AW: Re: When is message IRR010I USERID .... ASSIGNED ... written?

>>The message comes from RACROUTE REQUEST=VERIFYX, and I think JES2 invokes >>that service during READER processing. > > Very true. In fact these messages are written AFTER the ACEE of that job has > been established in the job's address space. Note that READER processing is *not* done in

Re: z/OS Security Level 3 woes

Gibney, David Allen wrote: >Once I get these FMID's in there, I will bring everything up to current RSU. Dave, Good luck to you. I hope you will succeed with that project. I must admit, beside being too lazy, I don't have enough weapons and armour to handle that... ;-) Groete / Greetings

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

Ted MacNEIL wrote: >Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: >>-- A data base application was redesigned at the last minute to read the >>entire data base into memory at startup. The business unit noticed that they >>were charged for I/O but not for memory use. It was cheaper to occupy virtual >>storage than

Re: When is message IRR010I USERID .... ASSIGNED ... written?

>Peter Hunkeler wrote: >>A job's JES2 joblog starts with a date message and (presuming RACF) message >>IRR010I. For example: >>10.37.42 J0012345 TUESDAY, 01 MARCH 2016 >>10.37.42 J0012345 IRR010I USERID JOHNDOE IS ASSIGNED TO THIS JOB. >>Next messages are RACF's last access message

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

Your first example is not necessarily bad behavior. I bet it performed! -teD   Original Message   From: Jesse 1 Robinson Sent: Wednesday, March 9, 2016 00:59 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List Subject: Re: Does everybody use chargeback? Ah, bad or perverse

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

Ah, bad or perverse behaviors. Two stand out in my career. -- A data base application was redesigned at the last minute to read the entire data base into memory at startup. The business unit noticed that they were charged for I/O but not for memory use. It was cheaper to occupy virtual storage

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

Scott Chapman wrote: >Software billing is based on available/consumed capacity. IBM's is/are not. It's based on *peak* four hour rolling average utilization per month -- or, effectively, per subscription year for products that are not Monthly License Charge products. You can set whatever pricing

Re: Problem applying UA71619 anyone ?

On 8 March 2016 at 12:03, ESHEL Jonathan wrote: > Thank you John and apologies for not doing it earlier. We did use GROUPEXTEND > initially so OA44222 was in > the package already. We also tried today to apply it specifically, but no > joy. UA71619 is preq'ed by UA72148 (the >

Re: SMP/E split screen in z/OS 2.1

On 3/8/2016 3:54 PM, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: I'm finally in a position to explore SMP/E split screen in z/OS 2.1. 'Forever' I've had an exec that allocates SMP/E libraries, does LIBDEFs, ALTLIB, etc., then undoes all that on the way out. The same initialization exec won't work in split screen

Re: SMP/E split screen in z/OS 2.1

On Tue, 8 Mar 2016 20:54:56 +, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: >I'm finally in a position to explore SMP/E split screen in z/OS 2.1. 'Forever' >I've had an exec that allocates SMP/E libraries, does LIBDEFs, ALTLIB, etc., >then undoes all that on the way out. The same initialization exec won't work

Re: z/OS Security Level 3 woes

Once I get these FMID's in there, I will bring everything up to current RSU. > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] > On Behalf Of John Eells > Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 1:01 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: z/OS

Re: z/OS Security Level 3 woes

Thank you again. I think I finally got it. The BUILDMCS includes several like this: ++PROGRAM(GLDCLS31) DISTLIB(AIEALNKE) FROMDS(DSN(SYS1.AIEALNKE) NUMBER(1)) SYSLIB(SIEALNKE). I need to change these to FROMDS(DSN(mydvd.SYS1.AIEALNKE) not the DDDEF for

Re: z/OS Security Level 3 woes

Jousma, David wrote: Well, when you run the buildmcs for the fmid's you want from that IBM DVD, SMPE will access, any and all dlib datasets associated with those FMID's to build the package. If that's all it is then great! So to finish my thought from the original response I gave you,

SMP/E split screen in z/OS 2.1

I'm finally in a position to explore SMP/E split screen in z/OS 2.1. 'Forever' I've had an exec that allocates SMP/E libraries, does LIBDEFs, ALTLIB, etc., then undoes all that on the way out. The same initialization exec won't work in split screen mode because of files that are already

Re: z/OS Security Level 3 woes

Well, when you run the buildmcs for the fmid's you want from that IBM DVD, SMPE will access, any and all dlib datasets associated with those FMID's to build the package. If that's all it is then great! So to finish my thought from the original response I gave you, everything you need for your

Re: z/OS Security Level 3 woes

I have the DVD CSI's restored to new names. Etc. That is what I ran the BUILDMCS against. I don't think I need to restore all the other files, just

Re: z/OS Security Level 3 woes

You said: " I had not really realized that the Distribution DDDEFs for the RECEIVE and APPLY need to point to the new order AIEALNKE, etc. And the targets point to my in-progress order. I am still not sure how my in-progress order DLIBs get updated." They shouldn't change. Your SMPE

Re: SMT vs. chargeback [was: Does everybody use chargeback?]

On 3/8/2016 11:44 AM, Neil Duffee wrote: If all my threads have to run on a single CP, don't I become singly threaded? That is precisely the concept behind SMT (symmetric multithreading). During the pipeline stalls that inevitably occur (e.g., interlocks, cache misses, etc.) the other thread

Re: SMT vs. chargeback [was: Does everybody use chargeback?]

Patents are tricky to read. The Abstract is semi-meaningless. Only the "claims" really matter, and they are tricky to read also. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Neil Duffee Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016

Re: Problem applying UA71619 anyone ?

On Mar 8, 2016, at 10:37 AM, ESHEL Jonathan wrote: Thank you Allan and sorry for not responding earlier. SMPMTS is the 1st in our SYSLIB concat and it is empty anyway ... Regards, Jonathan Maybe you can show the concatenations? Ed

Re: When is message IRR010I USERID .... ASSIGNED ... written?

On Tue, 8 Mar 2016 15:20:03 +0100, Peter Hunkeler wrote: >Cross-Posted to IBM-Main and JES2-L lists > > >A job's JES2 joblog starts with a date message and (presuming RACF) message >IRR010I. For example: > >10.37.42 J0012345 TUESDAY, 01 MARCH 2016 >10.37.42 J0012345

Re: SMT vs. chargeback [was: Does everybody use chargeback?]

The U of Zero (*grin*) hasn't charged back for more than 2.5 decades. I still saw account numbers in job cards when I started back then but expect it was hold-over from the card/batch-only days and habit from the lifers that ran the system. Given our expected un-plug in the next year, the PTB

Re: z/OS Security Level 3 woes

Thank you David and John. z/OS 2.2 is not an option for my z9 :( Thank you for the comments about my mistaken belief I need to do copies outside of SMP/E. I am only a SMP/E savvy (or really anything else) as I need to be for the problem at hand. The next issue gains priority before I

Re: IBM RDEz

Steve, We use RDz. Send me an email with your questions. On 3/8/2016 9:51 AM, Steve Beaver wrote: Does anyone's shop use RDz? Steve -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to

Re: Problem applying UA71619 anyone ?

In that case, assuming a local modification is not in the mix and causing the problem somehow, I suggest you open a PMR with JES2 Level 2 (COMPID 5752SC1BH). Our PTFs should be installable without error (once you include any PE fixing PTFs, of course) whether you use source and soruce update

Re: Problem applying UA71619 anyone ?

Double check the comma is not in column 72. On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 11:03 AM, ESHEL Jonathan wrote: > Thank you John and apologies for not doing it earlier. We did use GROUPEXTEND > initially so OA44222 was in the package already. We also tried today to apply > it specifically,

Re: Problem applying UA71619 anyone ?

Thank you John and apologies for not doing it earlier. We did use GROUPEXTEND initially so OA44222 was in the package already. We also tried today to apply it specifically, but no joy. UA71619 is preq'ed by UA72148 (the fix of OA44222) and it does not apply due to the ISFJREAD compile failure.

Re: Problem applying UA71619 anyone ?

Thank you Allan and sorry for not responding earlier. SMPMTS is the 1st in our SYSLIB concat and it is empty anyway ... Regards, Jonathan -Message d'origine- De : Staller, Allan [mailto:allan.stal...@wunderman.com] Envoyé : mercredi 2 mars 2016 16:37 Objet : Re: Problem applying

Re: IBM RDEz

Steve: There are a number of shops using RDz and it is being installed at a major credit card provider in the southwest U.S. at this point in time. Regards, Mitch McCluhan mitc...@aol.com -Original Message- From: Steve Beaver To: IBM-MAIN

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

On 3/8/2016 3:58 AM, Scott Chapman wrote: Even absent the chargeback and software cost issues, how do you do capacity planning with that level of variability? How do you do performance testing? Of course the other platforms that have this sort of technology seem to largely just say something

Re: IBM RDEz

I think I can get you to the folks that can provide you info on customer references. My email is kph...@us.ibm.com Drop me a note. Quickly. Ken On 3/8/2016 7:59 AM, Cameron Conacher wrote: > I used it a couple of years ago. > I really liked it. > Senior management thought it cost too much to

Re: IBM RDEz

We have it installed. What type of question/concern do you have? _ Dave Jousma Assistant Vice President, Mainframe Engineering david.jou...@53.com 1830 East Paris, Grand Rapids, MI  49546 MD RSCB2H p 616.653.8429 f 616.653.2717

Re: IBM RDEz

I used it a couple of years ago. I really liked it. Senior management thought it cost too much to license. On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Steve Beaver wrote: > Does anyone's shop use RDz? > > Steve > >

IBM RDEz

Does anyone's shop use RDz? Steve -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: z/OS Security Level 3 woes

Without having cross-checked everything you are doing, I'll say that most of what you have outlined should work in principle. Run APPLY and ACCEPT against clones of your existing target and DLIB zones and libraries. Of course, always take a backup first, too, because "stuff happens." See

When is message IRR010I USERID .... ASSIGNED ... written?

Cross-Posted to IBM-Main and JES2-L lists A job's JES2 joblog starts with a date message and (presuming RACF) message IRR010I. For example: 10.37.42 J0012345 TUESDAY, 01 MARCH 2016 10.37.42 J0012345 IRR010I USERID JOHNDOE IS ASSIGNED TO THIS JOB. Next messages are RACF's last

Re: Alleged mainframe breach to add to the list

The offical name now is 'IBM i for Power Systems'. Current IBM Power8 hardware can run IBM i, AIX and Linux LPARs all concurrently under PowerVM on machines from a 2u rack mounted server all the way up to Enterprise level E880 with 192 cores (8xSMT) and 32TB of memory. Also, IBM now offers

Re: z/OS Security Level 3 woes

I didn't respond earlier. I don't know what is on the contents of the DVD they sent you. If this DVD is an entire system replacement, you may need to restore it completely to separate(throw-away DASD), and before doing the buildMCS make sure all the maintenance for those FMIDs in that order

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

I believe that while chargeback is an important issue that SMT messes up, that's already somewhat messed up today because there's more variance from execution to execution. I.E. run the same exact job twice and even absent SMT you'll get different CPU measurements. That's always been the case,