I sent Steve a copy offline. It was on a Classic SMS Redbooks CD I found
and the CD also contains the books in the conversion series.
The -01 version was dated September 1999, updated February 2000.
On Sat, 8 Oct 2022 at 12:25, Paul Gorlinsky wrote:
> BTW There are other Redbooks in this same
BTW There are other Redbooks in this same area. For example Converting to
DFSMSrmm from CA-1 ( SG24-6241-01 )
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the
On 6/10/2022 19:07, Steve Beaver wrote:
Does anyone in the group have the following Redbook on their PC or Laptop
SG24-4998-01, Converting to Removable Media Manager: A Practical Guide
I migth have it on a backup.
Any idea of the date?
Best regards.
j@n.
Here's the previous version. https://ibmdocs.pocnet.net/SG24-4998-00.pdf
On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 12:08 PM Steve Beaver wrote:
>
> Does anyone in the group have the following Redbook on their PC or Laptop
>
>
>
> SG24-4998-01, Converting to Removable Media Manager: A Practical Guide
>
>
>
>
>
Does anyone in the group have the following Redbook on their PC or Laptop
SG24-4998-01, Converting to Removable Media Manager: A Practical Guide
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send
they are 2.3
before converting per IBMs recommendation.
John Benik | Optum
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Tom Conley
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 1:11 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RMM
On 2/14/2018 12:23 PM, Benik, John E wrote:
Yes I know that but our company is also moving away from VRS's in my opinion
doing something like this...
MCATTR(ALL)/* USE SMS MANAGEMENT. */ -
RM(EXPDT(GDG(WHILECATALOG(UNTILEXPIRED),RETPD(0)) -
List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Tom Conley
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 10:44 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RMM question
On 2/14/2018 11:18 AM, Benik, John E wrote:
> From: Benik, John E
> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 11:22 AM
> To: 'IBM
On 2/14/2018 11:18 AM, Benik, John E wrote:
From: Benik, John E
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 11:22 AM
To: 'IBM Mainframe Discussion List'
Subject: RE: RMM question
We have been looking at changing from VRSEL to Retention Method processing.
However our understanding is that in Z/OS 2.3
From: Benik, John E
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 11:22 AM
To: 'IBM Mainframe Discussion List'
Subject: RE: RMM question
We have been looking at changing from VRSEL to Retention Method processing.
However our understanding is that in Z/OS 2.3 a lot of the functionality
performed
626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW
robin...@sce.com
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Tom Conley
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 9:05 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: RMM question
On 2/13/2018 9:24 AM
AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: RMM question
On 2/13/2018 9:24 AM, Tony Thigpen wrote:
> Thanks Tom.
>
> Yes, I did mean VRS.
>
> No, IBM did not do the conversion.
>
> The output shows:
> Exit status:
> EDGUX100 = NONE
>
> Are you s
On 2/13/2018 9:24 AM, Tony Thigpen wrote:
Thanks Tom.
Yes, I did mean VRS.
No, IBM did not do the conversion.
The output shows:
Exit status:
EDGUX100 = NONE
Are you suggesting that I not use EDGUX100, but instead use:
RMM ADDVRS DSNAME(’**’) WHILECATALOG
Will this affect all existing
Thanks Tom.
Yes, I did mean VRS.
No, IBM did not do the conversion.
The output shows:
Exit status:
EDGUX100 = NONE
Are you suggesting that I not use EDGUX100, but instead use:
RMM ADDVRS DSNAME(’**’) WHILECATALOG
Will this affect all existing volumes? Is there a way to see the effect
On 2/13/2018 8:19 AM, Tony Thigpen wrote:
We recently converted from CA-1 to RMM.
I am having an issue with some tape volumes containing GDGs not
scratching after x days.
I have determined it is due to EXPDT=99000, and I am now waiting for the
person who performed the conversion to let me
We recently converted from CA-1 to RMM.
I am having an issue with some tape volumes containing GDGs not
scratching after x days.
I have determined it is due to EXPDT=99000, and I am now waiting for the
person who performed the conversion to let me know if the EDGUX100 exit
is installed and
Richard, Just chanced upon this question from you . and cant see any reply
yet, so will try to answer it.
You cannot mix RETAINBY volume and RETAINBY set for VRS retention. However that
does not really answer the question
What rmm will do for a "set" of volumes depends on what is
Most of our tape are logical volumes residing in an IBM VTS
and they are SMS managed. Our RMM EDGRMMxx parm of RETAINBY
is set to volume and we use RETENTION METHOD of VRSEL.
I want a certain set of volumes to be managed by RETAINBY
SET. Can this be done?
FIRST TENNESSEE
Confidentiality
] On Behalf
Of Mike Wood
Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2014 9:26 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RMM question about adding VRS
...small addendum to my reply
re: step #2
Without checking the full flow of command processing I cant be absolutely
certain any more of what rmm does.
However, as I
...small addendum to my reply
re: step #2
Without checking the full flow of command processing I cant be absolutely
certain any more of what rmm does.
However, as I said, it should allow you to change the location information to
reflect the actual situation via commands.
You might have to
Wayne,
You should not need to retrieve the volumes, re-insert them, and do it all
again under VRS control.
RMM should be smart enough to make sense of what it finds in the library and
what the VRS policy decides.
I suggest you
1. Add the rule that will cause rmm to identify what should be in
List,
I have been archiving SMF/RMF data to a 3592 tape then manually ejecting it and
carry it offsite therefor the location is still listed as LIBATL1 in the RMM
database. I would like to automate this process and add a VRS rule to send it
offsite. If I add a VRS rule for these datasets, what
22 matches
Mail list logo
