Back in the days of NetNews, there was .
See #3 of the verb.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/plonk
In the case of your personal news reader (or for us, your particular
email client) this is effective.
For LISTSERV (sans the feature Gabe suggests), it rests upon the list
admin to remove the
When we moved our LPARs to a hosting service, we were able to set-up a VPN
(Palo Alto FW) from our f5 load balancer to 10. Addresses at the service OSA
and from our customer's point of view, keep all of our local ip addresses
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
If you want to INCLUDE a member, this is like a PROC, so you need to
have SETS in a system-defined proclib or you have to add something like
//JCLLIB ORDER=PHS.PDS.JCL840
and I would probably move the INCLUDE up to where you explain what is in
the SETS member, to make it clearer.
Billy
Billy Ashton wrote:
>If you want to INCLUDE a member, this is like a PROC, so you need to
>have SETS in a system-defined proclib or you have to add something like
>//JCLLIB ORDER=PHS.PDS.JCL840
You've got me to spot what I'd just stupidly missed: I had taken the JCLLIB to
be a DD, and
For decades, I've wished for a list setting:
Set bozo on
...which would allow the subject person to post and see posts reflected back,
but not inflict them on anyone else. Talking into a bottomless well would get
boring.
Ed Jaffe
On 8/30/2023 7:12 AM, Kirk Wolf wrote:
Dear
Everyone needs to add their 2 cents to the thread they were complaining about.
This is why there are few younger mainframers here. The same 20-30 who dominate
this platform with drivel. As long as you’re a member of the cult/frat pack, no
problem. Anyone who dares challenge the status quo
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 17:19:38 +, Pommier, Rex wrote:
>Yeah, I don't understand why IBM didn't just use DD card syntax instead of
>coming up with this.
>
I conjecture sequence of operations. DD statements aren't elaborated until
job initiation. JCLLIB is needed earlier. Isn't there a
Sorry Jerry, I missed it.
What's being considered (among other things) is Db2 Z on-prem to Db2 Z cloud.
I was just trying to see if anyone in the community had any experiences to
share. Thanks.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Jerry Whitteridge
Hi Michael,
What about //JOBLIB? ... That is not in any Step.
Regards,
David
On 2023-08-31 15:16, Schmitt, Michael wrote:
It they had used DD, imagine all the customer code that would break that parses JCL
looking for DDs, and never expects to see a DD outside of a step. And all the code that
I just found some old JCL for EasyProc and sure enough, it's coded like:
//PROCLIB DD DSN=TED013.PROCLIB,DISP=SHR
... with a DD. But that doesn't mean it went through standard DD
allocation. All this happened early in the JCL scanning and conversion.
The "DD" and maybe even the DISP=SHR was
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 10:39:34 -0700, Tom Brennan wrote:
>
>I thought ORDER= was done because you can code more than one dataset.
>
DD concatenation should have sufficed for that.
--
gil
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff /
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 11:58:23 -0400, Phil Smith III wrote:
>...
>//SYSUT1 DD DSN=
>...
>STMT NO. MESSAGE
>
> 6 IEFC624I INCORRECT USE OF PERIOD IN THE DSN FIELD
>I understand the latter error (because the SET didn't happen),
>...
I could find that behavior useful.
In part because that was how the EasyProclib (owned by CA at the time)product
worked.
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
> Behalf Of Pommier, Rex
> Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2023 10:20 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Is SMP/E
EasyProclib did DD concatenations. IBM did a new //name JCLLIB
ORDER=(dsn,dsn,,) JCL statement. I am only guessing that this was so that it
was sufficiently different from the existing ISV product
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
> Behalf Of Tom Brennan
>
Thanks, I forgot about that. But we may have known it at one time,
because I "think" we coded our exit 4 conversion from PROCLIB to JCLLIB
with that in mind.
On 8/31/2023 10:50 AM, Gibney, Dave wrote:
EasyProclib did DD concatenations.
Lance - I responded to your query asking for clarification on your question.
Are you asking about moving Mainframe DB2 to UDB in the cloud or Mainframe DB2
to Mainframe DB2 (hosted on z/OS still) ?
J
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Lance D. Jackson
Yeah, I don't understand why IBM didn't just use DD card syntax instead of
coming up with this.
Rex
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Phil Smith III
Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2023 12:01 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Is SMP/E
I think it was because it was "stolen|borrowed" from DOS/VSE
Steve Thompson
On 8/31/2023 1:19 PM, Pommier, Rex wrote:
Yeah, I don't understand why IBM didn't just use DD card syntax instead of
coming up with this.
Rex
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
Wrong JCLLIB use.
JCLLIB is *not* DD name it is separate JCL statement. Like PROC, PEND,
EXEC, JOB, etc.
What is misleading, it is *NOT* similar to JOBLIB/STEPLIB or older
special DD names.
--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland
W dniu 31.08.2023 o 17:58, Phil Smith III pisze:
Thanks to
I've never coded it!
So forgot about it.
We were just happy to get JCLLIB at all, JES proclibs were a pain. What was
that, /*JOBPARM P=, where the concatenation could only be changed by the
systems people, because it is was in the PROC00 member in the JES parms library?
-Original
The wheel has turned full circle. When I worked at IBM UK in 1978 we had a
JOBPROC statement.
It was internal code developed by one of our systems programmers. It worked
but sometimes broke.
On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 4:58 AM Tom Brennan
wrote:
> Thanks, I forgot about that. But we may have known
OK - so you are planning DB2 z to DB2 z that makes it simpler. Are you
running on your own systems or are you planning to move to a hosted operating
system (in other words are you just migrating DB2 or would you be migrating
your OS as well).
We recently moved all our mainframe work to the
Have you seen the LEGO® z16?
I'm all for bringing our culture to the youth of the world using icons
they understand.
On 2023-08-31 07:44, Steve Thompson wrote:
That was a good laugh. But about time someone did something that was
not a put down of Mainframes.
Steve Thompson
On 8/31/2023
I remember that product! But I thought it worked with a DD, something
like: //PROCLIB DD DSN=TED013.PROCLIB,DISP=SHR
When JCLLIB came out, we dropped the product and wrote some code in JES2
exit 4 to convert PROCLIB to JCLLIB so users didn't have to change their
JCL.
I thought ORDER= was
W dniu 31.08.2023 o 19:48, Paul Gilmartin pisze:
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 10:39:34 -0700, Tom Brennan wrote:
I thought ORDER= was done because you can code more than one dataset.
DD concatenation should have sufficed for that.
DD concatenation is better, because it may contain more entries. Yes,
It they had used DD, imagine all the customer code that would break that parses
JCL looking for DDs, and never expects to see a DD outside of a step. And all
the code that *edits* DDs would have to say "except if PROCLIB". And you
wouldn't be able to *have* a DD named PROCLIB. And certain code
Gabe Goldberg wrote:
>For decades, I've wished for a list setting:
>Set bozo on
>...which would allow the subject person to post and see posts
>reflected back, but not inflict them on anyone else. Talking into a
>bottomless well would get boring.
That's called "shadow banning":
True, they could have done that. They could have also used //PROCLIB
and saved us some kludge coding :) Unless there was some concern about
getting sued by CA. Oh well, it's all history now.
On 8/31/2023 10:48 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 10:39:34 -0700, Tom Brennan wrote:
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 19:16:25 +, Schmitt, Michael wrote:
>It they had used DD, imagine all the customer code that would break that
>parses JCL looking for DDs, and never expects to see a DD outside of a step.
>...
>
I'm unsympathetic. Even as all the customer code that broke when PROC
On Fri, 1 Sep 2023 05:47:51 +1000, Wayne Bickerdike wrote:
>
>It was internal code developed by one of our systems programmers. It worked
>but sometimes broke.
>
Or, perhaps, "It was broken but sometimes worked."
I had a co-worker who had previously worked for an ISV which he lauded for
Does the dispatcher take cache interference into account?
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Peter Relson
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2023 8:14 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Switching between SMT-1 and SMT-2
I'll bite. Why
Unfortunately SE "single object operations" is not the only case when
port 99xx is being used.
I can't check it now, but I'm pretty sure there are more features using
new window and new port.
Sometimes the port is reused, so every new warning reduces the
possibility of next one.
--
Radoslaw
Does she say "IPCS is too hard for me."?
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Phil Smith III
Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2023 9:26 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Only sorta OT
"Mainframer Barbie"! You knew it had to happen:
Have you submitted an RCF?
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Paul Gilmartin <042bfe9c879d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2023 7:38 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Temporary DSN (was: ???)
On Wed,
Unfortunately no one can legally use such software or even have a copy
of installation media.
No one except those who really bought it (in legal way).
Depending on local country law there are very few institutions which may
collect such things as an exception to the common rules.
Sometimes
That was a good laugh. But about time someone did something that
was not a put down of Mainframes.
Steve Thompson
On 8/31/2023 9:26 AM, Phil Smith III wrote:
"Mainframer Barbie"! You knew it had to happen:
https://twitter.com/psqlctln/status/1696864584848605554
"Mainframer Barbie"! You knew it had to happen:
https://twitter.com/psqlctln/status/1696864584848605554
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message:
Hi Scott,
Could you expand on this please.
> But z/OS "densely packs" the cores, meaning that if a work unit is running on
> a zIIP core and another zIIP eligible work unit comes in it will run on the
> second thread on the already busy zIIP core instead of being dispatched to an
> available
On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 12:14:29 +, Peter Relson wrote:
>I'll bite. Why would you want to switch? Activating it is one thing.
>
>There are situations where a job might run better not multi-threaded.
>It's not clear that the system ever would run better not multi-threaded.
There are multiple
Thanks to many people politely telling me, "Hey dummy, use SYMBOLS=", I have
gotten around the must-change-many-places problem with the SMP/E jobs. Thanks!
Next, Gil suggested using an INCLUDE member, so the SETs get done exactly once,
which I quite like. But now I'm stumped again.
Here's my
40 matches
Mail list logo
