Brian Westerman wrote:
>No, I think he's right, it says in the document that it is
>supposed to be available in June of 2019. z/OS 2.4 isn't
>going to be available until September.
Actually, IBM wrote:
>Announced functionality will be available by June 30, 2019,
>if not sooner.
IBM also wrote:
>
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The next meeting of the GSE UK Security Working Group, will take place on
Thursday 6th June 2019 at the new offices of RSM Partners in Bromsgrove, UK (a
40 minute drive from Birmingham Airport). Please note that registration is
open, which you can access via our Events pag
Elardus Engelbrecht wrote:
>So, after reading the replies to you, it seemed to me you need to sort
>according to first item_nbr and then location.
>After that, you select the FIRST of these numbers. After that you only select
>those with CORPORATIVO.
>Or reject any/all duplicates of item_nbr an
No, I think he's right, it says in the document that it is supposed to be
available in June of 2019. z/OS 2.4 isn't going to be available until
September.
Brian
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions
On 4/23/2019 11:39 AM, Dana Mitchell wrote:
I think the zFS File Level backup and restore sounds interesting, although we
can't be 2.3 until new CEC's sometime next year.
That feature won't be available until z/OS V2R4.
--
Phoenix Software International
Edward E. Jaffe
831 Parkview Drive No
On Tue, 23 Apr 2019 16:09:39 -0500, Ron Thomas wrote:
>Correct Elardus, I am awaiting Kolusu reply as to whether this can be achieved
>using sort. if not, other option is to do using as program .
>
Wouldn't Rexx be easier?
-- gil
-
Correct Elardus, I am awaiting Kolusu reply as to whether this can be achieved
using sort. if not, other option is to do using as program .
Regards
Ron T
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send em
We are about to replace our DS8870 in the DR site with a new DS8886. This
is currently in a Metro Mirror relationship with production. We will copy
from the old SAN to the new SAN using Global Copy and then start a Metro
Mirror session from the production SAN to the new SAN. This is all using
Copy
Per today's announcements:
https://www-01.ibm.com/common/ssi/ShowDoc.wss?docURL=/common/ssi/rep_ca/2/897/ENUS219-102/index.html&lang=en&request_locale=en
I think the zFS File Level backup and restore sounds interesting, although we
can't be 2.3 until new CEC's sometime next year.
-
Ron Thomas wrote:
>We have a file that is received from a vendor ( item_nbr 10 byes and location
>20 bytes) . File is a 80 byte FB record
>item_nbrlocation
>4046340¦CORPORATIVO
>4046564¦CORPORATIVO
>4046564¦ESTADO
>4047131¦CORPORATIVO
>4047460¦CORPORATIVO
>4047479¦CORPORATIVO
>Here we need
Here is a URL which gets you to IBM Personal Communications
publication "Host Code Page Reference". You'll probably find this
helpful when you're looking for various EBCDIC character encodings.
https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSEQ5Y_13.0.0/com.ibm.pcomm.doc/reference/pdf/hcp_referenc
I am exploring available methods for access to new SMF data. MVS exits
IEFU83, IEFU84 and IEFU85 historically provide access depending on the call
type and environment. Writing a new exit interface, I'd clearly use the newer
IEFU86 exit as it handles all three conditions provided by IEFU83
On Tue, 23 Apr 2019 15:38:53 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>Metz's law: don't try to validate data unless you really understand and
>communicate what is permissible.
>
>Take web forms that reject, e.g., valid e-mail addresses, valid ZIP+4.Please!
>
Striking example: "Seymour J Metz " is a valid e-
Scott Barry's Share Session 24421 in Phoenix this Spring
provides a good analysis of zEDC analysis, including this
list of relevant SMF records.
Here are the various SMF/DCOLLECT record references:
- RMF 74 subtype 9
- SMF type 14/15
- SMF type 30, zEDC data-section
- SMF t
On Tue, 23 Apr 2019 10:12:30 -0500, Ron Thomas wrote:
>Hi -
>We have a file that is received from a vendor ( item_nbr 10 byes and location
>20 bytes) . File is a 80 byte FB record
>
>item_nbrlocation
> ...
>4046564¦ESTADO
>4047131¦CORPORATIVO
> ...
>Here we need to extract item_nbrs that has
Metz's law: don't try to validate data unless you really understand and
communicate what is permissible.
Take web forms that reject, e.g., valid e-mail addresses, valid ZIP+4.Please!
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mai
Kolusu - sorry they should also be picked , we shouldn't be picking item_nbr
that have other locations defined which means extract items have only
in location "CORPORATIVO"
Thanks
Ron T
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / arc
Ron,
Why aren't the following records picked?
4047460¦CORPORATIVO
4047479¦CORPORATIVO
They have only "CORPORATIVO" as location.
Kolusu
DFSORT Development
IBM Corporation
IBM Mainframe Discussion List wrote on
04/23/2019 08:12:30 AM:
> From: Ron Thomas
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Hi -
We have a file that is received from a vendor ( item_nbr 10 byes and location
20 bytes) . File is a 80 byte FB record
item_nbrlocation
4046340¦CORPORATIVO
4046564¦CORPORATIVO
4046564¦ESTADO
4047131¦CORPORATIVO
4047460¦CORPORATIVO
4047479¦CORPORATIVO
Here we need to extract item_nbrs tha
On 4/23/2019 12:24 AM, Peter wrote:
This time when I do with SNX32704
I get
the request fails with return code 10 , Fbk2=00, sense=8570003.
I know 8570003 comes up for CONCT status of LU. but what does it mean by
FBK2=00 and return code 10 ?
Is there a reason you're not using D4C32XX3? I
SNX32704 is for a model 4.
SNX32702 is for a model 2.
Joe
On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 4:21 AM Peter wrote:
> Mike
>
> Thank you so much
>
> The scenario is we are trying to access a TSO from a Netmaster.
>
> So we receive this sense code in netmaster log
>
> Also some IBM PCOMM users do complaint
Mike
Thank you so much
The scenario is we are trying to access a TSO from a Netmaster.
So we receive this sense code in netmaster log
Also some IBM PCOMM users do complaint about x'723 but when I check the LOG
I see 08570003.
So the question is whether the LU2 type SNX32704 is not correct or t
You can look up return code and feedback2 in the SNA messages and codes manual
(or maybe SNA programming).
However, NetView RCFB 10 00 is quicker and gives this:
CNMR1000 RTCD FDBK2 Page 1 of 2
X'10'(16)0
Log
23 matches
Mail list logo
