, October 29, 2020 8:58 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Syncsort to DFSORT - my time has come.
>
> >>For compatibility and migration purposes, is there a way for DFSORT to
> accept this specification?
>
> Unfortunately NO. The other product had to i
>>For compatibility and migration purposes, is there a way for DFSORT to
accept this specification?
Unfortunately NO. The other product had to introduce the formats for
compensating the rich functionality of JNF1CNTL and JNF2CNTL in DFSORT.
DFSORT gives you the entire INREC formatting with JNF1
3:05 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Syncsort to DFSORT - my time has come.
>
> Dave,
>
> DFSORT Joinkeys does not require the FORMAT of the key field as a binary
> match is done implicitly.
>
> So change your control cards to the following(Just remove
Dave,
DFSORT Joinkeys does not require the FORMAT of the key field as a binary
match is done implicitly.
So change your control cards to the following(Just removed the CH on the
Fields statement)
JOINKEYS FILE=F1,FIELDS=(1,9,A),TYPE=F
JOINKEYS FILE=F2,FIELDS=(6,9,A),
t; Behalf Of Gibney, Dave
> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 10:17 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Syncsort to DFSORT - my time has come.
>
>A fairly quick question. Are there sample ICEPRMxx members provided by
> IBM for tailoring DFSORT? I don't find any in S
: Syncsort to DFSORT - my time has come.
[CAUTION: This Email is from outside the Organization. Unless you trust the
sender, Don’t click links or open attachments as it may be a Phishing email,
which can steal your Information and compromise your Computer.]
Barry pointed this out to me. And I did
within the year. For me, the path
to ASCII is not likely.
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
> Behalf Of Edward Finnell
> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 12:40 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Syncsort to DFSORT - my time
SAS and MXG have PC versions.
So, I lose MXG and reasonable ability to process SMF anyway.
-Original Message-
From: Gibney, Dave
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Wed, Oct 28, 2020 11:47 am
Subject: Re: Syncsort to DFSORT - my time has come.
If we had longer to exist, I might
t; Behalf Of Martin Packer
> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 1:32 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Syncsort to DFSORT - my time has come.
>
>
> FWIW I would go with SMF=FULL - unless you have an exceptionally large
> number of sorts - or tight SMF space restricti
Not my dog... I'm just a developer.
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Martin Packer
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 2:32 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Syncsort to DFSORT - my time has come.
FWIW I would go with SMF=FULL
TSOINV
> SMF=SHORT
> TD1
> SMF=SHORT
> TD2
> SMF=SHORT
> TD3
> SMF=SHORT
> TD4
> SMF=SHORT
>
>
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf
of R.S.
> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 11:26 AM
> To: IBM-MAI
> And, fwiw, and fyi. The version of SHOWZOS I recently pulled from
> cbt seems not to observe the results of
> START ICEOPT,ICEPRM=00
Dave,
You can list the installation defaults with the following JOB. It will show
you the updated values either from parmlib or icemac.
//STEP0100 EXEC
t; To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Syncsort to DFSORT - my time has come.
>
> After review of our SYNCSORT settings, I have:
> * JCL (ICEAM1)
> JCL
> DYNALOC=(3390,10)
> DYNAUTO=IGNWKDD
> EQUALS=NO
> ERET=ABEND
> SORTLIB=SYSTEM
> Y2PAST=0
> *
> * INV (ICEAM2
EQUALS=NO
ERET=ABEND
SORTLIB=SYSTEM
Y2PAST=0
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
> Behalf Of R.S.
> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 10:26 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Syncsort to DFSORT - my time has
TD2
SMF=SHORT
TD3
SMF=SHORT
TD4
SMF=SHORT
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
R.S.
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 11:26 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Syncsort to DFSORT - my time has come.
W dniu 27.10.2020 o 18:16, Gibney
> I can evaluate and transfer our long time SYNCSORT options. And the
manual does offer advice in this area.
Dave,
I sent you an email offline about DFSORT equivalent installation options
for syncsort. As always please feel free to send me any kind of questions
related to migration.
Thanks,
less than one year before we stop z/OS and DFSORT is included in our MFaaS
contract.
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
> Behalf Of R.S.
> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 10:26 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Syncsort to DF
W dniu 27.10.2020 o 18:16, Gibney, Dave pisze:
A fairly quick question. Are there sample ICEPRMxx members provided by IBM
for tailoring DFSORT? I don't find any in SICESAMP.
Yesterday, in my sandbox, I IPL'd with SICELPA, SORTLPA, SICELINK, SORTLIB
ahead of the SYNCSORT libraries and not
Dave,
That is good new !! We don't have samples for ICEPRMxx, however our
Installation and Customization has good examples.
Check this link
https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSLTBW_2.4.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r4.icei100/ice2ci_ICEPRM01_installation_default_overrides.htm#idg9282__iceprm01
A fairly quick question. Are there sample ICEPRMxx members provided by IBM
for tailoring DFSORT? I don't find any in SICESAMP.
Yesterday, in my sandbox, I IPL'd with SICELPA, SORTLPA, SICELINK, SORTLIB
ahead of the SYNCSORT libraries and not ICEPRMxx. SHOWZOS shows DFSORT as
resident sort
20 matches
Mail list logo
