and virtual
memory ... includes reference that OS/VS2 release 2 (MVS) was on glide
path to OS/VS2 release 3 (FS)
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013h.html#44 Why does IBM keep saying things like
this
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013h.html#45 Storage paradigm [was: RE: Data
volumes]
http
Perhaps you are keeping bad company. While humans are not perfect, there are
methods to improve code reliability.
In 30+ years, I've worked for 6 companies.
Gee, they all must be bad company!
-
Ted MacNEIL
eamacn...@yahoo.ca
Twitter: @TedMacNEIL
W dniu 2013-06-11 08:58, Ted MacNEIL pisze:
Perhaps you are keeping bad company. While humans are not perfect, there are
methods to improve code reliability.
In 30+ years, I've worked for 6 companies.
Gee, they all must be bad company!
Are we still talking about possible bug in the
,
control who can use different Dataclasses etc.
Kees.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Gerhard Postpischil
Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 19:32
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Storage paradigm [was: RE: Data volumes
, Peter x23353
Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 5:38 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Storage paradigm [was: RE: Data volumes]
Rant
Like a few others on this list, I have often gritted my teeth at the
necessity to estimate disk storage quantities that vary widely over
time in a fixed manner
Gerhard Postpischil wrote:
What planet are you from?
Sol 3
Interesting that you refer to that filthy big blue polluted ironball with
warring citizens. The last time I checked, we're on Tatooine in a galaxy far
far away or so I think... ;-)
Ted MacNEIL wrote:
Programmers seem able to test
On 06/10/2013 01:57 PM, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
As to run-away programs, they should be thoroughly checked on a test system
before
going into production; a run-away in production should be so rare as to be
immaterial.
What planet are you from?
Programmers seem able to test everything except that
On 6/11/2013 5:41 AM, Elardus Engelbrecht wrote:
Interesting that you refer to that filthy big blue polluted ironball
with warring citizens. The last time I checked, we're on Tatooine in
a galaxy far far away or so I think... ;-)
Nice display of dry wit G
Gerhard Postpischil
Bradford, Vermont
In
CAAJSdjhdFqcpkSUKJ9Uu+DSJh1VwwJdFT2VSHwC3P9=79nc...@mail.gmail.com,
on 06/10/2013
at 11:45 AM, John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com said:
LUW works similar to z/OS UNIX file systems. I.e. there is a file
system which is formatted using some utility (mkfs in the Linux/UNIX
world, format
In 51b60a0b.7030...@valley.net, on 06/10/2013
at 01:16 PM, Gerhard Postpischil gerh...@valley.net said:
Technically the easiest to implement would be adding a new device
type, thus keeping (E)CKD completely distinct from FBA. The new type
could be supported by VSAM/AMS only (and JCL, SVC 99,
In
985915eee6984740ae93f8495c624c6c23194bd...@jscpcwexmaa1.bsg.ad.adp.com,
on 06/10/2013
at 02:46 PM, Farley, Peter x23353 peter.far...@broadridge.com
said:
There *are* non-theoretical solutions to runaway file output. The
*ix system model of using disk quotas per user makes it entirely
In
985915eee6984740ae93f8495c624c6c23194bd...@jscpcwexmaa1.bsg.ad.adp.com,
on 06/10/2013
at 11:38 AM, Farley, Peter x23353 peter.far...@broadridge.com
said:
Why is it that IBM (and organizations that use their mainframe
systems) so vigorously resist a conversion off of the ECKD
standard?
On 6/11/2013 2:58 AM, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
In 30+ years, I've worked for 6 companies.
Gee, they all must be bad company!
I'll take your word for it.
In 40+ years I worked for 8 companies, two of which were ISVs, two
service bureaus, and the rest were contract software providers (mostly,
but
LVM requires an LV (Logical Volume) to be in a single VG (Volume Group). A
VG is composed of one or more PVs (Physical Volumes). A PV is basically a
specially formatted disk partition (which can be the entire disk or
subdivision). A single file system must reside on a single LV. Which is in
a VG.
Yes, most people basically want to say: I don't want to have to concern
myself with how much space and time it takes to do my work. I just want it
to work. Oh, and I need it ASAP. And it must not require too much thought.
That is, I need to be able to use it on a Monday morning, before I have had
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
On Behalf Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 3:37 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Storage paradigm [was: RE: Data volumes
shmuel+...@patriot.net (Shmuel Metz , Seymour J.) writes:
That's not the Multics model. The Multic model is that segment numbers
are dynamically assigned as needed, and that in general two processes
will use different numbers for the same segment. IBM had something
similar in TSS, but
) for moderate filesystem workload. some
past posts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#mmap
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013h.html#44 Why does IBM keep saying things like
this
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013h.html#45 Storage paradigm [was: RE: Data
volumes]
note that there was two parts
Rant
Like a few others on this list, I have often gritted my teeth at the necessity
to estimate disk storage quantities that vary widely over time in a fixed
manner (i.e., SPACE in JCL) when the true need is just to match output volume
to input volume each day.
Why is it that IBM (and
In general, I agree. But I will say that I need something to limit run-away
usage of disk space. Why? Because we have had programmers who didn't want
to be bother either. So they put out a report to SPOOL. And then their
program went into a loop; writing the same message over and over. This
On Mon, 10 Jun 2013 11:38:08 -0400, Farley, Peter x23353
peter.far...@broadridge.com wrote:
Rant
Like a few others on this list, I have often gritted my teeth at the necessity
to estimate disk storage quantities that vary widely over time in a fixed
manner (i.e., SPACE in JCL) when the true
@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Storage paradigm [was: RE: Data volumes]
Rant
Like a few others on this list, I have often gritted my teeth at the necessity
to estimate disk storage quantities that vary widely over time in a fixed
manner (i.e., SPACE in JCL) when the true need is just to match output
-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 10:38 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Storage paradigm [was: RE: Data volumes]
Rant
Like a few others on this list, I have often gritted my teeth
For Windows Capabilities, I suggest reading about Dynamic Disks and Dynamic
Volumes on MSDN:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa363785(v=vs.85).aspx
John
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive
On 6/10/2013 12:15 PM, Blaicher, Christopher Y. wrote:
I am not a LUW person, other than I use a windows machine for simple
things, so I am curious how external storage is allocated and
controlled in that environment. I think we have all heard the
complaints about the short-comings of MVS in
On 6/10/2013 11:38 AM, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
Rant
Like a few others on this list, I have often gritted my teeth at the
necessity to estimate disk storage quantities that vary widely over
time in a fixed manner (i.e., SPACE in JCL) when the true need is
just to match output volume to input
Download GnuPartEd, Burn it to CD-ROM, Boot from it, resize as needed.
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Roberts, John J
jrobe...@dhs.state.ia.us wrote:
For Windows Capabilities, I suggest reading about Dynamic Disks and Dynamic
Volumes on MSDN:
: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Gerhard Postpischil
Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 1:32 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Storage paradigm [was: RE: Data volumes]
On 6/10/2013 11:38 AM, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
Rant
Like a few others
Too true. And, around here, our QA people appear to be glitz checkers
instead of function and reliability checkers. They have more people than
any other group and do less testing on the mainframe. They seem to check
mainly for ease of use. That is, can a totally numb skull still use
this?
On Mon,
On 6/10/2013 2:46 PM, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
To your point about tailoring and dynamically submitting JCL, it
really is an issue. In a typical large z/OS shop today, dynamically
tailoring and submitting JCL is only permitted for test environments
and users. Production JCL is frozen and
On 6/10/2013 2:57 PM, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
What planet are you from?
Sol 3
Programmers seem able to test everything except that one condition that will
break in Production
Perhaps you are keeping bad company. While humans are not perfect, there
are methods to improve code reliability.
31 matches
Mail list logo
