a.b.c a specific GDG name?
If so, have you tried
A.B.C(0) in a listing function? I am thinking LISTDSI or SYSDSN might be
useful in REXX.
Lizette
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
On Behalf Of
To perform some reporting for PCI compliance, I would like to be able to be
able to list out SYSMODs with ALL of the ++HOLDDATA that I have processed. We
do load the SECINT assigns and holddata pulled from the security portal.
However, once loaded, getting to the value that was in the SYMP
Sorry, I forgot you had already stated the LISTC ENT and LISTC LVL.
Lizette
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
On Behalf Of Lizette Koehler
Sent: Monday, July 06, 2015 11:18 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IDCAMS
Marc,
We are z/OS V2.1 here, so I tested this and it works (where A.B.C exists as a
GDG with no generations):
//TSOUSERZ JOB . . .
//LISTCAT EXEC PGM=IKJEFT01
//SYSTSPRT DD SYSOUT=*
//SYSTSIN DD *
LISTCAT LEV(A.B.C)
//
Output on
Have you tried the LISTC LVL(a.b.c) ALL and see what happens?
Otherwise your options are probably
CSI
Write a REXX/COBOL/other PGM language
Or see if there is a vendor product.
Lizette
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
On
Does this 30% apply to every local page DS, or total space of all DS?
Any overhead of using a mix of small very big sizes?
TIA,
Rez
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to
The client wants it that way. No other explanation given by the client.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
On 7/6/2015 7:59 PM, R Hey wrote:
Does this 30% apply to every local page DS, or total space of all DS?
Any overhead of using a mix of small very big sizes?
TIA,
Rez
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access
I have vague memories (but haven't tested recently) that if unlike page
datasets were used then the smallest size would dictate the usage for ALL
datasets.
Jerry Whitteridge
Lead Systems Engineer
Safeway Inc.
925 738 9443
Corporate Tieline - 89443
If you feel in control
you just aren't going
Just found Ron's post from 2010
Subject:Re: PAGE datasets -- few large or more small
from Greg Dyck ...
- Individual local page datasets should not exceed 30% (or
25% if you choose) utilization because the contigious slot allocation
algorithm becomes
Walter -
The defaults are different. So here is what I used for my sizings..
Metaback_cache_size default is 64M (depending on Meta_cache_size)
meta_cache_size 128m
vnode_cache_size32768
user_cache_size 337m
Frank,
I don't think you can suppress the matching fields from the output. May
be another step to left justify the spaced fields.
Thanks,
Kolusu
From: Frank Swarbrick frank.swarbr...@outlook.com
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date: 07/02/2015 04:11 PM
Subject:Re: FILEM DSM
Hello Lizette,all values you mentioned use their default value. I
have:user_cache_size set to 1229Mvnode_cache_size set to 32768 (I assume byte)
meta_cache_size set to 100Mmetaback_cache_size set to 1129M
Our LPAR has 12800M real storage assigned. According to IBM,above default
values but the
34 matches
Mail list logo
