Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

I'm puzzled: Why do you think those dispatching priorities are inconsistent with the WLM goals (and your technical business goals)? Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Cloud & Systems Performance, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email:

AW: Re: FW: Help with mount?

>>> Thanks to some help offline, I was pointed to RDEFINE TSOAUTH MOUNT UACC(NONE). This allowed me to enter "mount -qv /". Thanks Steve. >> I'm baffled. I've never before detected a connection between TSOAUTH in general, and TSOAUTH MOUNT especially and any z/OS UNIX authority. > Do you

Re: LE question

If it's that sensitive then linking in your own options module would be a good idea.   IMO   Hank  -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

1. Yeah, a separate folder solves this problem while complicating other chores issues or requirements or habits or whatever. I suspect it is the only solution. Grrr. 2. You can't do it with a #pragma! #pragma options only supports C and this is C++. Go figure. Make may be goodness for a

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

G. Please read the thread. I keep explaining the same points. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of David Crayford Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2015 2:16 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Any clever

LE question

All, I have a new to verify the correct LE runoption are in effect prior to our STCs initialization. I need to check things like: 1.ALL31 2. HEAP 3. STACK I would like to do this pro grammatically. Can i do this ? If I can , can some point me the direction of a manual which mentions it

Re: LE question

I think Scott is the vendor and is worried about the customer doing a PARM='some LE option/...' or a //CEEOPTS DD and then calling their support when the STC does not perform as desired. Or at least confusing their support desk because things are not exactly as the vendor expects. I don't know

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

Try PARM="ARCH(5),OPTF" > On 27 Nov 2015, at 2:56 am, Charles Mills wrote: > > ARCH(9) / ARCH(5) > > Charles > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of Jack J. Woehr > Sent: Thursday, November 26,

Re: LE question

If you can assume R12 point to the CAA then: USING CEECAA,12 USING CEEEDB,11 USING CEEOCB,10 L 11,CEECAAEDB L 10,CEEEDBOPTCB CEECAA CEEEDB CEEOCB then use the following information to parse

Re: LE question

Hank: Much appreciated , exactly what I needed. Regards, Scott IDMworks On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Hank Oerlemans wrote: > If you can assume R12 point to the CAA then: > > USING CEECAA,12 > USING CEEEDB,11 > USING CEEOCB,10 > L 11,CEECAAEDB > L 10,CEEEDBOPTCB

Re: FW: Help with mount?

Do you have UID(0) on your USERID? -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Peter Hunkeler Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 11:09 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: AW: FW: Help with mount? >Thanks to some help offline,

Re: LE question

The parms are controlled via (depending on the z/OS Level) a CEEPRMxx member in Parmlib or CEEOPT module in the code. Generally - one size fits all. In CEEPRMxx are parms for CICS, Other, and I am not sure if there is another delineation or not. So depending on the environment - I would

Re: LE question

Charles: Absolutely correct, I am going to write it and then share ,,if you guys want me to... Regards, Scott On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Charles Mills wrote: > I think Scott is the vendor and is worried about the customer doing a > PARM='some LE option/...' or a

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 12:48:05 -0700, Jack J. Woehr wrote: >... >### ># Compilation rules >### > >CC = c89 >LD = ld > >$(OBJDIR1)/%.o : $(SRCDIR1)/%.cpp > $(CC) $(INC_PATH_FLAGS) $(CFLAGS1) -c $< -o $@ > >$(OBJDIR2)/%.o :

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

Paul Gilmartin wrote: I'd use a generic suffix rule for the preponderance of the sources and a specific rule naming the few exceptions -- gil That would be the right way for Charles Mills to go if he built with make/ -- Jack J. Woehr # Science is more than a body of knowledge. It's a

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

Isn't this a bit of a no-brainer just using JCL? //CPROCPROC M=,PARMS= //COMPILE EXEC PGM=CCNDRVR,REGION=0M, //PARM=('EXPORTALL OPTF LOC(EN_US.IBM-037) ') //SYSMSGS DD DUMMY //USERLIB DD DISP=SHR,DSN=DOC.USER.H // DD DISP=SHR,DSN=COM110.WDOC.H // DD

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

Yes. Very much like what I do. But it is the framework of the problem, not the solution. Here is the problem: I want to compile the bulk of my modules by default ARCH(9) (changeable from time to time) but two of them ARCH(5). Should be simple enough, right? (Why? See related thread. I want to

Re: LE question

Does not CEEOPTS etc. still override? A good thing if you want it; a bad thing if you don't. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Hank Oerlemans Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2015 2:43 PM To:

Re: 3DES encryption using ICSF callable services

Just in case it could help anyone else, I also discovered that I could have used this callable service to encipher the response: Encode (CSNBECO and CSNEECO) Use the encode callable service to encipher an 8-byte string using a clear key. The callable service uses the electronic code book (ECB)

Re: IBM Mainframe

On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 5:37 PM, esst...@juno.com wrote: > From my personal observation I don't see a shortage of Mainframe Skills. > I do see companies not willing to pay for an experience skill set. In to > days economic climate business are very reluctant to hire staff

Re: IBM Mainframe

On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 6:17 PM, John Mattson wrote: > My personal experience. I'm 67, laid off after 18 years May 2014, > consultant with raise Sept 2014, Hired away with raise Aug 2015. Yes, > there is work to be had. More so if you are able to travel and/or >

Re: IBM Mainframe

John McKown wrote: >​Unfortunately for me, I'm "in the hole". I'll be 63 when the company gets rid >of me. Likely too old to get hired somewhere else, too young for Medicare. Same here in Sunny South Africa. Generally retirement age is about 60 years, but you can retire at 55 - 65 years

Re: Straightforward way to determine hardware architecture level?

To answer your question directly: no there is no such way. Could there be, in the future? Sure. If z/OS base control program were to provide it, it might not be the compiler ARCH value but might be the machine generation number (which happens to be +2 over the compiler ARCH level) -- e.g., z13

Re: Straightforward way to determine hardware architecture level?

I wanted to add that the list of facilities mentioned in one of the posts >ARCH(10) (xC12) execution-hint facility, the load-and-trap >facility, the miscellaneous-instruction-extension facility, and the >transactional-execution facility. leads to some interesting points. The availability of an

Re: Straightforward way to determine hardware architecture level?

Peter Relson wrote: >Further, it is not available on any z/OS release if z/OS is running under VM. Very interesting. Are there other functions also absent when z/OS is running as a guest under z/VM? If so, where is that documented? Many thanks for your excellent posts. I value them all!

Re: IBM Mainframe

john McKown wrote ​That's definitely true at the company I'm working for. Basically, the company wants "ad hoc" workers for some project. But they don't seem to have any concern about "maintenance" or having people on staff who understand how things work. They want I.T. to be like the

WLM and Dispatching Priority

Hello All, I need some assistance with being able to get a proper DP assigned to a set of tasks. The problem is this; I have 2 tasks, SYSVIEW and CICSLOGR and many CICS tasks. CICSLOGR is a subtask attached by SYSVIEW. In WLM, SYSVIEW is set to a service class of 'monitor' with an importance of

Re: IBM Mainframe JOB market

Steve Beaver wrote "And I cover all zOS Systems, ACF2, RACF, TSS, CICS, DB2, IMS/DB-DC, Cobol, PL/I and Assembler." I HATE THIS ! This is not a software specialist - it is a software Inventory I have been known to respond to recruiters like this. And Yes the recruiters take too much, it

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

First: DP's are variable and adjusted by WLM such that the task meets its goals. Apparently WLM in convinced that it is doing its job well. Second: you can move the critical monitors to Service Class SYSSTC. I don't think the CPUCRITICAL attribute will help in your current setup, because both

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 22:31:48 -0700, Jack J. Woehr wrote: > >I write programming languages that would make your hair stand on end. You can >download FIJI for example >http://fiji.sourceforge.net > An extreme example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%42%72%61%69%6e%66%75%63%6b (I don't use it;

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

At 19:11 -0700 on 11/25/2015, Jack J. Woehr wrote about Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options prece: > 1. Will make in fact solve this specific problem? Can one readily specify "global" compiler options for most modules and override them for specific modules? Not exactly.

RES: WLM and Dispatching Priority

Hello, Generally it is recommended that "Monitors" should execute at SYSSTC. Atenciosamente / Regards / Saludos BANCO BRADESCO S.A. 4250 / DPCD Engenharia de Software Sistemas Operacionais Mainframes Ituriel do Nascimento Neto Tel: +55 11 3684-2177 R: 42177 3-1404 Fax: +55 11 3684-4427

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

Put monitors in SYSSTC. This gives them the second highest DP in the system. You cannot completely control the DP in Service Classes. - -teD -   Original Message   From: phil yogendran Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2015 11:02 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List

Re: Straightforward way to determine hardware architecture level?

@Peter, thank you for the direct answer. Yes, I would consider an "ARCH level," a "ZS- number" or a "marketing architecture number" such as 13 to be a great answer to my need. As you move your emphasis more from assembler to compiled languages an ARCH number rather than "op code bits" would be a

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

1. So the use of make rather than JCL has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with the problem I posted, the subject of the thread??!! Gee, thanks. I am not a C newbie. I am totally familiar with #ifdef (the relevant macro is __MVS__ FWIW). My code is 95% bimodal (Windows/z/OS) and some is

Re: IBM Mainframe

On 26 November 2015 at 06:51, John McKown wrote: > > The company wants to only be an insurance company. They are outsourcing > I.T. infrastructure. They have already outsourced the DBA function, new > business data entry, and claims data entry. I'm not sure about the

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

Thank you all for your response and advise. My only reservation is that SYSVIEW, at times, tends to be heavy-footed and causes the system to 'pause'. This is only because of the data we capture at periodic intervals. Anyway, that's for me to investigate further and fix. Thanks, again, On Thu,

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

On 25 November 2015 at 14:24, Charles Mills wrote: > The C/C++ compiler lets you set options globally with PARM= or DD:OPTFILE > (or equivalently on a UNIX command line for those who like that sort of > thing). You can also specify most options *first thing* in a source module >

Re: Straightforward way to determine hardware architecture level?

On 26 November 2015 at 09:47, Elardus Engelbrecht wrote: > Peter Relson wrote: >>Further, it [Transactional Execution] is not available on any z/OS release if >>z/OS is running under VM. > > Very interesting. Are there other functions also absent when z/OS is

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

Exactly. Thank you. Yes, and COBOL does it more or less right also. It's even worse than what I wrote. I am about convinced I cannot get there from here. Problem: I want to compile the bulk of my modules by default ARCH(9) (changeable from time to time) but two of them ARCH(5). Should be

Re: IBM Mainframe

esst...@juno.com wrote: Many institutions have been burned on this "plug and Play: mentality. They do not look at inhoues I.T. personal as ASSESETS. It's true in IT all over. A company I consult to has gotten rather large being the plug-in for big biz companies in the Linux/Windows hosted

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

Paul Gilmartin wrote: An extreme example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%42%72%61%69%6e%66%75%63%6b (I don't use it; just stumbled on and amused by.) A classic! -- Jack J. Woehr # Science is more than a body of knowledge. It's a way of www.well.com/~jax # thinking, a way of

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

Robert A. Rosenberg wrote: Will using this use of ifndef solve the issue that if a compiler option is set at launch time due to being coded in the JCL or via a DD it can/will override the pragma supplied setting? There are so many "things" in C/C++ compilation I have to look back in this

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

By "compiler options" I mean what the compiler documentation calls "compiler options." See Chapter 4 of the User's Guide for a description of compiler options. The problem is that there is apparently no way to specify ARCH(9) at a "global/default" sort of level and then override it at a

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

Jack J. Woehr wrote: If you didn't previously post in detail, Ok, what option is being set by the JCL and what do you want to do instead on one file? -- Jack J. Woehr # Science is more than a body of knowledge. It's a way of www.well.com/~jax # thinking, a way of skeptically interrogating

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

Charles Mills wrote: By "compiler options" I mean what the compiler documentation calls "compiler options." See Chapter 4 of the User's Guide for a description of compiler options. The problem is that there is apparently no way to specify ARCH(9) at a "global/default" sort of level and then

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

On 26 November 2015 at 13:28, Jack J. Woehr wrote: > Okay, you're right. Can you just omit the problem file from the JCL, compile > it separately, put it in the right dataset of output objects, > and then run the JCL and link it with the others? For some value of "just"... Tony

RES: WLM and Dispatching Priority

You were talking about your monitors, that were using an importance 1 SC instead of SYSSTC. And what about RMF ? RMF must be SYSSTC too. Atenciosamente / Regards / Saludos BANCO BRADESCO S.A. 4250 / DPCD Engenharia de Software Sistemas Operacionais Mainframes Ituriel do Nascimento Neto Tel: +55

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

Tony Harminc wrote: For some value of "just"... Ha! Aint' that the truth in Big Iron World! I spent two weeks learning how to get a second virtual ethernet link working in z/VM. Simple in Unix: 1. Comment out file name from list in Makefile 2. Run the compile target without running the link

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

ARCH(9) / ARCH(5) Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Jack J. Woehr Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2015 10:16 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

Right. Exactly. This is not the only requirement. The problem space is not "demonstrate how one might ..." I have other build issues or requirements or gotchas or whatever (habits?) that also come into consideration. I have multiple processes in place. And my hope had been that this was not a

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

True, RMF is SYSSTC. Clearly there's more faith and confidence here. On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 1:39 PM, ITURIEL DO NASCIMENTO NETO < 4254.itur...@bradesco.com.br> wrote: > You were talking about your monitors, that were using an importance 1 SC > instead of SYSSTC. And what about RMF ? RMF must

Re: Any clever way to defeat the C compiler's options precedence?

Charles Mills wrote: For your specific "omit the problem file from the JCL" suggestion there are no files in the JCL. //SYSIN specifies a UNIX folder and the compiler grabs all of the .C or .c files. Okay. Two Ideas and one "But Anyway" 1. Move the problem file out of the folder, compile