Sorry, all. Whatever the problem was, it's apparently resolved now.
-Sue Shumway
On 8/6/2019 12:51 PM, Carmen Vitullo wrote:
I don't think you are doing anything wrong unless the link was
changed/moved/updated/or deleted
I get the same message, :(
Carmen Vitullo
- Original Message
Timothy Sipples
>Phil, I don't think your assertion is true, but, regardless, what's the
>problem with granting another vendor the courtesy of referring to its
>products and offerings by the names they give them? If you're referring to
>z/OS Data Set Encryption, then use the name z/OS Data
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 00:42:48 -0400, Phil Smith III wrote:
>
>...; but more significantly, consider normal data flows: data moves between
>ASCII and EBCDIC worlds, gets translated in the process. With whole-file,
>non-format-preserving encryption, that means you have to decrypt, translate,
Andrew,
Yes, from that same z/OS LPAR (or another in the same Sysplex), access to the
keys via a RACF resource is also needed.
In order to access those keys one would need to use ICSF and the Crypto Express
devices that hold the master keys for that domain/LPAR. So if another operating
system
Joel C. Ewing pointed out that FPEd data won't compress quite as well as
un-FPEd since repeated characters will not be repeated in the ciphertext. This
is no doubt true, although some number of random repeats will occur in the
ciphertext as well.
He wrote:
>Unless by format-preserving data
Ron Hawkins wrote:
>One area where PE encryption, as implemented on z is where it is used
>together with compression.
>The horse must go in front of the cart, meaning compression must happen
>before encryption, because it will be ineffective if you do it after.
Not true with
On 8/6/19 8:38 AM, Phil Smith III wrote:
> Ron Hawkins wrote:
>
>> One area where PE encryption, as implemented on z is where it is used
>> together with compression.
>
>
>> The horse must go in front of the cart, meaning compression must happen
>> before encryption, because it will be
I have a batch program that does several SVC 99 allocations. They are fairly
vanilla temporary dataset allocations, or at least that is how I think of
them. I am seeing a CPU time of about .0025 CPU seconds per allocation on a
z196. Is this what others would expect, or does it seem high?
OTOH I
I don't think you are doing anything wrong unless the link was
changed/moved/updated/or deleted
I get the same message, :(
Carmen Vitullo
- Original Message -
From: "Charles Mills"
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2019 11:44:56 AM
Subject: IBM KC "The
The key word is "apparently". Unless you can track the CPU time used by the
Initiator, you have no way to know which is more efficient.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Charles
This allocation time can be calculated from SMF type 30.
I am sure time is tracked. I am not sure the associated CPU is tracked.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2019 11:45 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 04:55:50 +, Jon Perryman wrote:
> ...
>For security reasons, Chrome does not support Windows file extensions. This is
>a huge security exposure with other browsers (e.g. MS Word autorun script).
>There are very few extensions that chrome supports (e.g. PDF) and they use
Repeating my refrain!
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Charles Mills
Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2019 11:45 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: IBM KC "The request cannot be fulfilled by the server"
I attempt to go to
I attempt to go to https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/ and get the
indicated message. Am I doing something wrong?
Charles
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 12:25:05 -0400, Charles Mills wrote:
>
>OTOH I have an IEFBR14 batch job on the same machine that allocates 15
>temporary datasets in JCL. The entire job lock, stock and barrel uses
>(according to IEF032I) .00 CPU seconds. Can anyone explain why JCL
>allocation is apparently
Except when it is:
//DD1 DD DSN=,...,DISP=(,PASS)
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Paul Gilmartin <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, August 6,
Yes, allocations in your JCL are done in the Initiator. The IEF032I message n
your job has CPU time for your jobstep. There may also be an IEF032I for the
Initiator, but the CPU time would be for all of the jobs that the Initiator had
handled before shutting down.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
Charles Mills wrote:
>I am seeing a CPU time of about .0025 CPU seconds per allocation on a z196.
>The entire job lock, stock and barrel uses (according to IEF032I) .00 CPU
>seconds.
What type of CPU time?
SMF30CPT - TCB?
SMF30CPS - SRB?
SMF30ISB – SRB CPU time for initiator work?
Sigh.
Amazon keeps their Web site up 99.9% of the time; why can't IBM?
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Allan Staller
Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2019 12:47 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM KC
Can you please clarify? Your first sentence seems to say that SVC 99 (or do you
mean Initiator) CPU time is in the SMF 30? Can you be more specific?
Your last sentence seems to say the opposite? Or ... ?
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
all of those timings, from the jeslog or syslog you see are from the SMF type
30 subtype 4
the IEF032I is prolly, without checking from the IEFACTRT SMF exit, which uses
the same SMF record and sub type.
I suspect dynamic allocation may be doing more that the IEFBR14 possibly?
Carmen
SMF type 30's contain the start and end time of the allocation process for the
initiator.
I cannot specifically recall whether the CPU time for this process is broken
out into a specific bucket, or can be calculated.
I you have MXG, Barry Merrill has a lot of doc in this area.
-Original
Amazon has to support a lot more hackers.
.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW
robin...@sce.com
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
FWIW I tried adding DISP=(,PASS) to all of the DDs and adding another (BR14
also) step. No difference in the step CPU time -- still 0.00 seconds.
Of course, one could play guessing games all day. Is the Initiator smart enough
to know the whole job is one big no-op? I would guess not, but who
Hi
I am trying to get the link map of a module
First I load it into core LOAD EP=MYMOD
The I do CSVQUERY INEPNAME=MYMOD,
OUTEPTKN=MODTOKEN
I get a zero return code and what looks to be a valid token
However trying to start a session I fail
Are you saying -- I am trying to clarify; I don't doubt you -- that the JCL
allocations are done by the Initiator, and that time is not included in
IEF032I?
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Seymour J Metz
Sent:
Thanks. I don't have MXG but I am super familiar with SMF concepts, reading the
SMF documentation, "decoding" SMF triplets and so forth. I see the following:
12 C SMF30ICU 4 binary Initiator CPU time under the task control block (TCB),
in hundredths
of a second. This field is set at step
Paul Gilmartin wrote, re FPE being ASCII-EBCDIC transparent:
>I'm astonished that's possible (but it can't be proven impossible). Suppose I
>change
>x'C1' to x'41' in the clear text (in fact, only a single bit change). With
>strong encryption
>that must change numerous bits in the encrypted
For the SVC 99, the time as reported by the C library function clock(),
documented as
Approximates the processor time used by the program, since the beginning of an
implementation-defined time period that is related to the program invocation.
In other words, it is the CPU time used so far by
>I have updated the COBOL options using IGY620.SIGYSAMP(IGYWDOPT), SMP/E
>usermod to update the COBOL options. IGY620.SIGYCOMP is in the system link
>list, and the usermod updates IGYCDOPT in that load library. After updatin
>g the
>module I refresh LLA with F LLA,REFRESH.
>
>I have used ISRDDN
Chrome is not open source. From the behavior, I don't believe MIME is
involved. Remove the file type extension (e.g. jpg or pdf) and specify the file
in the chrome address bar. I think chrome looks for eye catchers in file data
to determine how to open the file.
This does not rule out some of
I would have to dig before I can provide a detailed answer.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Charles Mills
Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2019 2:30 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
Thanks. I don't have MXG but
A profound question. My vastly oversimplified answer: The Watsons are
dead, Bezos is not.
sas
On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 3:03 PM Charles Mills wrote:
> Sigh.
>
> Amazon keeps their Web site up 99.9% of the time; why can't IBM?
>
> Charles
>
Got it. Thanks,
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Seymour J Metz
Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2019 3:34 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
Yes, allocations in your JCL
SMF type 30 has a lot more granularity than the message. If you submit an RFE,
I advise that you not ask to have all of those data in the message. OTOH, a ew
more fileds wouldn't hurt.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM
What I have determined is that when I use IGYWDOPT, or at least a version that
I had, my
overrides are not present. If I use the non-SMPE install, I get the requested
overrides. I'm
in the process of trying to understand why my usermod is causing the problem.
I'll probably RESTORE the
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Good news: the article has been updated based on input from Gabe and IBM-MAIN.
See http://destinationz.org/Mainframe-Solution/Trends/elephants-and-mainframes
for the revised version.
Thanks, all!
Reg Harbeck
+1.403.605.7986
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
On 2019-08-07 5:08 AM, Carmen Vitullo wrote:
I suspect dynamic allocation may be doing more that the IEFBR14 possibly?
Well, DYNALLOC is certainly doing more that the job step initiation when
it comes to allocation.
Device allocation at step-start time is a largely CPU-bound affair with
On 2019-08-07 5:37 AM, Joseph Reichman wrote:
The program is not a program object, anomalies were found in its
structure, or the program is PO1 (program object, version 1) and the
program contains overlay structures. The request was rejected
So, would you swear on a stack of PLMs that MYMOD
On 5/08/2019 3:08 pm, Timothy Sipples wrote:
Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw wrote:
My first reason for PE for data sets is that encryption
protects the data when it is accessed outside of its normal
environment (i.e. not via the data's normal RACF
environment).
Some other examples, in no particular
Has all IBM code that issues an ABEND documented to give a reason code
been updated to use the REASON keyword rather than just loading R15 before
the ABEND?
I'd assume "no" (the "subtle difference" is not one that causes enough
grief to warrant the cost). A different approach to that
I am applying Db2 maintenance and have never used zOSMF workflows. In order to
setup and use workflows, do I need to run the Db2 install/migration clist to
generate the workflows?
thanks
Bill
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff
43 matches
Mail list logo
