On Sat, 8 Apr 2017 00:56:15 +, Jesse 1 Robinson
wrote:
>I love getting affirmation after all these years, but I'm still a bit queasy.
>All I did was
> change from GRS ring to star. No RNL changes. Is the 'QNAME=SYSZVVDS
> RNAME=volser'
> conversion still explained?
>
> Note that, despite
t; To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: RLS for catalogs
>
> Hi everyone, thanks for replys.
>
> We use MIM historically. I know we can convert to GRS STAR, which is
> quite a big change and needs to be done carefully. It would probably
> need an all systems IPL. In terms
Hi everyone, thanks for replys.
We use MIM historically. I know we can convert to GRS STAR, which is quite a
big change and needs to be done carefully. It would probably need an all
systems IPL. In terms of cost, we have several CA products bundled, and
dropping one generally does not save mone
543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW
robin...@sce.com
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Mark Zelden
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 2:04 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: RLS for catalogs
On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 11:35
On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 11:35:47 -0500, Mark Zelden wrote:
>On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 15:56:29 +, Jesse 1 Robinson
>wrote:
>
>>This goes back several years when CF and memory resources were more expensive
>>and less flexible than today. Think standalone CF where a memory >upgrade was
>>a huge PITA. W
On Fri, 7 Apr 2017 06:16:30 +, Vernooij, Kees (ITOPT1) - KLM
wrote:
>The reason for the difference in runtimes must be simple: the system that
> has the GRS Lock structure in its local CPC has much faster access to it.
>We see the same with the CA-DISK IXMAINT function that als does massive
m: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Jesse 1 Robinson
> Sent: 06 April, 2017 17:56
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: RLS for catalogs
>
> This goes back several years when CF and memory resources were more
> expensive and less
Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW
robin...@sce.com
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Mark Zelden
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2017 9:36 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):R
On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 15:56:29 +, Jesse 1 Robinson
wrote:
>This goes back several years when CF and memory resources were more expensive
>and less flexible than today. Think standalone CF where a memory >upgrade was
>a huge PITA. We had one single-system parallel sysplex that I had refrained
NEW
robin...@sce.com
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Mark Zelden
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2017 7:52 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: RLS for catalogs
On Wed, 5 Apr 2017 18:23:29 +, Jesse
On Wed, 5 Apr 2017 18:23:29 +, Jesse 1 Robinson
wrote:
>I’m curious about using CA MIM Resource Sharing within a sysplex. Historically
>I used
> it in the days before sysplex, before PDS/E, before other newfangled
> contraptions
> that depend on XCF for serialization. We still use MIA for
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of R.S.
> Sent: 06 April, 2017 10:04
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: RLS for catalogs
>
> W dniu 2017-04-05 o 20:23, Jesse 1 Robinson pisze:
>
W dniu 2017-04-05 o 20:23, Jesse 1 Robinson pisze:
I’m curious about using CA MIM Resource Sharing within a sysplex. Historically
I used it in the days before sysplex, before PDS/E, before other newfangled
contraptions that depend on XCF for serialization. We still use MIA for tape
allocation
On Wed, 5 Apr 2017 14:16:26 -0700, Lizette Koehler
wrote:
>Have you reviewed the RNL requirements for GRS and CATALOG
>
>https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSLTBW_2.1.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r1.ieag400/catgrs.htm
>
>Catalogs are VSAM data sets, but VSAM recognizes, catalogs, and manages acce
RESERVE conversion RNL.
Lizette
-Original Message-
>From: Allan Staller
>Sent: Apr 5, 2017 10:33 AM
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>Subject: Re: RLS for catalogs
>
>GRS ring or GRS star?
>
>-Original Message-
>From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:I
On Wed, 5 Apr 2017 11:43:30 -0500, Joe Owens wrote:
>We are experiencing general issues with catalog contention, seeing a lot of
>SYSIGGV2 enqueue waits. We have shared DASD between multiple LPARS in a sysplex
>
>I was wondering if anyone had experience of using RLS for
Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Allan Staller
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2017 10:33 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: RLS for catalogs
GRS ring or GRS star?
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN
Standing by for CA flames!
IMO they only benefit of MIM/MIA is the ability to cross sysplex boundaries
GRS is the logical equivalent of CA/MIM but cannot cross sysplex boundaries.
Autoswitch/ATS STAR is the logical equivalent of CA/MIA but cannot cross
sysplex boundaries.
So, if you don't cros
-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Joe Owens
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2017 9:44 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):RLS for catalogs
We are experiencing general issues with catalog contention, seeing a lot of
SYSIGGV2 enqueue waits. We have shared DASD between multiple LPARS in a
1:43:30 AM
Subject: RLS for catalogs
We are experiencing general issues with catalog contention, seeing a lot of
SYSIGGV2 enqueue waits. We have shared DASD between multiple LPARS in a sysplex
I was wondering if anyone had experience of using RLS for catalogs, as
introduced with with Z/OS
GRS ring or GRS star?
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Joe Owens
Sent: Wednesday, April 5, 2017 11:44 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: RLS for catalogs
We are experiencing general issues with catalog contention
2017 9:44 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: RLS for catalogs
>
> We are experiencing general issues with catalog contention, seeing a lot of
> SYSIGGV2 enqueue waits. We have shared DASD between multiple LPARS in a
> sysplex
>
> I was wondering if anyone had expe
We are experiencing general issues with catalog contention, seeing a lot of
SYSIGGV2 enqueue waits. We have shared DASD between multiple LPARS in a sysplex
I was wondering if anyone had experience of using RLS for catalogs, as
introduced with with Z/OS 2.1?
In particular, anyone using this
23 matches
Mail list logo