I stand corrected. Thanks for decreasing my ignorance in this area with those
links.
Peter R., apologies for my mistaken understanding of the TOD clock value. I
now much better appreciate your repeated statements about the TOD clock value
being architecturally TAI - 10.
Peter
-Original
On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 23:52:07 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>> ...
>I believe otherwise. In order to avoid discontinuities at leap seconds of the
>sort
>that cause network failures:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leap_second#Examples_of_problems_associated_with_the_leap_second
>the TOD
On Sat, 29 Dec 2018 05:21:30 +, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
>"A STCK value came from the clock and is not to be considered UTC time."
>
>Then what is STP/NTP (or whatever the current mechanism is named) supposed to
>do? Isn't the entire point of a hardware clock-setting mechanism to set the
"A STCK value came from the clock and is not to be considered UTC time."
Then what is STP/NTP (or whatever the current mechanism is named) supposed to
do? Isn't the entire point of a hardware clock-setting mechanism to set the
hardware clock to some agreed-upon and internationally-supported
On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 21:57:43 -0600, Joe Monk wrote:
>>"By my arithmetic, January 1, 1900 + 143 years = January 1, 2043".
>
>Ummm ... Did you forget the year 1900? Theres only 142 years left after you
>subtract the Year 1900.
>
WTF!?
So, by that reasoning, January 1, 1900 + 1 year = January 1,
"By my arithmetic, January 1, 1900 + 143 years = January 1, 2043".
Ummm ... Did you forget the year 1900? Theres only 142 years left after you
subtract the Year 1900.
"How are those bits numbered? 0 to 103? What's the value of bit 0? What's
the value of bit 103?"
Yes, 0 to 103. Bit 51 is
On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 18:18:51 -0600, Joe Monk wrote:
>So if you read the POO, you see:
>
> - Communication between systems is facilitated by establishing a
> standard time origin that is the calendar date and time to which a clock
> value of zero corresponds. January 1, 1900, 0 a.m.
All I can say is computers, Mainframe and PC have changed so much, who can
keep up.
I am kinda there now, Java Java is all I hear and no IBM z type projects.
Time moves on..
Scott
On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 5:22 PM Seymour J Metz wrote:
> Well, I started on a 650, but I once saw a post here from
On 12/28/2018 2:40 PM, David Cole wrote:
I'm looking for an IBM written mapping macro for the ISPF statistics
found in PDS directory entries. I've searched high and low, but I'm
not having much luck.
We had the same issue and ended up constructing our own.
We never would have done so if an
So if you read the POO, you see:
- Communication between systems is facilitated by establishing a
standard time origin that is the calendar date and time to which a clock
value of zero corresponds. January 1, 1900, 0 a.m. Coordinated Universal
Time (UTC) is recommended as this
On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 14:46:41 -0500, Peter Relson wrote:
>I shouldn't have included "TIME" among the services I mentioned because
>that's "current", not "historic" (so only has to deal with "current" leap
>seconds) and because it does not let you choose STCK as the "zone" -- you
>
Not as the
In: MVS Interactive Problem Control System (IPCS) Customization
Version 2 Release 3 SA23-1383-30
I read:
TOD Clock Service
The time-of-day (TOD) clock service provides a caller, including your exit
routine,
with a TOD clock image. In the clock image, bit 0 is set on to allow the
Hi,
I'm looking for an IBM written mapping macro for the ISPF statistics
found in PDS directory entries. I've searched high and low, but I'm
not having much luck.
Certainly, I could write a mapping macro myself, but I'd rather not
if IBM already has one.
I know about IHAPDS, but that
Well, I started on a 650, but I once saw a post here from Werner Buchholz; you
don't get much old timer than that.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
scott Ford
Sent: Friday,
Boy I thought I was an old timer, BAL on a 360-20 ...I feel better,
your..lol
Scott
On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 4:37 PM Seymour J Metz wrote:
> I never mentioned the Altos; you did.
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>
>
>
I never mentioned the Altos; you did.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Wayne Bickerdike
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2018 3:41 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: How about
Look at the date on that; it's revisionist history. You won't find any
contemporaneous documents referring to the 1401 as a mainframe.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Wayne
Rob,
My friend big thanks, answer is 'yes'. This is great.
Happy Holidays, also.
Scott
On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 3:52 PM Rob Schramm wrote:
> Is this along the lines of what you are looking for?
>
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/bit.listserv.ibm-main/6SlkPC-irSc
>
> Rob
>
> On Fri,
Is this along the lines of what you are looking for?
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/bit.listserv.ibm-main/6SlkPC-irSc
Rob
On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 12:09 PM scott Ford wrote:
> All,
>
> Has anyone created their own system symbol and then referenced it in HLASM
> ?
> If so I need some
On a roll here...
They weren't hyphenated either. Z80 and S100.
Give me a Z28 anyday.
On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 7:45 AM Wayne Bickerdike wrote:
> Even IBM are confusing:
>
> IBM 1401: The Mainframe
>
> https://www.ibm.com/ibm/history/ibm100/us/en/icons/mainframe/
>
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 29, 2018
Even IBM are confusing:
IBM 1401: The Mainframe
https://www.ibm.com/ibm/history/ibm100/us/en/icons/mainframe/
On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 7:41 AM Wayne Bickerdike wrote:
> "If you want to pick nits, read "Z-80" as "S-100 PC using a Z-80"; it's
> not a mainframe, nor is the 1401."
>
> I'll pick
"If you want to pick nits, read "Z-80" as "S-100 PC using a Z-80"; it's not
a mainframe, nor is the 1401."
I'll pick nits. Altos was not S100 bus.Cromemco was. Next?
I was in short pants when 1401 was a mainframe. Long pants with Z80. So my
memory is hazy. Just remember older peers talking about
If you want to pick nits, read "Z-80" as "S-100 PC using a Z-80"; it's not a
mainframe, nor is the 1401.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Wayne Bickerdike
Sent: Thursday,
One major consideration should be who sets the time zone. Many
mainframes support users in multiple time zones. So ideally the
mainframe should be set to UTC then the macro should convert to the
local time of the individual application / user.
On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 1:47 PM Peter Relson
I agree with the comments on what should have been done, and I agree that the
documentation needs to be corrected. However, I also agree with IBM that they
should not introduce an incompatibility and that any enhancement to TOD
conversion requires a business case. A starting point might be to
I shouldn't have included "TIME" among the services I mentioned because
that's "current", not "historic" (so only has to deal with "current" leap
seconds) and because it does not let you choose STCK as the "zone" -- you
must choose between local and UTC, both of which are defined with respect
Redbooks are useful, but they are not formal documentation.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
George Kozakos
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2018 2:23 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Is there any additional documentation on this function ?
The function was documented in the z/OS Version 1 Release 11
Implementation redbook - 13.5 Cross-memory TCB and SRB WAIT
Regards,
George Kozakos
z/OS Software Service, Level 2 Supervisor
There is an architectural definition of what a tick in bit 51 of the
64-bit TOD clock.
Thus a given clock value (bits 0-51) represents the number of microseconds
since the start of the epoch being used.
It seems true that STCKCONV assumes the standard epoch. As I said, if that
is not mentioned
Thanks
I am going to run it under TESTAUTH
( obviously I cannt run the SRB under TEST )
But I can display the values of X.SRBCCOMCODE before IEAMSCHED and after
> On Dec 28, 2018, at 1:20 PM, Peter Relson wrote:
>
> When I wrote that you ought to invest in a debugger, perhaps what I meant
When I wrote that you ought to invest in a debugger, perhaps what I meant
was that you need to use a debugger for debugging.
Capture data so that you can see what is going on and what is going wrong.
Share that data if you are going to ask for help.
You showed some of the code, but you did not
I only waiting for a reply from Statler and Waldorf... (grump, grump).
Kees.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of scott Ford
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2018 18:43
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: How about a
AM I to understand that this routine can be called from an SRB Routine or
a Cross Memory PC Service routine to place the SRB routine in a
wait-suspend for x-amount of time ?
yes
Is there any additional documentation on this function?
no. What additional documentation would you think you
I helped convert from a System 3 to a 4361
On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 10:21 PM Wayne Bickerdike wrote:
> Z80 was a processor. How could it possibly crop up in a discussion about
> what constitutes a mainframe?
>
> The Altos 8000 was Z80 based as was the North Star Horizon and the Cromemco
> System
It is, to me, quite surprising that anyone still uses SSAFF OBTAIN.
It is an inefficient way of accessing a small amount of data. To a good
degree, I think that name/token has superseded the usefulness of SSAFF.
SSAFF will likely never be enhanced in any way.
Peter Relson
z/OS Core Technology
All,
Has anyone created their own system symbol and then referenced it in HLASM ?
If so I need some points on how to do it. I saw in the manual how to define
it, what I am not clear on is how to have HLASM code read the system symbol
table and compare for the desired symbol..What i want to do is
You're looking in the right spot Paul.
SCTABEND indicates the step abended and if the step completed
(SCTSTSRT+SCTSTPND) then SCTSEXEC should contain the completion code for this
step (not the abend code).
SCTSTNRN will be on if the step was bypassed.
Where's your code running? An SMF exit?
For a contrary opinion, I believe IBM's documentation and function of the
TOD clock to be quite adequate. The provided macros do the fairly involved
arithmetic to convert a TOD number as-is, which is the most useful option.
Adjusting for leap seconds, DST, and time zone can easily be done before
38 matches
Mail list logo
