Re: Use of zCX
David Crayford wrote: >Right, but zCX is not free. Actually it’s no additional charge for 90 days. However, “it’s not free” is not a meaningful argument. It’s *never* free to run applications in an enterprise context at least. What matters is whether there’s sufficient or better value-for-money compared to next best alternatives. “Money” here also includes labor inputs and the many other cost-related ingredients. >You have to pay a hardware license fee... No, you don’t. On IBM z14 and IBM z15 machines you have the *option* to order Feature Code 0104, and then there’s no additional software charge for/with z/OS. Or you can choose the IBM Container Hosting Foundation for z/OS (5655-HZ1), a monthly charge software element. On IBM z16 machines there’s no Feature Code 0104, so you would choose the IBM Container Hosting Foundation for z/OS. For this 5655-HZ1 software element there’s a further choice of flat or tiered pricing. And you can change your mind. For example, you can start on tiered then switch to flat or vice versa. Obviously you should compare (and perhaps periodically re-compare) flat and tiered then pick the lower price. Another option is the IBM zCX Foundation for Red Hat OpenShift (5655-ZCX). This IBM Program Number has zero license charge but chargeable annual Subscription & Support. Loosely speaking you can think of this product as “Yearly License Charge” (YLC), akin to MLC but 12 months at a time. This product does not require either Feature Code 0104 or 5655-HZ1. As its name indicates this product provides Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform on z/OS, delivered and supported by IBM. In case anyone is wondering, IBM plans to continue offering, developing, and supporting both the z/OS Container Extensions and IBM zCX Foundation for Red Hat OpenShift. You can choose either or even both. One is not a replacement for the other. If you’d like a Red Hat analogy, the z/OS Container Extensions are analogous to Podman, and of course the IBM zCX Foundation for Red Hat OpenShift *is* Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform. If you’re a software vendor/solution provider, and if you deliver Docker/OCI container images as part of your solution, either the z/OS Container Extensions or the IBM zCX Foundation for Red Hat OpenShift should support your software. The container images need to be either s390x single architecture or multi-architecture with s390x compatibility. If your container image runs on Linux on IBM Z/LinuxONE (on Podman as a notable example) or on IBM Cloud Hyper Protect Virtual Servers then it will be fine on z/OS in either of the container runtimes as long as there are no unsatisfied external dependencies. If you notice anything unusual that contradicts what I just wrote, please let IBM know so IBM can (most probably) fix it. If you already deliver container images that support your product that currently run outside z/OS, or if that’s what you plan to do, it’d be a great idea to add s390x compatibility to your container images so your customers have greater deployment flexibility. That’s usually quite easy to do. Please note that Feature Codes 0103 and 0104 are NOT carry forward feature codes. Obviously they don’t carry forward to IBM z16 (since they don’t exist on that model), but they also did not/do not carry forward from IBM z14 to z15. >...plus assign zIIP, disk and storage resources. You’re not strictly required to have or use zIIPs, but IBM recommends at least one for zCX. As a periodic reminder, my views are my own. Always rely first on official IBM publications and statements if you want to know what’s official. — — — — — Timothy Sipples Senior Architect Digital Assets, Industry Solutions, and Cyber Security IBM zSystems and LinuxONE sipp...@sg.ibm.com -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Use of zCX
I messed about with this back in the day; it worked well. http://gsf-soft.com/Documents/ISX390.html Subject: Re: Use of zCX From: "PINION, RICHARD W." Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 18:52:08 + Does anybody hear remember a software product from a Russian company that allowed one to run Linux as an address space under OS/390? If memory serves me correctly, I think this was in the 1990's, possible early 2000's. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Use of zCX
>>Early 2001. Possibly included to run VSE in a z/OS address space to >>aid migration? >> >DUO (DOS Under OS)? If memory serves, DUO was around way before as one of the products acquired when CA bought UCCEL. I have a recollection of seeing a manual in the blue binders that I think CA was using in the late 80s. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Use of zCX
On 22/4/22 03:35, Charles Mills wrote: I am not a "corporate shop" guy but apparently "put up a VM LPAR" is a huge political leap for many z/OS shops. The idea is facilitating "if we could just get one instance of Linux up under z/OS we could show that to senior management and take it from there." Hence zCX. Right, but zCX is not free. You have to pay a hardware license fee plus assign zIIP, disk and storage resources. If you want to run Linux you can buy a 2 socket, 128 core enterprise x86 server with 200TB of disk for less then a single zIIP. 400Gbs ethernet is available in most data centers now. Maybe that's the political leap. z/OS guys want to run Linux on z Hardware because they own it. Most companies have provisioning systems like Ansible where you can easily spin up a few linux VMs. Who remembers zBX? That died a death pretty quickly. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Dave Jones Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2022 10:55 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Use of zCX I agree with Robert's objections to zCX, and, frankly, If all a site wants to do is run zLinux applications on an IBM z system, it is much simpler (and perhaps cheaper) to just install z/VM on the box and then host as many Linux guests as you want. No extra external tooling is needed; just use out of the box management apps that are already available. Plus, the system programmers have much greater and finer, control over the hardware resources (memory, CPU, etc.) each zLinux guest is allowed to consume. And of course, z/VM and zLinux run very well on the full speed IFL engines, no other specialty engines required. Connect the z/VM and z/OS LPARs together by hyper-sockets and you're good to go. If I was an z/OS shop looking towards Linux, that's how I would proceed. Thought and comments always welcome. DJ -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Use of zCX
On 22/4/22 05:32, Phil Smith III wrote: Linux on Z in general seems to be fading, which makes me very sad: several of the poster children have backed away completely Don't mean to put you on the spot Phil, but can you elaborate? Is there a big drop off in Linux on Z users? Did the poster children move to x86 systems? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Use of zCX
zCX is part of new hardware exploitation. IBM still sells mainframes and needs software to exploit the great new hardware features. The flip side is that such software runs well only on the new hardware. For zCX you pretty much need to be on z15 or even z16 to start seeing the great benefits. zCX is groomed for 2GB page size, so you need that size system to start seeing how well mainframe does. It is solid technology just immature but without containers z/OS will be dead in a decade or 2. It's not running Linux on z/OS that is significant, its the application workload and like it or not, containers will be essential for some parts of applications. I'd like z/OS to stay in that game. On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 7:33 AM Phil Smith III wrote: > That's a nice, positive view, Matt. Still doesn't quite make sense to me > yet, but I'm willing to believe it. Not convinced it made sense as a use of > very limited resources at this stage of the game, though. Linux on Z in > general seems to be fading, which makes me very sad: several of the poster > children have backed away completely. Whether adding it on z/OS will help > or > not-I have no idea. Hope so! > > > > ...phsiii > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Use of zCX
On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 16:32:40 -0400, Phil Smith III wrote: > >>What incremental skill set is required for the respective alternatives? >>I once inquired on another form whether a VM LPAR only for Linux >>might be administered with no CMS skill required. Alan Altmark >> (IIRC) answered, neither practical nor desirable in view of the >>superiority of the CMS-based tools. does an OOTB Linux LPAR >>change that? > >Yes, it should, these days. I honestly don't know, not having actually >touched it in 14 years. But it wasn't difficult then. > Too many "it"s with unclear antecedents. The closeness of the coupling is essential. I found it invaluable to be able to ADDRESS SYSCALL, ADDRESS SH, ADDRESS LINKMVS, BPXWDYN(), BPXWUNIX(), ... any combination in the same Exec. Does a container build a firewall segregating such functions in any language? -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Use of zCX
That's a nice, positive view, Matt. Still doesn't quite make sense to me yet, but I'm willing to believe it. Not convinced it made sense as a use of very limited resources at this stage of the game, though. Linux on Z in general seems to be fading, which makes me very sad: several of the poster children have backed away completely. Whether adding it on z/OS will help or not-I have no idea. Hope so! ...phsiii -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Use of zCX
On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 20:55:49 +, Mike Schwab wrote: >Early 2001. Possibly included to run VSE in a z/OS address space to >aid migration? > DUO (DOS Under OS)? >On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 6:52 PM PINION, RICHARD W. wrote: >> >> Does anybody hear remember a software product from a Russian company that >> allowed one to run Linux as >> an address space under OS/390? If memory serves me correctly, I think this >> was in the 1990's, possible early >> 2000's. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Use of zCX
A little bit of rationale on the question and why I think this is important. As everyone has demonstrated there is deep z/OS skill in shops and it will be needed now and into the future. All of us plan to retire so to keep Z relevant we need to transfer our skills to the up and comers. There is a boatload of skill that most of the up and comers have in the form of Linux and cloud based deployments using technology like containers and their deployment and orchestration on a Kubernetes infrastructure. I believe that we (z/OS and operations) need to marry the technologies together. This has been done before and probably the most successful merge of technology was the creation of OpenEdition and later USS. Arguably, without that innovation Java, Python, Node and a host of other capabilities would not be possible on z/OS and the platform would be relegated to hospice to run the existing workloads (CICS, IMS and batch) as there would be no way to include modern languages and tech on the platform. Its the same issue with scheduling and orchestration. Incorporating Linux around z/OS and in zCX or zLinux allows for workloads based on those technologies to run alongside to platform. This isn’t just for applications but for me and other ISVs its about providing new capabilities that use open source software, common languages and the container runtimes to deliver products and updates using the cloud paradigm. Without the surrounding capabilities to host these containers around z/OS would be like trying to run Java without USS. We are all proud of what z/OS has been and it is the only game in town for high volume ACID transactions that drive the worlds businesses and economies. That doesn’t mean that expanding its scope to embrace Linux and Kubernetes diminishes its value; it enhances it. Did USS suck in terms of performance and utility when it first came out? Yes it did. Can you say Fooorr? Today, its been refined and you don’t even know its there but now the system won’t even function without it. I believe that the same infection point is here with Cloud Native. Without it on the platform, a lot of new support software for machine learning, capabilities like Splunk, Elastic, … and so many other capabilities are related to Intel Kubernetes farms. I think the longer adoption takes the less relevant z/OS becomes. Its not Z or Cloud, it’s both exist in the Hybrid Cloud and must work together. /endSoapBox Matt Hogstrom m...@hogstrom.org “To achieve great things two things are needed: a plan, and not quite enough time.” - Leonard Bernstein > On Apr 21, 2022, at 4:55 PM, Mike Schwab wrote: > > Early 2001. Possibly included to run VSE in a z/OS address space to > aid migration? > > On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 6:52 PM PINION, RICHARD W. > wrote: >> >> Does anybody hear remember a software product from a Russian company that >> allowed one to run Linux as >> an address space under OS/390? If memory serves me correctly, I think this >> was in the 1990's, possible early >> 2000's. >> >> -Original Message- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of >> Phil Smith III >> Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2022 2:26 PM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Use of zCX >> >> [External Email. Exercise caution when clicking links or opening >> attachments.] >> >>> It likes a LOT of real memory and it appears that the running instance >> consumes the full amount of real memory allocated to it for the duration, >> making it unavailable to zOS for paging or any other use. >> >> >> >> Well, sure-that memory use is Linux caching files in memory. This has all >> been explored, analyzed, and solved under z/VM years ago; alas, z/OS doesn't >> have the same kinds of controls, so it's going to be a problem with zCX >> until and unless IBM adds some knobs. >> >> >> >> I'm with Dave Jones re "Where's the real value?" I remember when IBM first >> proposed what became zCX, I asked what the point was. The answer I got was >> "It's politically hard/impossible to get an LPAR created to run z/VM (not to >> mention paying for z/VM) or to run Linux on the bare iron". A technical >> solution to a political problem is painful to contemplate, but is sometimes >> necessary, and it appears that's what zCX is. >> >> >> >> Running an entire operating system under z/OS that isn't acclimated to doing >> so is inherently problematic. Things like Db2 and CICS have spent many, many >> years being made into good z/OS citizens (OK, since CICS has always been >> under z/OS and predecessors, that's obvious-but Db2 started as SQL/DS on >> VM). Sure, IBM can make Linux behave under z/OS, but it's gonna take a >> while! And the real value is still unclear to me, beyond the political >> hurdles. You're sure not going to run hundreds of zCX containers under z/OS, >> I don't think, as you can Linuxen under z/VM. >> >> >> >> TonyH: My information
Re: Use of zCX
Early 2001. Possibly included to run VSE in a z/OS address space to aid migration? On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 6:52 PM PINION, RICHARD W. wrote: > > Does anybody hear remember a software product from a Russian company that > allowed one to run Linux as > an address space under OS/390? If memory serves me correctly, I think this > was in the 1990's, possible early > 2000's. > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of > Phil Smith III > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2022 2:26 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Use of zCX > > [External Email. Exercise caution when clicking links or opening attachments.] > > >It likes a LOT of real memory and it appears that the running instance > consumes the full amount of real memory allocated to it for the duration, > making it unavailable to zOS for paging or any other use. > > > > Well, sure-that memory use is Linux caching files in memory. This has all > been explored, analyzed, and solved under z/VM years ago; alas, z/OS doesn't > have the same kinds of controls, so it's going to be a problem with zCX until > and unless IBM adds some knobs. > > > > I'm with Dave Jones re "Where's the real value?" I remember when IBM first > proposed what became zCX, I asked what the point was. The answer I got was > "It's politically hard/impossible to get an LPAR created to run z/VM (not to > mention paying for z/VM) or to run Linux on the bare iron". A technical > solution to a political problem is painful to contemplate, but is sometimes > necessary, and it appears that's what zCX is. > > > > Running an entire operating system under z/OS that isn't acclimated to doing > so is inherently problematic. Things like Db2 and CICS have spent many, many > years being made into good z/OS citizens (OK, since CICS has always been > under z/OS and predecessors, that's obvious-but Db2 started as SQL/DS on VM). > Sure, IBM can make Linux behave under z/OS, but it's gonna take a while! And > the real value is still unclear to me, beyond the political hurdles. You're > sure not going to run hundreds of zCX containers under z/OS, I don't think, > as you can Linuxen under z/VM. > > > > TonyH: My information is that z/OS (MVS) only uses SIE for zCX, so I think > that's just two levels of SIE, which presumably/hopefully means vSIE, which > isn't that bad? > > > > ...phsiii (who spent four years doing Linux provisioning under z/VM at > Linuxcare and then a few years doing performance of Linux under z/VM, so > feels he has some qualifications to make the above assertions) > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to > lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > Confidentiality notice: > This e-mail message, including any attachments, may contain legally > privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended > recipient(s), or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this > message to the intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any > dissemination, distribution, or copying of this e-mail message is strictly > prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately > notify the sender and delete this e-mail message from your computer. > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Use of zCX
Gil asked: >What incremental skill set is required for the respective alternatives? >I once inquired on another form whether a VM LPAR only for Linux >might be administered with no CMS skill required. Alan Altmark > (IIRC) answered, neither practical nor desirable in view of the >superiority of the CMS-based tools. does an OOTB Linux LPAR >change that? Yes, it should, these days. I honestly don't know, not having actually touched it in 14 years. But it wasn't difficult then. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Use of zCX
On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 12:35:10 -0700, Charles Mills wrote: >I am not a "corporate shop" guy but apparently "put up a VM LPAR" is a huge >political leap for many z/OS shops. The idea is facilitating "if we could just >get one instance of Linux up under z/OS we could show that to senior >management and take it from there." Hence zCX. > What incremental skill set is required for the respective alternatives? I once inquired on another form whether a VM LPAR only for Linux might be administered with no CMS skill required. Alan Altmark (IIRC) answered, neither practical nor desirable in view of the superiority of the CMS-based tools. does an OOTB Linux LPAR change that? >-Original Message- >From: Dave Jones >Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2022 10:55 AM > >I agree with Robert's objections to zCX, and, frankly, If all a site wants to >do is run zLinux applications on an IBM z system, it is much simpler (and >perhaps cheaper) to just install z/VM on the box and then host as many Linux >guests as you want. No extra external tooling is needed; just use out of the >box management apps that are already available. Plus, the system programmers >have much greater and finer, control over the hardware resources (memory, CPU, >etc.) each zLinux guest is allowed to consume. And of course, z/VM and zLinux >run very well on the full speed IFL engines, no other specialty engines >required. Connect the z/VM and z/OS LPARs together by hyper-sockets and >you're good to go. >If I was an z/OS shop looking towards Linux, that's how I would proceed. >Thought and comments always welcome. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Use of zCX
I am not a "corporate shop" guy but apparently "put up a VM LPAR" is a huge political leap for many z/OS shops. The idea is facilitating "if we could just get one instance of Linux up under z/OS we could show that to senior management and take it from there." Hence zCX. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Dave Jones Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2022 10:55 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Use of zCX I agree with Robert's objections to zCX, and, frankly, If all a site wants to do is run zLinux applications on an IBM z system, it is much simpler (and perhaps cheaper) to just install z/VM on the box and then host as many Linux guests as you want. No extra external tooling is needed; just use out of the box management apps that are already available. Plus, the system programmers have much greater and finer, control over the hardware resources (memory, CPU, etc.) each zLinux guest is allowed to consume. And of course, z/VM and zLinux run very well on the full speed IFL engines, no other specialty engines required. Connect the z/VM and z/OS LPARs together by hyper-sockets and you're good to go. If I was an z/OS shop looking towards Linux, that's how I would proceed. Thought and comments always welcome. DJ -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Use of zCX
Does anybody hear remember a software product from a Russian company that allowed one to run Linux as an address space under OS/390? If memory serves me correctly, I think this was in the 1990's, possible early 2000's. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Phil Smith III Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2022 2:26 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Use of zCX [External Email. Exercise caution when clicking links or opening attachments.] >It likes a LOT of real memory and it appears that the running instance consumes the full amount of real memory allocated to it for the duration, making it unavailable to zOS for paging or any other use. Well, sure-that memory use is Linux caching files in memory. This has all been explored, analyzed, and solved under z/VM years ago; alas, z/OS doesn't have the same kinds of controls, so it's going to be a problem with zCX until and unless IBM adds some knobs. I'm with Dave Jones re "Where's the real value?" I remember when IBM first proposed what became zCX, I asked what the point was. The answer I got was "It's politically hard/impossible to get an LPAR created to run z/VM (not to mention paying for z/VM) or to run Linux on the bare iron". A technical solution to a political problem is painful to contemplate, but is sometimes necessary, and it appears that's what zCX is. Running an entire operating system under z/OS that isn't acclimated to doing so is inherently problematic. Things like Db2 and CICS have spent many, many years being made into good z/OS citizens (OK, since CICS has always been under z/OS and predecessors, that's obvious-but Db2 started as SQL/DS on VM). Sure, IBM can make Linux behave under z/OS, but it's gonna take a while! And the real value is still unclear to me, beyond the political hurdles. You're sure not going to run hundreds of zCX containers under z/OS, I don't think, as you can Linuxen under z/VM. TonyH: My information is that z/OS (MVS) only uses SIE for zCX, so I think that's just two levels of SIE, which presumably/hopefully means vSIE, which isn't that bad? ...phsiii (who spent four years doing Linux provisioning under z/VM at Linuxcare and then a few years doing performance of Linux under z/VM, so feels he has some qualifications to make the above assertions) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Confidentiality notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient(s), or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this message to the intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this e-mail message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail message from your computer. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Use of zCX
>It likes a LOT of real memory and it appears that the running instance consumes the full amount of real memory allocated to it for the duration, making it unavailable to zOS for paging or any other use. Well, sure-that memory use is Linux caching files in memory. This has all been explored, analyzed, and solved under z/VM years ago; alas, z/OS doesn't have the same kinds of controls, so it's going to be a problem with zCX until and unless IBM adds some knobs. I'm with Dave Jones re "Where's the real value?" I remember when IBM first proposed what became zCX, I asked what the point was. The answer I got was "It's politically hard/impossible to get an LPAR created to run z/VM (not to mention paying for z/VM) or to run Linux on the bare iron". A technical solution to a political problem is painful to contemplate, but is sometimes necessary, and it appears that's what zCX is. Running an entire operating system under z/OS that isn't acclimated to doing so is inherently problematic. Things like Db2 and CICS have spent many, many years being made into good z/OS citizens (OK, since CICS has always been under z/OS and predecessors, that's obvious-but Db2 started as SQL/DS on VM). Sure, IBM can make Linux behave under z/OS, but it's gonna take a while! And the real value is still unclear to me, beyond the political hurdles. You're sure not going to run hundreds of zCX containers under z/OS, I don't think, as you can Linuxen under z/VM. TonyH: My information is that z/OS (MVS) only uses SIE for zCX, so I think that's just two levels of SIE, which presumably/hopefully means vSIE, which isn't that bad? ...phsiii (who spent four years doing Linux provisioning under z/VM at Linuxcare and then a few years doing performance of Linux under z/VM, so feels he has some qualifications to make the above assertions) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Use of zCX
I agree with Robert's objections to zCX, and, frankly, If all a site wants to do is run zLinux applications on an IBM z system, it is much simpler (and perhaps cheaper) to just install z/VM on the box and then host as many Linux guests as you want. No extra external tooling is needed; just use out of the box management apps that are already available. Plus, the system programmers have much greater and finer, control over the hardware resources (memory, CPU, etc.) each zLinux guest is allowed to consume. And of course, z/VM and zLinux run very well on the full speed IFL engines, no other specialty engines required. Connect the z/VM and z/OS LPARs together by hyper-sockets and you're good to go. If I was an z/OS shop looking towards Linux, that's how I would proceed. Thought and comments always welcome. DJ -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: CBT Usermod Collection for ISPF (CUCI) V1R7 RELEASED!
www.cbttape.org is now back up. Lionel B. Dyck <>< Website: https://www.lbdsoftware.com Github: https://github.com/lbdyck “Worry more about your character than your reputation. Character is what you are, reputation merely what others think you are.” - - - John Wooden -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Thomas Conley Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2022 11:05 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: CBT Usermod Collection for ISPF (CUCI) V1R7 RELEASED! >It can be found at https://www.cbttapes.org/updates.htm - where all the >updates can be found. >CUCI is in FILE 967 My apologies, as Lionel points out above, the file number is 967. www.cbttape.org is currently down, and they are working diligently to get it back up, so if you can't get in, try again later. Regards, Tom Conley -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: CBT Usermod Collection for ISPF (CUCI) V1R7 RELEASED!
>It can be found at https://www.cbttapes.org/updates.htm - where all the >updates can be found. >CUCI is in FILE 967 My apologies, as Lionel points out above, the file number is 967. www.cbttape.org is currently down, and they are working diligently to get it back up, so if you can't get in, try again later. Regards, Tom Conley -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Dadacom
Hmm, Dadaists object to capitalist society and are into irrational nonsense. Not sure about the first part, but the second definitely sounds like a lot of content on this forum. I can only imagine what a Dadaist database would be like--return data from random rows, I suppose? On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 4:04 PM Carmen Vitullo wrote: > not at my current gig, at a former outsourcer one of our clients had > Datacom as their primary DB > > Carmen > > On 4/20/2022 2:58 PM, Steve Beaver wrote: > > Now here is the tough one. Has any one written a little application > using Data > > And that has become critical and you have no way out. > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > No one said I could type with one thumb > > > >> On Apr 20, 2022, at 14:51, Carmen Vitullo wrote: > >> > >> not unknown to my management but forced to use Datacom for CA-7 and 11 > :( > >> > >> Carmen > >> > >> > >>> On 4/20/2022 2:47 PM, Steve Beaver wrote: > >>> Just out of happy curiosity, how many of you are using Datacom under > the > >>> covers unbeknownst to your management? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > >>> send emailtolists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > >>> > >>> > >> -- > >> /I am not bound to win, but I am bound to be true. I am not bound to > succeed, but I am bound to live by the light that I have. I must stand with > anybody that stands right, and stand with him while he is right, and part > with him when he goes wrong. *Abraham Lincoln*/ > >> > >> -- > >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > >> send email tolists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email tolists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > > -- > /I am not bound to win, but I am bound to be true. I am not bound to > succeed, but I am bound to live by the light that I have. I must stand > with anybody that stands right, and stand with him while he is right, > and part with him when he goes wrong. *Abraham Lincoln*/ > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- zMan -- "I've got a mainframe and I'm not afraid to use it" -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: DB2: Combining result sets
Not exactly, as I left out that there is also column D and E which may have different values. >From your comment it would appear that this is a lot more difficult.. On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 00:13:00 +0200 Bernd Oppolzer wrote: :>If the results in col1, col2 and col3 may be different for the same :>"something" condition :>in tables table1 thru table3, my solution is not correct. :> :>In this case, you need some sort of "select from table1 ... union all ... :>select from table2 where not exists (result from table1)" etc. etc. :> :>But this is a complete other requirement. You should maybe be more :>specific about :>what your targets are. :> :>Kind regards :> :>Bernd :> :> :>Am 19.04.2022 um 00:02 schrieb Bernd Oppolzer: :>> select col1, col2, col3, min (wherefound) :>> from (select col1, col2, col3, 'source 1' as wherefound :>> from table1 :>> where something :>> union ALL :>> select col1, col2, col3, 'source 2' as wherefound :>> from table2 :>> where something :>> union ALL :>> select col1, col2, col3, 'source 3' as wherefound :>> from table3 :>> where something) as t1 :>> group by col1, col2, col3 :>> :>> I changed the UNION to UNION ALL, BTW; :>> :>> kind regards :>> :>> Bernd :>> :>> :>> Am 18.04.2022 um 19:48 schrieb Binyamin Dissen: :>>> Seems that I have been knocked off of the DB2-L listserv. :>>> :>>> I am doing a union of three queries where it is possible that the :>>> critical :>>> columns are in more than one of the queries. :>>> :>>> For example: :>>> :>>> select col1, col2 col3, 'source 1' :>>> from table1 :>>> where something :>>> union :>>> select col1, col2, col3,, 'source 2' :>>> from table2 :>>> where something :>>> union :>>> select col1, col2, col3, 'source 3' :>>> from table3 :>>> where something :>>> :>>> I would like a single row even if the data (col1, col2, col3) is in :>>> more than :>>> one of the queries, so that 'source1' is returned if in table1 and :>>> table2 :>>> and/or table3, 'source 2' if not in table1 but in table2 (and perhaps :>>> table3) :>>> and 'source 3' if only in table 3. :>>> :>>> -- :>>> Binyamin Dissen :>>> http://www.dissensoftware.com :>>> :>>> Director, Dissen Software, Bar & Grill - Israel :>>> :>>> -- :>>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, :>>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN :>> :>> -- :>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, :>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN :> :>-- :>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, :>send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- Binyamin Dissen http://www.dissensoftware.com Director, Dissen Software, Bar & Grill - Israel -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Use of zCX
EA/s/ Anthony L. Zak Original message From: Sean Gleann Date: 4/21/22 2:57 AM (GMT-05:00) To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] Use of zCX @Robert Garrett (with a sigh of relief!) 15 minutes for z/CX to come up ona z/OS under z/VM at Dallas? Me too. I thought I was doing somethingwrong, but couldn't get any useful feedback from IBM/Dallas about the'problem'.SeanOn Thu, 21 Apr 2022 at 04:57, kekronbekron <02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:> Apologies if this seems rash.> Certainly don't mean to belittle people's work; many are restricted with> choices, procedures, etc.> If it isn't for the cost of being an MF s/w vendor, competent new> solutions would steal the show.> Much like most of y'all, I want Z to remain king of the hill.>> -KB>> --- Original Message ---> On Thursday, April 21st, 2022 at 9:06 AM, kekronbekron <> 02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:>>> > As an observer, I reckon IBM are forced to use OpenShift because they've> got to get RedHat in there.> > Also, since everyone knows the word Docker now, the Z "has to have it".> > Surely the industry is now waking up to the mess that is the Kubernetes> ecoystem mgmt., service MESS.> >> > I do wonder... for those who thought setting up zOSMF RACF was painful,> what their journey will be for zCX and OpenShift.> > Just saying, "it's free because zIIP" doesn't make it good.> > No Ferrari owner should be "compelled" to use a unicycle's wheel just> because it's free.> >> > IMHO, "Me too" solutions are seriously ruining the reputation of the Z> with the ridiculous CPU, memory, storage requirements.> > I thought it was ridiculous that RDz wanted a few gigabytes of memory> for the JVM.> > Rebadged oldware, with web stack & interface from early 2010s, are now> coming to compete with Chrome, in their lust for memory and such.> >> > - KB> > --- Original Message ---> > On Thursday, April 21st, 2022 at 4:22 AM, Tony Harminc t...@harminc.net> wrote:> >> >> >> > > On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 at 18:00, Robert Garrett rob...@garrettfamily.us> wrote:> > >> > > [...]> > >> > > > It likes a LOT of real memory and it appears that the running> instance consumes the full amount of real memory allocated to it for the> duration, making it unavailable to zOS for paging or any other use. Don't> believe the claim that it can run in as little> > > > as 2GB. The experimental test instance that I built had 3GB> allocated to it (the most I could give it on the LPAR I was using) and it> took a full 15 minutes (yes minutes) by the clock for the address space to> initialize and reach the point where it was> > > > functional - on every start up. Admittedly, this was on a zOS image> that was being hosted under zVM at IBM Dallas, so I'm sure that had some> impact.> > >> > > That smells like three levels of SIE, which to my understanding is> > > never going to perform reasonably.> > >> > > Tony H.> > >> > > --> > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,> > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN> >> >> > --> > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,> > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN>> --> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN>--For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Use of zCX
/s/ Anthony L. ZakJo,z Original message From: Sean Gleann Date: 4/21/22 2:57 AM (GMT-05:00) To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] Use of zCX @Robert Garrett (with a sigh of relief!) 15 minutes for z/CX to come up ona z/OS under z/VM at Dallas? Me too. I thought I was doing somethingwrong, but couldn't get any useful feedback from IBM/Dallas about the'problem'.SeanOn Thu, 21 Apr 2022 at 04:57, kekronbekron <02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:> Apologies if this seems rash.> Certainly don't mean to belittle people's work; many are restricted with> choices, procedures, etc.> If it isn't for the cost of being an MF s/w vendor, competent new> solutions would steal the show.> Much like most of y'all, I want Z to remain king of the hill.>> -KB>> --- Original Message ---> On Thursday, April 21st, 2022 at 9:06 AM, kekronbekron <> 02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:>>> > As an observer, I reckon IBM are forced to use OpenShift because they've> got to get RedHat in there.> > Also, since everyone knows the word Docker now, the Z "has to have it".> > Surely the industry is now waking up to the mess that is the Kubernetes> ecoystem mgmt., service MESS.> >> > I do wonder... for those who thought setting up zOSMF RACF was painful,> what their journey will be for zCX and OpenShift.> > Just saying, "it's free because zIIP" doesn't make it good.> > No Ferrari owner should be "compelled" to use a unicycle's wheel just> because it's free.> >> > IMHO, "Me too" solutions are seriously ruining the reputation of the Z> with the ridiculous CPU, memory, storage requirements.> > I thought it was ridiculous that RDz wanted a few gigabytes of memory> for the JVM.> > Rebadged oldware, with web stack & interface from early 2010s, are now> coming to compete with Chrome, in their lust for memory and such.> >> > - KB> > --- Original Message ---> > On Thursday, April 21st, 2022 at 4:22 AM, Tony Harminc t...@harminc.net> wrote:> >> >> >> > > On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 at 18:00, Robert Garrett rob...@garrettfamily.us> wrote:> > >> > > [...]> > >> > > > It likes a LOT of real memory and it appears that the running> instance consumes the full amount of real memory allocated to it for the> duration, making it unavailable to zOS for paging or any other use. Don't> believe the claim that it can run in as little> > > > as 2GB. The experimental test instance that I built had 3GB> allocated to it (the most I could give it on the LPAR I was using) and it> took a full 15 minutes (yes minutes) by the clock for the address space to> initialize and reach the point where it was> > > > functional - on every start up. Admittedly, this was on a zOS image> that was being hosted under zVM at IBM Dallas, so I'm sure that had some> impact.> > >> > > That smells like three levels of SIE, which to my understanding is> > > never going to perform reasonably.> > >> > > Tony H.> > >> > > --> > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,> > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN> >> >> > --> > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,> > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN>> --> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN>--For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: CBT Usermod Collection for ISPF (CUCI) V1R7 RELEASED!
Tom - congratulations on another great release It can be found at https://www.cbttapes.org/updates.htm - where all the updates can be found. CUCI is in FILE 967 Lionel B. Dyck <>< Website: https://www.lbdsoftware.com Github: https://github.com/lbdyck “Worry more about your character than your reputation. Character is what you are, reputation merely what others think you are.” - - - John Wooden -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Tom Conley Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2022 11:09 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: CBT Usermod Collection for ISPF (CUCI) V1R7 RELEASED! FYI, I'm pleased to announce Version 1 Release 7 of the CBT Usermods Collection for ISPF (CUCI), available at http://www.cbttape.org. If you want EDIT highlighting for other languages, if you want useful modifications to ISPF panels, if you want a way to set default ISPF options that are not in the ISPCCONF dialog, then CUCI is for you! V1R7 contains the following enhancements (both RFE's and the new z Idea Portal enhancements are provided in this release) and maintenance items: Total RFEs delivered to date: 39 Total IBM Ideas delivered to date: 03 ZOS-I-3292 - ISPF Enhanced PANEL Edit Highlighting ZOS-I-2852 - ISPF Edit highlighting for R RFE 154404 - ISPF Edit highlighting for R ZOS-I-2174 - HILITE PLI - End-of-line Comment // support (requires OA62409) RFE 144625 - HILITE PLI - End-of-line Comment // support (requires OA62409) - Interrogate ZHIPAREN to determine if parens should be highlighted for FLOWASM (requires OA62409) - Add code to bypass highlighting Top of Data, Bottom of Data, blank lines, and MSG, NOTE, etc. lines. - Eliminate extraneous and unnecessary code for performance. - Fix JCL errors in $MANHACJ when assembling ISRPXASM. *** Thanks to Lionel Dyck for this update!! *** - Fix error in ISR@PRIM which caused the USRCCONF keyword file name and output file content option not to be saved. - Alter language for message USRL001 to be more clear and to add R and PANELX language support. - Miscellaneous cleanup of various installation members This new release adds highlighting support for 2 more languages, bringing the total number of supported languages to 20: ACS (much better than CLIST highlighting) CARLA FLOWASM FORTRAN GO JAVA JAVASCRIPT JSON KOTLIN PANELX (panel highlighting the way it should have been from the beginning) PERL PHP PYTHON R (the R statistics language, available as a Rocket Ported Tool) RUBY SAS (could use some help here, there are thousands more keywords to identify) SHELL SQL TYPESCRIPT XMLASCII (a must if you're working with or customizing z/OSMF workflows) Ideas and contributions are always welcome, so download CUCI and try it out. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. -- Regards, Tom Conley -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Use of zCX
@Robert Garrett (with a sigh of relief!) 15 minutes for z/CX to come up on a z/OS under z/VM at Dallas? Me too. I thought I was doing something wrong, but couldn't get any useful feedback from IBM/Dallas about the 'problem'. Sean On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 at 04:57, kekronbekron < 02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > Apologies if this seems rash. > Certainly don't mean to belittle people's work; many are restricted with > choices, procedures, etc. > If it isn't for the cost of being an MF s/w vendor, competent new > solutions would steal the show. > Much like most of y'all, I want Z to remain king of the hill. > > -KB > > --- Original Message --- > On Thursday, April 21st, 2022 at 9:06 AM, kekronbekron < > 02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > > > As an observer, I reckon IBM are forced to use OpenShift because they've > got to get RedHat in there. > > Also, since everyone knows the word Docker now, the Z "has to have it". > > Surely the industry is now waking up to the mess that is the Kubernetes > ecoystem mgmt., service MESS. > > > > I do wonder... for those who thought setting up zOSMF RACF was painful, > what their journey will be for zCX and OpenShift. > > Just saying, "it's free because zIIP" doesn't make it good. > > No Ferrari owner should be "compelled" to use a unicycle's wheel just > because it's free. > > > > IMHO, "Me too" solutions are seriously ruining the reputation of the Z > with the ridiculous CPU, memory, storage requirements. > > I thought it was ridiculous that RDz wanted a few gigabytes of memory > for the JVM. > > Rebadged oldware, with web stack & interface from early 2010s, are now > coming to compete with Chrome, in their lust for memory and such. > > > > - KB > > --- Original Message --- > > On Thursday, April 21st, 2022 at 4:22 AM, Tony Harminc t...@harminc.net > wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 at 18:00, Robert Garrett rob...@garrettfamily.us > wrote: > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > It likes a LOT of real memory and it appears that the running > instance consumes the full amount of real memory allocated to it for the > duration, making it unavailable to zOS for paging or any other use. Don't > believe the claim that it can run in as little > > > > as 2GB. The experimental test instance that I built had 3GB > allocated to it (the most I could give it on the LPAR I was using) and it > took a full 15 minutes (yes minutes) by the clock for the address space to > initialize and reach the point where it was > > > > functional - on every start up. Admittedly, this was on a zOS image > that was being hosted under zVM at IBM Dallas, so I'm sure that had some > impact. > > > > > > That smells like three levels of SIE, which to my understanding is > > > never going to perform reasonably. > > > > > > Tony H. > > > > > > -- > > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > > > -- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
