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

Pipelines RFE (was: Whither VIO)

On 2016-05-20, at 14:04, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: > I'm not sure how this interacts with the SMS limit on VIO, but we once > experienced a near system meltdown from TSO TRANSMIT of a large file. ... > There's some rationale here for the Pipelines RFE. CMS Pipelines includes a NETDATA stage

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? (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? (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? (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)

was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) 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 pages fit into a track witho

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)

was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) 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 pages fit into a track without w

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? (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)

t was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) 2314, 2419, 2311, these are just a few of the "IBM" DASD that I've had the pleasure of working with. I've forgotten the drum device numbers and the noodle snatcher model number. Regards, Steve Thompson On 05/16/2016 07:24 PM, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: > OK, th

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)

? (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 w

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

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, we defined VIO (I believe) to devi

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

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 &

AW: Re: Whither VIO?

>[snip] Expanded storage is one of those things that, for a combination of >technical and marketing reasons, had its day in the sun and has gone, while >VIO continues. It's back, just called "Flash Express" these days. It's used for paging, and for some other things (or things to come) just

Re: Whither VIO?

arna Walle): https://developer.ibm.com/tv/category/mpt/ From: Jesse 1 Robinson <jesse1.robin...@sce.com> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 11/05/2016 17:05 Subject: Re: Whither VIO? Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> Mea

Re: Whither VIO?

On Wed, 11 May 2016 13:09:45 -0400, Tony Harminc wrote: > >The biggest reason to use VIO rather than the various alternatives >mentioned is that it is compatible. An existing application need know >nothing about it, and can be offered improved performance with no code >changes. In these days of

Re: Whither VIO?

On 11 May 2016 at 10:07, Martin Packer wrote: > The nasty answer to "what happened to VIO?" is "nothing". :-) :-( > > Seriously, it remains as before but implemented in central storage rather > than expanded. VIO long predates the existence of expanded storage. It was

Re: Whither VIO?

On 11 May 2016 at 12:05, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: > One question I have. In a previous life, we defined VIO (I believe) to device > 3314 even though we had none left on the floor. The device type was still > valid in IOGEN at that time, and I was told that device

Re: Whither VIO?

rogram 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 David Betten >Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 8:41 AM >To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV

Re: Whither VIO?

: (External):Re: Whither VIO? When I was in DFSORT, I always recommended not using VIO for sort work data sets. We felt it was better to let DFSORT manage the use of storage for intermediate work space via Hiperspace, Memory Object or Dataspace. One advantage was that DFSORT has controls over the total

Re: Whither VIO?

.UA.EDU > Date: 05/11/2016 11:12 AM > Subject: Re: Whither VIO? > Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> > > I said in another thread that VIO was one of the worse DIM exploiters for > CPU usage - in the Orange "Coffee Table" book of DIM

Re: Whither VIO?

rno...@klm.com> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 11/05/2016 15:32 Subject:Re: Whither VIO? Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> I heard rumors that VIO is that CPU expensive and that I/O is that fast nowadays, that it is VIO is not wor

Re: Whither VIO?

On 5/11/2016 7:31 AM, Vernooij, CP (ITOPT1) - KLM wrote: I heard rumors that VIO is that CPU expensive and that I/O is that fast nowadays, that it is VIO is not worth the extra CPU anymore. We use VIO for (nearly) ALL temporary data sets. (VIO MAXSIZE is set to the highest supported value of

Re: Whither VIO?

] On Behalf Of Martin Packer Sent: 11 May, 2016 16:08 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Whither VIO? The nasty answer to "what happened to VIO?" is "nothing". :-) :-( Seriously, it remains as before but implemented in central storage rather than expanded. With the improved

Re: Whither VIO?

Series (With Marna Walle): https://developer.ibm.com/tv/category/mpt/ From: Lizette Koehler <stars...@mindspring.com> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 11/05/2016 14:55 Subject:Re: Whither VIO? Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>

Re: Whither VIO?

t; To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Whither VIO? > > In a thread in a distant galaxy, J.O.Skip Robinson wrote: > > > ...be aware that some customers (like us) did away with VIO a long time ago. > > I've been away from MVS for a while. Did something better than VIO c

Whither VIO?

In a thread in a distant galaxy, J.O.Skip Robinson wrote: > ...be aware that some customers (like us) did away with VIO a long time ago. I've been away from MVS for a while. Did something better than VIO come along while I wasn't looking? Why would VIO have been vaporized? -- Jerry