Re: Was: Implicit VVDS creation now: FDR & VVDS's

: Re: [IBM-MAIN] Was: Implicit VVDS creation now: FDR & VVDS's In <02b6c5b8-a688-4da3-ae65-a9ab8a56b...@comcast.net>, on 02/12/2014 at 09:19 AM, Ed Gould said: FDR,compaktor I'm pretty sure that it treats the VVDS the same as any other data set. -- Shmuel (Seymo

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

M-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] > On Behalf Of Mark Zelden > Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 1:22 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] Implicit VVDS creation > > Could have been. That was a batch tool only that used GTF like trace data > IIRC, and may have even read GTF

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

datasets. Ron > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] > On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL > Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2014 1:48 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] Implicit VVDS creation > > ‎As fo

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] > On Behalf Of DASDBILL2 > Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2014 1:27 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] Implicit VVDS creation > > The theoretical worst case for

Re: Was: Implicit VVDS creation now: FDR & VVDS's

Re: [IBM-MAIN] Was: Implicit VVDS creation now: FDR & VVDS's > > In <02b6c5b8-a688-4da3-ae65-a9ab8a56b...@comcast.net>, on > 02/12/2014 >at 09:19 AM, Ed Gould said: > > >FDR,compaktor > > I'm pretty sure that it treats the VVDS the same as any oth

Re: Was: Implicit VVDS creation now: FDR & VVDS's

In <02b6c5b8-a688-4da3-ae65-a9ab8a56b...@comcast.net>, on 02/12/2014 at 09:19 AM, Ed Gould said: >FDR,compaktor I'm pretty sure that it treats the VVDS the same as any other data set. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see

Re: Was: Implicit VVDS creation now: FDR & VVDS's

In , on 02/12/2014 at 07:44 AM, John McKown said: >I thought FDR was the product (Fast Dump Restore) and IDP (Innovation >Data Processing) was the company. Whoops! The mind is the second thing to go (I can't remember the first.) -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO

Re: Was: Implicit VVDS creation now: FDR & VVDS's

Wednesday, February 12, 2014 7:05:53 AM Subject: Re: Was: Implicit VVDS creation now: FDR & VVDS's In <476fd1b4-cd31-49e7-bba2-d719c96b7...@comcast.net>, on 02/11/2014    at 01:40 PM, Ed Gould said: >I am trying to remember if FDR consolidates the SYS1.VVDS extents   FDR is

Re: Was: Implicit VVDS creation now: FDR & VVDS's

FDR,compaktor On Feb 12, 2014, at 7:05 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: In <476fd1b4-cd31-49e7-bba2-d719c96b7...@comcast.net>, on 02/11/2014 at 01:40 PM, Ed Gould said: I am trying to remember if FDR consolidates the SYS1.VVDS extents FDR is a company that sells several products; whic

Re: Was: Implicit VVDS creation now: FDR & VVDS's

I thought FDR was the product (Fast Dump Restore) and IDP (Innovation Data Processing) was the company. Ref: http://www.fdr.com On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 7:05 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) < shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net> wrote: > In <476fd1b4-cd31-49e7-bba2-d719c96b7...@comcast.net>, on 02/11/2014

Re: Was: Implicit VVDS creation now: FDR & VVDS's

In <476fd1b4-cd31-49e7-bba2-d719c96b7...@comcast.net>, on 02/11/2014 at 01:40 PM, Ed Gould said: >I am trying to remember if FDR consolidates the SYS1.VVDS extents FDR is a company that sells several products; which are you licensed for? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

In <6330372289028276.wa.markmzelden@listserv.ua.edu>, on 02/10/2014 at 03:22 PM, Mark Zelden said: >Could have been. That was a batch tool only that used GTF like >trace data IIRC, and may have even read GTF input. I vaguely recall that CMF had a seek optimizer that used GTF data. --

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

In <5873965579866770.wa.markmzelden@listserv.ua.edu>, on 02/10/2014 at 08:41 AM, Mark Zelden said: >Yes, of course the VVDS existed. Been there since ICF (MVS/SP 1.3 >?). DF/EF provided the ICF. Later on DFP came along and included DF/DS and DF/EF. Neither was bundled with MVS/SP. --

Was: Implicit VVDS creation now: FDR & VVDS's

I do not have access to the FDR manuals now. I am trying to remember if FDR consolidates the SYS1.VVDS extents *AND* releases unused extents of the VVDS? I would guess that it does but without manuals its hard to guess. BTW FDR is one of the few companies I cannot say enough good things abou

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

M Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation That makes more sense. We had their DASD Mgt Product DMS(?) and that was   about the time they ran me off.     In a message dated 2/10/2014 4:47:45 P.M. Central Standard Time,   dasdbi...@comcast.net writes: If it  was called FastDASD, then it was eithe

Re: DMSOS - Was(RE: Implicit VVDS creation)

files. BobL -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Linda Mooney Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 5:23 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation [ External ] DMS (Disk Management System, II

DMSOS - Was(RE: Implicit VVDS creation)

- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Linda Mooney Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 5:23 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation [ External ] DMS (Disk Management System, IIRC) was from Sterling Software, which was bought out by

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 3:00:14 PM Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation That makes more sense. We had their DASD Mgt Product DMS(?) and that was   about the time they ran me off.     In a message dated 2/10/2014 4:47:45 P.M. Central Standard Time,   dasdbi...@comcast.

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

February 10, 2014 10:27:44 AM Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation There was a DASD Seek Analysis tool. Don't know if it was Candle or somebody else. Our tuning folks used the heck out of it for Storage volumes back then. When we got out E's ISPF didn't support them! In a

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

That makes more sense. We had their DASD Mgt Product DMS(?) and that was about the time they ran me off. In a message dated 2/10/2014 4:47:45 P.M. Central Standard Time, dasdbi...@comcast.net writes: If it was called FastDASD, then it was either Software Corp. of America's -

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

If it was called FastDASD, then it was either Software Corp. of America's or CA's (which bought SCA in late 1985). Bill Fairchild - Original Message - From: "Ed Finnell" To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 12:27:44 PM Subject: Re: Im

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

Don't think we had that at that time. The folks that used it have gone off grid(retired). Used to have a SHARE presentation on what we had, but it's up in the attic. ASG MSX, CA(UCCEL) 1,7,10. MORINO MICS, CANDLE and a couple that I don't remember vendor. One for PAGEDELs and a LINKLST loader

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

target.com/ateExperts/ On Mon, 10 Feb 2014 21:10:06 +, Linda Mooney wrote: >Sounds like CA's FastDASD. > >- Original Message - >From: "Ed Finnell" >To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 10:27:44 AM >Subject: Re: Im

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

Sounds like CA's FastDASD. - Original Message - From: "Ed Finnell" To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 10:27:44 AM Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation There was a DASD Seek Analysis tool. Don't know if it was Candle or   somebody el

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

There was a DASD Seek Analysis tool. Don't know if it was Candle or somebody else. Our tuning folks used the heck out of it for Storage volumes back then. When we got out E's ISPF didn't support them! In a message dated 2/10/2014 8:25:51 A.M. Central Standard Time, rpomm...@sfgmembers.co

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

The default value for implicitly defined VVDSes can now be specified in the IGGCATxx member of PARMLIB, which is relatively new (z/OS v1.13): VVDSSPACE(primary,secondary) Specifies the number of tracks for primary and secondary allocations that the Catalog Address Space (CAS) should use for an im

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation Skip, Yup, VVDSes existed way back then. I remember initializing new 3380Ds and Es, and trying to get the VTOC, VTOCIX, and VVDS all sitting nicely right next to each other. Some at the beginning of the v

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

On Sat, 8 Feb 2014 10:32:59 -0800, Skip Robinson wrote: >As for location, in a distant galaxy long ago, SLED DASD liked VTOC and >VVDS (did that exist then?) located in the middle of the volume to >minimize head movement. (Nod if you agree.) Yes, of course the VVDS existed. Been there since

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

reside on the volume. Rex -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Skip Robinson Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2014 12:33 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation Aside from the how of creating your own

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

In <20140208214814.5939345.50125@yahoo.ca>, on 02/08/2014 at 04:48 PM, Ted MacNEIL said: >As for location, in a distant galaxy long ago, SLED DASD liked VTOC >and  VVDS (did that exist then?) Yeah, verily! ICF came in with DF/EF, about which the less said the better. -- Shmuel (Se

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

One thing they forgot to mention is that when the VVDS shrinks it doesn't release the space that it formally used on the volume. I think its a start but depending on use the 10,10 trk allocation is just plain shortsighted on some volumes. IOW know your data. Ed On Feb 9, 2014, at 9:38 AM, Ri

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

On 2/7/2014 11:58 AM, retired mainframer wrote: Since the VVDS is a catalog extension supporting both VSAM and SMS, wouldn't the size of the VVDS depend on mix of VSAM and non-VSAM datasets and possibly even the type of VSAM datasets on the volume? There is a formula to calculate the size of a

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Bell network.   Original Message   From: Skip Robinson Sent: Saturday, February 8, 2014 14:12 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation Aside from the how of creating your own VVDS, I'm conc

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

595 Mobile jo.skip.robin...@sce.com From: "Cosby, Bob - OCFO" To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU, Date: 02/07/2014 11:04 AM Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List Just ran into a situation where the VVDS was filling up; 10,10 was not

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

STGR -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of John McKown Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2014 12:01 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re:group Implicit VVDS creation Yes. step1 is ICKDSF. Step2 creates VVDS. On Thu, Feb 6,

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

to:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On :>: Behalf Of Staller, Allan :>: Sent: Friday, February 07, 2014 5:53 AM :>: To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU :>: Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation :>: :>: As I commented recently in another thread, in the ICKDSF manual there is :>: a tab

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

ruary 07, 2014 5:53 AM > :>: To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > :>: Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation > :>: > :>: As I commented recently in another thread, in the ICKDSF manual there is > :>: a table of MAXVTOC/MAXVTOCIX sizes in : > :>: "Calculating

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

to:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On :>: Behalf Of Staller, Allan :>: Sent: Friday, February 07, 2014 5:53 AM :>: To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU :>: Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation :>: :>: As I commented recently in another thread, in the ICKDSF manual there is :>: a table of MAXVTOC/MAXVT

Re: RES: Implicit VVDS creation

And since a raid array usually hosts many volumes, utilization of the other volumes will impact a particular volume. And many site have multiple LPARs accessing some to all of the volumes on the array. On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 9:27 AM, Joel C. Ewing wrote: > On 02/06/2014 05:42 PM, Shmuel Metz (Se

Re: RES: Implicit VVDS creation

On 02/06/2014 05:42 PM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: > In , on > 02/06/2014 >at 01:17 PM, "David G. Schlecht" said: > >> Or am I way off base? > > At least partially. On a simulated 3390 a cylinder boundary may not > tell you much about seek time, but it can still have an effect on > whet

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

As I commented recently in another thread, in the ICKDSF manual there is a table of MAXVTOC/MAXVTOCIX sizes in : "Calculating the size of the VTOC index" in appendix C of ICKDSF Users Guide GC35-0033-39. Unfortunately, there is no reference to the size of the VVDS required to support a MAXVTOC/

Re: RES: Implicit VVDS creation

In , on 02/06/2014 at 01:17 PM, "David G. Schlecht" said: >Or am I way off base? At least partially. On a simulated 3390 a cylinder boundary may not tell you much about seek time, but it can still have an effect on whether a channel program breaks and has to be restarted. OTOH, with code that

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

only get about 50 of them on each VTOC track. Bill Fairchild - Original Message - From: "Ed Gould" To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Sent: Thursday, February 6, 2014 1:44:08 PM Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation Doug: Any TSO pack is a mandatory larger VTOC and a larger

Re: RES: Implicit VVDS creation

ark Zelden Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2014 10:45 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: RES: Implicit VVDS creation One of the reasons to do it implicitly is placement, not that it really matters, but if you want it next to the VTOC you may want to do it implicitly. On Thu, 6 Feb 2014 18:0

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu Sent: 2/6/2014 1:47:17 PM Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation Doug: Somewhere along the line I though SMS datasets requires an entry for each one. Ed On Feb 6, 2014, at 12:25 PM, Doug Fuerst wrote: You have that many VSAM datsets on a volume? 10 tracks holds a fair

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

Gould" To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu Sent: 2/6/2014 1:47:17 PM Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation Doug: Somewhere along the line I though SMS datasets requires an entry for each one. Ed On Feb 6, 2014, at 12:25 PM, Doug Fuerst wrote: You have that many VSAM datsets on a volume? 10 tracks

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

d...@bkassociates.net -- Original Message -- From: "David G. Schlecht" To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu Sent: 2/6/2014 12:55:12 PM Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation Hold the presses! The documents for v1r13 say the VVDSSIZE defaults to TRKS(10 10). Holy cow, that's a whol

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

| E:dschle...@admin.nv.gov -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of John McKown Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2014 10:01 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation Yes. step1 is ICKDSF. Step2 creates VVDS

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

True, but still have to have a slew of them... Doug Doug Fuerst BK Associates 718.921.2620 917.572.7364 d...@bkassociates.net -- Original Message -- From: "Ted MacNEIL" To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu Sent: 2/6/2014 1:28:26 PM Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation It'

Re: RES: Implicit VVDS creation

One of the reasons to do it implicitly is placement, not that it really matters, but if you want it next to the VTOC you may want to do it implicitly. On Thu, 6 Feb 2014 18:01:51 +, ITURIEL DO NASCIMENTO NETO <4254.itur...@bradesco.com.br> wrote: >Since z/OS 1.13 there is a new IGGCATxx m

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

t; To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation > > Yes. step1 is ICKDSF. Step2 creates VVDS. > > > On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 11:22 AM, David G. Schlecht > wrote: > > > Does anyone still build VVDS datasets explicitly when initializing volumes? > > >

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

List Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation You have that many VSAM datsets on a volume? 10 tracks holds a fair amount of data for a VVDS. Doug Doug Fuerst BK Associates 718.921.2620 917.572.7364 d...@bkassociates.net -- Original Message -- From: "David G. Schlecht"

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

2:55:12 PM Subject: Re: Implicit VVDS creation Hold the presses! The documents for v1r13 say the VVDSSIZE defaults to TRKS(10 10). Holy cow, that's a whole lot less than 10 cylinders. One would think that at 10 tracks, the VVDS would run out of space (and extents) quite frequently but I don

RES: Implicit VVDS creation

: quinta-feira, 6 de fevereiro de 2014 15:55 Para: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Assunto: Re: Implicit VVDS creation Hold the presses! The documents for v1r13 say the VVDSSIZE defaults to TRKS(10 10). Holy cow, that's a whole lot less than 10 cylinders. One would think that at 10 tracks, the VVDS woul

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

On Thu, 6 Feb 2014 09:22:14 -0800, David G. Schlecht wrote: >Does anyone still build VVDS datasets explicitly when initializing volumes? > We had a problem once, a large, multivolume dataset landed an extent on a brand new Mod9 volume. Dataset allocation took the entire volume, and when SMS w

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

Yes. step1 is ICKDSF. Step2 creates VVDS. On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 11:22 AM, David G. Schlecht wrote: > Does anyone still build VVDS datasets explicitly when initializing volumes? > > I understand that the default allocation for a new VVDS is CYLS(10 10) > which saves me from having to rebuild the

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

On Behalf Of David G. Schlecht Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2014 9:22 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Implicit VVDS creation Does anyone still build VVDS datasets explicitly when initializing volumes? I understand that the default allocation for a new VVDS is CYLS(10 10) which sav

Re: Implicit VVDS creation

We do not ever manually build a VVDS data set. There might be a valid argument for building them, but we are cheerfully ignorant of it. Regards, Greg Shirey Ben E. Keith Company -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of

Implicit VVDS creation

Does anyone still build VVDS datasets explicitly when initializing volumes? I understand that the default allocation for a new VVDS is CYLS(10 10) which saves me from having to rebuild the VVDS if it fills up. What is everyone else doing with VVDS datasets? Is there still a valid argument for b