Lizette,
Thanks for the tip, but this is not the problem.
I did check the SAS archives, but they are mainly concerned with SAS coding,
not with SAS z/OS technical issues.
We opened an incident with our local SAS support site. I will post the results
on IBM-MAIN.
I am investigating SAS
Bill Fairchild wrote:
'Write only'? ;-)
You're thinking of that WORM CDs with reading disabled? ;-)
I think he means that after being written the block could never be
successfully read back in, which would rended it WORN (Write Once Read Never).
Ok, so that WORM has really WORN out! ;-)
Have a user getting error trying to print...think it is not RACF
related...but in the ISFparms somewhere ...
can someone lead me in right direction..
user with ID being with XB can not print outputgets following msg...no
ICH msgs...
$HASP186 XBxxx outgrp=5.1.1 Not Selected by PRT12 Due to
Let me briefly explain the coprocessor vs. accelerator modes of the CEX
crypto cards. As far as the crypto card itself is concerned, there IS no
difference, and there are no separate modes. The only difference is how the
host z machine chooses to use the card. Let me explain what I mean...
A) I have not observed this phenomenon.
B) I would question the assertion of 10 sec. vs 20 min. Can you go back to the
1.12 system and validate?
Things I would check (in no particular order).
1) Relative TSO region size
2) Was capping in effect at this time? (4 hr RA)
3) relative workload (Is
Ron Wells wrote:
Have a user getting error trying to print...think it is not RACF related...but
in the ISFparms somewhere ...
Usually it is RACF.
user with ID being with XB can not print outputgets following msg...no ICH
msgs...
'XB' ? What is that? I know about XC, XF, etc.
For a
SYS1.PARMLIB(ISFPRM00)
snip
Have a user getting error trying to print...think it is not RACF related...but
in the ISFparms somewhere ...
can someone lead me in right direction..
user with ID being with XB can not print outputgets following msg...no ICH
msgs...
$HASP186 XBxxx outgrp=5.1.1
On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 22:33:59 -0500, Anthony Fletcher flet...@nz1.ibm.com
wrote:
We have a customer running on a z800 in a capped LPAR.
We just converted them from z/OS 1.12 to z/OS 1.13 and have found that
performance has degraded.
They are looking at a list of data sets - approx 98,000 under
In my experience strtok() is more trouble than it is worth.
For classic parm = value files my solution of choice is
http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_53_0/doc/html/program_options.html. I have
never used it on Z (despite the fact that I do a lot of C++ there) but use
it a lot on Windows. Not
Todd Arnold wrote:
Let me briefly explain the coprocessor vs. accelerator modes of the CEX
crypto cards. As far as the crypto card itself is concerned, there IS no
difference, and there are no separate modes. The only difference is how the
host z machine chooses to use the card. Let me
Kees
Thanks
I will be interested in the answer
Lizette
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Vernooij, CP - SPLXM
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 11:28 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: SAS and DIV SASLIB
On 23/04/2013 9:37 PM, Charles Mills wrote:
In my experience strtok() is more trouble than it is worth.
For classic parm = value files my solution of choice is
http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_53_0/doc/html/program_options.html. I have
never used it on Z (despite the fact that I do a lot of C++
debug did it...found racf entrytks
--
Email Disclaimer
This E-mail contains confidential information belonging to the sender,
which may be legally privileged information. This information is intended
only for the
Anthony Fletcher wrote:
On z/OS 1.12 this list was retrieved in under 10 seconds
On z/OS 1.13 this list took 20 Minutes to return.
Do you see any message(s) in the TSO session and SYSLOG during that time?
Are ALL other TSO / ISPF functions working normally?
How busy are those volsers during
On 4/22/2013 11:34 PM, Anthony Fletcher wrote:
We have a customer running on a z800 in a capped LPAR.
We just converted them from z/OS 1.12 to z/OS 1.13 and have found that
performance has degraded.
They are looking at a list of data sets - approx 98,000 under a HLQ, say ABCD
with the Initial
Anthony,
I notice similar results on our 1.13 system. When I used Initial view of
1. VOLUME, a 29,000 list takes 20 seconds. When I used 2. SPACE it takes
700 seconds. When monitoring my TSO session, it was using around 20% CPU
with an EXCP rate of 100/second.
Regards,
John K
From:
Notwithstanding my previous reply, If SPACE is requested, a catalog lookup and
touch of all of the datasets not migrated is required.
This can take a while.
ISMF has utilities that perform this type of activity more efficiently than
ISPF.
snip
A) I have not observed this phenomenon.
B) I
On 23 April 2013 09:42, Phil Smith p...@voltage.com wrote:
Thanks for this, Todd. VERY interesting. The fact that System z adds this
restriction seems odd. I'm sure you would have commented on it if you were
able to; I can only speculate from here that it's either (a) a conservative
Mark,
I read the original post differently, and my reading of it makes it sound like
if he just does the catalog search it comes back in a matter of seconds, then
when he hits the shift right button to get the space info, that is when he
gets the horrendous response time. I don't think it is
On my 1.12 system a list of about 9500 datasets takes 'a blink of an eye'. If I
select 'Display Total Tracks' in the initial 3.4 menu (ISRUDLP) it jumps to
about 75 seconds. Both measurements are for the Space listing.
Is it possible that the user or the upgrade changed the selected options?
On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 16:35:19 +, Pommier, Rex R. rex.pomm...@cnasurety.com
wrote:
Mark,
I read the original post differently, and my reading of it makes it sound like
if he just does the catalog search it comes back in a matter of seconds, then
when he hits the shift right button to get
W dniu 2013-04-23 18:07, Tony Harminc pisze:
On 23 April 2013 09:42, Phil Smith p...@voltage.com wrote:
Thanks for this, Todd. VERY interesting. The fact that System z adds this
restriction seems odd. I'm sure you would have commented on it if you were able
to; I can only speculate from here
On 23 April 2013 16:23, R.S. r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl wrote:
W dniu 2013-04-23 18:07, Tony Harminc pisze:
Which of course raises the questions of how well the card interfaces are
documented,
There are NOT documented, which is clearly documented.
and whether the cards are available
W dniu 2013-04-23 22:49, Tony Harminc pisze:
On 23 April 2013 16:23, R.S. r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl wrote:
W dniu 2013-04-23 18:07, Tony Harminc pisze:
Which of course raises the questions of how well the card interfaces are
documented,
There are NOT documented, which is clearly
On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 23:15:21 +, Mark Yuhas wrote:
EZA1701I STOR abc.txt
125 Storing data set /SYSTEM/etc/u/dept976/Departmental/Weekly Mainframe
Capacity Statistics/abc.txt
250 Transfer completed successfully.
EZA1617I 5734 bytes transferred in 0.005 seconds. Transfer rate 1146.80
This is the JCL:
//FTP EXEC PGM=FTP
//SYSPRINT DD SYSOUT=*
//INPUTDD *
Did you really intend to post site name, userid *and password* to a public list?
I'm going to hope that those values were munged in some way...
Regards,
Allen
I goofed. The address was change but the userid password was not. I have
just changed my password.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message:
locsite chmod ... if abc.txt is at the local client end.
quote chmod ... if abc.txt is at the remote server end.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 4:28 PM
To:
Did you really intend to post site name, userid *and password* to a public
list?
The password was not included in the output.
As to the OP's question, Charles is right: Your cd command is directed to
the remote host, but your locsite chmod command is directed to the local
host. The local host
In F81CCECAEAE64DCABBFB72AD3BDA6C1C@graham, on 04/22/2013
at 01:12 PM, Graham Hobbs gho...@cdpwise.net said:
Am not sure this is simple and googling and docs are not illuminating
- but I have compiled program PGM0047 and the output is in SDSF:O.
Can I get this output into a 133 byte PDS via a
:: -Original Message-
:: From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
:: Behalf Of Steven St.Jean
:: Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 7:13 PM
:: To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
:: Subject: Re: FTP problem
::
:: Did you really intend to post site name, userid *and
I'm guessing that the catalog display feature is dragging you down.
Uncheck that option on the 3.4 entry panel and I bet your 3.4 flies
again. If you want the catalogs, then make sure you're using VLF
caching for your catalogs.
Just went to my 1.13 system and tested this on a list of
32 matches
Mail list logo
