Since I quoted Shmuel
I agree whole heartedly with Shmuel.
Ed
On May 1, 2015, at 4:14 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On 2015-05-01 15:08, Ed Gould wrote:
Agreed...
Agreed with Timothy or agreed with Shmuel?
On May 1, 2015, at 9:14 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
In
In
of1c8cf620.778691d4-on48257e37.001a8f05-48257e37.0022e...@sg.ibm.com,
on 04/30/2015
at 02:21 PM, Timothy Sipples sipp...@sg.ibm.com said:
. IBM did not (generally) recommend multiple JES3
globals in a single Sysplex
Still not PolyASP. PolyASMP wqould be running multiple globals or
In
of1c8cf620.778691d4-on48257e37.001a8f05-48257e37.0022e...@sg.ibm.com,
on 04/30/2015
at 02:21 PM, Timothy Sipples sipp...@sg.ibm.com said:
A quarter century is a long time to keep holding onto a ~41 year old
IT grudge. :-)
I still hold a grudge for the way IBM handled TSO Data Set
On 2015-05-01 15:08, Ed Gould wrote:
Agreed...
Agreed with Timothy or agreed with Shmuel?
On May 1, 2015, at 9:14 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
In
of1c8cf620.778691d4-on48257e37.001a8f05-48257e37.0022e...@sg.ibm.com,
on 04/30/2015
at 02:21 PM, Timothy Sipples sipp...@sg.ibm.com
The references I cited in my previous post are documentation elaborations.
Nothing more, nothing less. IBM did not (generally) recommend multiple JES3
globals in a single Sysplex (which can consist of a single LPAR or not),
past tense, and IBM does not (generally) recommend multiple JES3 globals
On Thu, 30 Apr 2015 14:21:35 +0800, Timothy Sipples wrote:
The references I cited in my previous post are documentation elaborations.
Nothing more, nothing less. IBM did not (generally) recommend multiple JES3
globals in a single Sysplex
Right. And they still don't, for many reasons.
(which
On Tue, 28 Apr 2015 12:49:44 +0800, Timothy Sipples wrote:
I thought JES3 can still spread workload over multiple LPARs?
That has nothing to do with PolyASP, which was the ability to run a
secondary ASP on the same CPU.
I disagree with the word nothing. Multiple LPARs often exist on the same
I feel insulted by the tone of your comments.
Me too! I used to appreciate Timothy's posts for their precision. However, in
this case he seems to have a need to be perceived as right, even if he's not.
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 08:22:00 -0500
From:
sipp...@sg.ibm.com (Timothy Sipples) writes:
Let's take a brief look at this not exactly new history. I can fairly
easily trace JES3 back a quarter century. (Perhaps somebody else would like
to go back into the pre-Sysplex JES3 era, from 1973 to 1990, to see what
IBM recommended and/or
On 26 Apr 2015 09:54:57 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attached_Support_Processor
I thought JES3 can still spread workload over multiple LPARs?
JES3 can have 1 GLOBAL and N LOCALs where N ranges from 1 to a number
I have long since forgotten. From
In
cajtoo591ynazi9hblngnsrxzo0vmkx4npwo12wh-dj9jntx...@mail.gmail.com,
on 04/26/2015
at 11:54 AM, Mike Schwab mike.a.sch...@gmail.com said:
I thought JES3 can still spread workload over multiple LPARs?
That has nothing to do with PolyASP, which was the ability to run a
secondary ASP on the
I thought JES3 can still spread workload over multiple LPARs?
That has nothing to do with PolyASP, which was the ability to run a
secondary ASP on the same CPU.
I disagree with the word nothing. Multiple LPARs often exist on the same
CPU, of course.
It is possible to have even a single LPAR with
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attached_Support_Processor
I thought JES3 can still spread workload over multiple LPARs?
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 9:08 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote:
In 6kjpja91t3suoq1kjpghelh2pbbj13t...@4ax.com, on 04/26/2015
at 08:40 AM, Clark
On 25 Apr 2015 19:45:15 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
In
CAArMM9R9VfbsSb5fDZkx4hC87_M1-VXHkVyjQf7pE=76bdb...@mail.gmail.com,
on 04/24/2015
at 11:17 AM, Tony Harminc t...@harminc.net said:
It seems a surprising loss of enerality given the elegant (and
long-standing) nature of the
In
CAArMM9R9VfbsSb5fDZkx4hC87_M1-VXHkVyjQf7pE=76bdb...@mail.gmail.com,
on 04/24/2015
at 11:17 AM, Tony Harminc t...@harminc.net said:
It seems a surprising loss of enerality given the elegant (and
long-standing) nature of the subsystem interface.
To say nothing of a loss of functionality
Thanks, Tom!
Unfortunately, I usually do not have that kind of flexibility - neither
time-wise nor resource-wise.
We are not a really large company. So, in other words: availability is a
very loose concept around here ...
Best Regards
Karl
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe
On 22 April 2015 at 19:20, Ed Jaffe edja...@phoenixsoftware.com wrote:
As the book states, JES3 does not run as a secondary subsystem - only primary.
Just out of curiosity -- I've been away from this for a long time --
can you explain why this is the case? It seems a surprising loss of
Seems like great place for VM?
In a message dated 4/24/2015 7:20:52 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
000a2a8c2020-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu writes:
If you have a test LPAR available, you could create a JES3
configuration that you IPL with occasionally. Or you could get a
zPDT system
there are no known
problems). If JES3 is running on a system, it must be the primary job entry subsystem.
You cannot run JES2 as the primary subsystem and JES3 as a secondary subsystem..
As the book states, JES3 does not run as a secondary subsystem - only
primary. We have LPARs where JES3 runs primary
Karl,
If you are not aware - there are also a JES2 and JES3 list. If you would
like to join, go to these URLs
JES2http://listserv.vt.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=jes2-l
JES3http://www.listserv.uga.edu/archives/jes3-l.html
The biggest difference I see is that JES3 needs to know it owns resources
Hello JES experts,
My practical experience with JES3 is near zero, or even below zero.
The software we develop rarely ever has to take into consideration the
differences between JES2 and JES3. I can remember only 3 such cases in the past
more than 15 years I have been working here. Every
21 matches
Mail list logo
