Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

lto:ma..pac..@UK.. ..COM] Sent: May 20, 2016 01:48 Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) Right. My (now long gone, I fear) VIOTOES presentation majored on (the then new) DFSMS implementation. In particular ACS Routines and VIOMAXSIZE. But I still thought you had to have some VIO

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

-7535 Office robin...@sce.com -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Martin Packer Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 11:39 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) The "all 16 ex

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

The "all 16 extents" applies to VIOMAXSIZE calculation, by the way. Cheers, Martin Sent from my iPad > On 20 May 2016, at 17:26, Paul Gilmartin <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > >> On 2016-05-19, at 15:04, Longabaugh, Robert E wrote: >> >> ... Also VIO would get all 16

Re: What was a 3314?

these days. But still need to be sure there are sufficient page volumes. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Tom Brennan Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 5:23 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: What was a 3314

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

On 2016-05-19, at 15:04, Longabaugh, Robert E wrote: > ... Also VIO would get all 16 extents at once, so saying TRK(1,1) was not > better than saying TRK(16). When a job did the VIO allocation, it got the > page slots. > Perhaps not quite. My experience is that it gets the page slot as

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) Wasn't the MM the bon number? -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Edward Gould Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 11:20 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU S

Re: What was a 3314?

W dniu 2016-05-20 o 02:23, Tom Brennan pisze: Not if the jobs run fine. To change the subject beyond VIO: In my experience, arbitrary limits on mainframe resources do nothing more than result in job reruns. Jobs killed because of time/space/spool/etc might need double the CPU because of the

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

ame Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] >> On Behalf Of Norman.Hollander >> Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 2:45 PM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) >> >> Maybe a bunch of JCL with UNIT=VIO is a cause to make you

Re: What was a 3314?

Not if the jobs run fine. To change the subject beyond VIO: In my experience, arbitrary limits on mainframe resources do nothing more than result in job reruns. Jobs killed because of time/space/spool/etc might need double the CPU because of the rerun after the limits are increased. What a

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

On 19 May 2016 at 16:56, Martin Packer wrote: > The whole disk is NOT in your virtual storage; The track window IS (IIRC). Well I wasn't thinking *your* (the caller's) virtual storage; obviously it can't all be there. I was thinking there would be a VSM mapping of the

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

Wasn't the MM the bon number? -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Edward Gould Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 11:20 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) > On May 18, 2016, a

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

On Behalf Of Norman.Hollander > Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 2:45 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) > > Maybe a bunch of JCL with UNIT=VIO is a cause to make you fuss? > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

Maybe a bunch of JCL with UNIT=VIO is a cause to make you fuss? -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 1:18 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither

Re: What was a 3314?

norman.hollan...@desertwiz.biz (Norman.Hollander) writes: > Track size. We actually used to use a 2305 "drum" definition for VIO. > But if you genned 1 dummy address, you had to gen all 8. Made for a > larger IO-gen. So we would go for the next best tracksize of the > 2314. So- how many 4K

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

; as they came in. > > > Bob Longabaugh > CA Technologies > Storage Management > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Martin Packer > Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 3:56 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

agement -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Martin Packer Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 3:56 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) The whole disk is NOT in your virtual stor

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

The whole disk is NOT in your virtual storage; The track window IS (IIRC). Cheers, Martin Sent from my iPad > On 19 May 2016, at 21:45, Tony Harminc wrote: > >> On 19 May 2016 at 01:44, Martin Packer wrote: >> It's sort of come back to me: >> >> A

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

On 19 May 2016 at 01:44, Martin Packer wrote: > It's sort of come back to me: > > A small track size limits the virtual storage window (probably usually > below the line in 1989 when I looked at this). Or it might've been > cylinder. But I think it was track. > > I'm

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

table disk was the 3314. OK- discuss further... zNorman -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Martin Packer Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 10:45 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) It's so

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

On Thu, 19 May 2016 13:40:48 +, Roach, Dennis wrote: >Since almost all "3390" DASD resides on FBA arrayed disks, the software exists >and is running in the control units to convert ECKD to FBA requests. > Kinda proprietary, though, whether from IBM or competitors, and hard to make a

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

K- discuss further... zNorman -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Martin Packer Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 10:45 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) It's sort of come

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

W dniu 2016-05-19 o 15:40, Roach, Dennis pisze: Since almost all "3390" DASD resides on FBA arrayed disks, the software exists and is running in the control units to convert ECKD to FBA requests. Not so easy. USB stick use USB "CCW", so without hardware changes on mainframe side there would

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

nufactured, since the beginning of time. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Clark Morris Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 8:29 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) [Default] On 18 May

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Default] On 18 May 2016 19:31:34 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main ste...@copper.net (Steve Thompson) wrote: >> snip >Makes one very glad to have things like thumb drives that we have >today. Now if I could just get one big enough to IPL z/OS... Would 128 gigabytes be enough. I think I have

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 7:33 PM, Edward Gould wrote: > Chales, > > 2321 was a data cell (magnetic strip) hardly could be called DASD) > ​Technically, it was because you could get to a particular "block" of data "directly" (DASD == Direct Access Storage Device) as

Re: What was a 3314?

edgould1...@comcast.net (Edward Gould) writes: > It addressing had MMBBCCHHR(R?) so I guess you could address it > directly. Anyone remember how to do that? (progr5amming for a 2321 is > a lost art (where is Seymour?). the "BB" was to select the BIN that the magnetic strips were located in.

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

gt; From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Edward Gould >> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 5:33 PM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) >> >> Chales, >> >> 2321 wa

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

18, 2016 5:33 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) > > Chales, > > 2321 was a data cell (magnetic strip) hardly could be called DASD) I don’t > recall a 3314 . The removable 3340 (not sure the number anyone?) >

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

Well, the S/360-20 had TPS (Tape Processing System, not to be confused with Tape Operating System) which had a RESVOL that was a tape. And there were utilities to update the tape in place (not copy to another tape and then back, actual update blocks in place). From time to time one would have

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

On Wed, 18 May 2016 17:50:53 -0700, Charles Mills wrote: > ... It was indeed a direct access storage device. Not a disk, but DASD > nonetheless. Certainly not magnetic tape (though it had a family > resemblance!) and certainly not unit record. > What's the criterion? Max/Min latency ratio?

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) Chales, 2321 was a data cell (magnetic strip) hardly could be called DASD) I don’t recall a 3314 . The removable 3340 (not sure the number anyone?) Ed > On May 16, 2016, at 7:47 PM, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote: >

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

a mobile; please excuse the brevity > > Original message > From: Steve Thompson <ste...@copper.net> > Date: 05/16/2016 4:51 PM (GMT-08:00) > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) > > 2314, 2419, 2311, t

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

Lots of OEM's changed 1st digit but kept geometry.CDC, Memorex, Telex, Amdahl, StoraeTek. In a message dated 5/16/2016 6:40:33 P.M. Central Daylight Time, charl...@mcn.org writes: You are going to get some replies on that!

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

logy Systems & Operations - Metrics & Automation Team From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Steve Thompson [ste...@copper.net] Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 6:51 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Wha

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

6-302-7535 Office robin...@sce.com -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Clark Morris Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 4:16 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) [Default] On 16 M

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) OK, the sleeping dog wants some attention. Before my first reply, I carefully Googled device type 2314 to verify the number. Then I typed '3314' because who has ever worked with DASD that started with something other than

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

Co-Manager 323-715-0595 Mobile 626-302-7535 Office robin...@sce.com -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Clark Morris Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 4:16 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: What was a 3314

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Default] On 16 May 2016 07:01:50 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main jcal...@narsil.org (Jerry Callen) wrote: >In the "Whither VIO" thread, J.O.Skip Robinson wrote: > >> In a previous life, we defined VIO (I believe) to device 3314 even though >> we had none left on the floor > >That's a device

Re: 1620 veterans! [was:RE: What was a 3314?]

: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 9:09 AM, R.S. <r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl> wrote: W dniu 2016-05-16 o 16:01, Jerry Callen pisze: In the "Whither VIO" thread, J.O.Skip Robinson wrote: In a previous life,

Re: 1620 veterans! [was:RE: What was a 3314?]

On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Farley, Peter x23353 < peter.far...@broadridge.com> wrote: > You too? Hey, this is a small world indeed. You didn't happen to attend > a certain engineering college (now gone, sad to say) in Brooklyn, NY in the > late 1960's, did you? > ​Nope. U.T. Arlington

1620 veterans! [was:RE: What was a 3314?]

sleeping . . . Peter -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of John McKown Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 10:20 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 9:09 AM, R.S

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 9:09 AM, R.S. wrote: > W dniu 2016-05-16 o 16:01, Jerry Callen pisze: > >> In the "Whither VIO" thread, J.O.Skip Robinson wrote: >> >> In a previous life, we defined VIO (I believe) to device 3314 even >>> though we had none left on the

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

W dniu 2016-05-16 o 16:01, Jerry Callen pisze: In the "Whither VIO" thread, J.O.Skip Robinson wrote: In a previous life, we defined VIO (I believe) to device 3314 even though we had none left on the floor That's a device type I've never heard of, and the Google knows not of. Could this be

What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

In the "Whither VIO" thread, J.O.Skip Robinson wrote: > In a previous life, we defined VIO (I believe) to device 3314 even though we > had none left on the floor That's a device type I've never heard of, and the Google knows not of. Could this be a typo for "2314"? -- Jerry