results if
you do try it.
Note that my reluctance applies specifically to single-CP machines. If I had
even two CPs, then I'd be much more willing to give it a shot, depending on
current utilization levels and so forth. With dyndisp=thin of course.
Scott Chapman
On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 0
CICS will be most performant.
Scott Chapman
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
ts and
gives my recommendation for when you might want to try it. Go to
https://www.pivotor.com and click on the "Free!" button then find and click
through to our presentations. You probably can find it on a number of the
conference web sites as I've presented it at the major confe
ay's world. Especially if they're
performance advice.
Scott Chapman
On Wed, 3 Jun 2020 07:00:19 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:
>I must have time on my hands. I just dragged out the OS/390 V2R8 CDs from
>1999, and the sentence is there verbatim.
>
>It's the onl
version of
Edge is based on the open source version of Chrome under the covers. Some have
suggested it would be better to have more diversity in the underlying browser
technology, but Chromium generally is pretty good.
Scott Chapman
On Mon, 15 Jun 2020 10:46:13 -0400, Gord Tomlin
wrote:
>
free
webinars as well.
Scott Chapman
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
real zIIP capacity is the best answer. In cases
where that's impractical, MT=2 might be useful.
Scott Chapman
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
10% busy in the
customers I sampled though, which matches my historical understanding that most
customers don't have an issue with SAP capacity.
Scott Chapman
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
True, relative to the zIIP workload. But if that zIIP workload is relatively
low importance and crossing over to the GCPs and raising your R4HA, it may make
sense to restrict the low importance work instead of increasing the R4HA,
depending on what your business requirements are. And keeping the
>How about submitting a requirement to IBM that would add a control to WLM
>This control would re-classify a ZIIP eligible workload to a different
>service class if it spills over to a GCP because you are running your ZIIPS
>hot (or hit the "generosity factor" for DB2 work). This service class co
On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 13:34:09 -0500, Horst Sinram wrote:
>The OP's question was about DB2 workloads. Resource group capping for DB2
>workloads would be pretty risky unless you could really guarantee that you do
>not share resources with your production work.
>
Although I haven't counted them a
ttle utility that will read/write from
DDs instead of file system files. I did so at my past job, but alas the source
for that was left with the previous employer.
Scott Chapman
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
that. Seems like it should be a
fine enough idea. But I'd check things closely the first few times at least.
And I'd trust it more if it seemed to be valid XML. But at least from what I've
seen by the time it gets downloaded, it's not quite so.
Scott Chapman
Class Memory were more likely to have paging space >=
real storage. But even there, we've seen >1TB LPARs with with only a few
hundred GB of paging space, including SCM.
Of course it is also fairly common for those large memory systems to be running
with large amounts of that memory
ar
metric changed gets more interesting.
If your performance reporting tool makes that onerous, remember that we
(Enterprise Performance Strategies) do offer free cursory performance reviews
and our performance reporting service does have a free tier as well. Contact me
off-list if you'
Having looked at data from a whole lot of customer systems, I can say that
SMFID and SYSNAME are often (but not always) the same. LPARNAME is very often
different, although I appreciate it when there's at least some sort of visual
link between it and SMFID/SYSNAME. E.G. SYSA and C1SYSA vs SYSA a
vely idle production LPAR) meaning that the net savings will be
also relatively minor in the overall scheme of things.
Scott Chapman
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.e
Note you also must IPL PROCVIEW CORE (optionally append ,CPU_OK) in LOADxx
before you can switch back and forth by the setting in IEAOPTxx.
Scott Chapman
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send
is "we'll buy more when we start to see problems...
or when we do the next upgrade". Which, to be fair, most customers are in that
situation: they don't do any real detailed planning for zIIP capacity.
Scott Chapman
-
disable it. So it may be that the other platforms also
sometimes have valid reasons to disable it.
Scott Chapman
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 13:35:11 +, kekronbekron
wrote:
>Hi Scott,
>
>Could you expand on this please.
>
>> But z/OS "densely packs" the cores, mean
It's more complicated than that. Although I would agree that if an LPAR has
only a single zIIP, likely SMT would be a good idea. But B is not true for
intervals that people usually consider when looking at utilization levels
because at the level of dispatch intervals, it's much more likely there
and 6xx. Their situation
was particularly problematic, but they're not the only ones that could benefit
from more than 6 CPs that could be finely adjusted in terms of capacity.
Scott Chapman
On Wed, 6 Sep 2023 09:52:47 +, Martin Packer
wrote:
>I really hope you�re not advising custo
all CF LPAR running on a GP. But it requires some effort to configure and
manage.
Scott Chapman
On Mon, 20 Nov 2023 06:32:08 +, Timothy Sipples wrote:
>The z/OS AI Framework requires EzNoSQL, EzNoSQL requires VSAM Record-Level
>Sharing (RLS), and VSAM RLS requires a Coupling Facility (
x27;t know how interested people
are in general in EzNoSQL.
Scott Chapman
On Mon, 20 Nov 2023 17:28:17 -0600, Peter Bishop wrote:
>Also, given it's just SMF data being used here, surely there's a way for z/OS
>to process that without VSAM RLS and EzNoSQL (?). Perhaps they
years ago and just
left it set to that" makes much less sense to me.
Scott Chapman
On Fri, 29 Dec 2023 17:35:56 -0800, Ed Jaffe
wrote:
>On 12/29/2023 3:20 PM, Mark Zelden wrote:
>> This paper from Scott Chapman of EPS talks about the subject and he agrees
>> with
>>
Reality may differ more
significantly from expectation if you're just using one of the single-number
metrics without regard to the RNI of the work and the LPAR configuration
(factors that zPCR takes into account).
Scott Chapman
On Fri, 13 Dec 2019 20:55:54 -0500, Phil Smith III wr
to the processor core. That's also why you'll see potentially significant
variations between runs of the same exact job. That's why I always want to see
multiple re-runs so I can understand the "normal" variation. (But one still
needs to take into account the curr
e environments.
But I would be surprised to find a case where COBOL isn't the most memory
efficient.
Scott Chapman
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
"I want to play with z/OS for a few hours, stand up a z/OS image with x CPU
and y GB of disk and put it on my credit card".
*-Remember: in the cloud, you pay for what you forgot to turn off. And those
pennies can add up shockingly fast in some ca
va 8 being supported until "at least May 2026" and Java 11 until "at least
October 2024". So given that 17 is potentially coming available in September,
and given that I think the migration from 11 to 17 will likely be easier than 8
d as it is on other
platforms, it might underperform.
Scott Chapman
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
t as cheap
as DASD, but in the grand scheme of things it's not *that* expensive. And it
also can make dumps much more tolerable. I might go so far as to say that any
machine over some threshold of real should really (!) have SCM.
Scott Chapman
--
storage groups are added to the eligible list and evaluated the same
regardless of which SG they're in. But I could be wrong about that.
Scott Chapman
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
location method 20+ years ago I probably
knew the answer to your questions at one time, but the only one I remember for
sure is that it works fine with SMS.
Scott Chapman
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Which also have way more mind share among the smaller/startup
organizations.
Scott Chapman
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
fecting things that were off-peak. For customers trying to
move workload off from the mainframe, it can sometimes be hard to reduce
mainframe costs until they've moved off really significant amounts of workload.
(Notice I didn't use the word "s
Which may be part of the reason for releasing the smaller version* of a
particular generation some months after the larger version.
* - The models formerly known as "Business Class" that are now seeking a handy
name.
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 17:07:14 -0500, Mike Schwab wrote:
>The big problem w
ns forever. LOCSITE EPSV4 can be important for getting
through some firewalls properly.)
Scott Chapman
On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 12:27:56 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>>From Barry Merrill :
>>...
>>But if the destination is for ASCII and SAS, you can use IEBGENER to create a
>
Ah, I missed that or forgot by the time I got to posting. I haven't tried it
myself, but have heard it is problematic to get the data back into a z/OS
dataset in a usable fashion.
On Sat, 17 Dec 2022 09:47:39 +1100, Andrew Rowley
wrote:
>The OP specified being able to reverse the process, so
ta
>that might be in the SMF type 7x records.
While I agree that the 7x records generally have nothing that should be
considered "sensitive", some organizations consider system names sensitive.
Seems overkill to
LM section. The "Introdution to the WLM" presentation might be a good place to
start. "WLM’s Algorithms – How WLM Works" might be another good early one to
look at. It sounds like "Revisiting Goals over Time" might also be of interest.
:)
Scott Chapman
On Wed,
ve a measurable increase in CPU would be
those that are completely idle and doing nothing but writing interval SMF
records to say they haven't processed any data.
Scott Chapman
On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 16:36:34 +1000, Andrew Rowley
wrote:
>On 17/04/2024 12:09 pm, Michael Oujesky wrote:
>> Y
compressed data.
IIRC, I was only looking at at CPU because I/O time can be significantly
variable depending on where we reading the data from. And doing less I/O is
obviously always better, and can significantly impact runtime in some cases. So
I/O time wasn't really a question in my mind.
In short, giant LPARs can definitely be problematic. Similarly, too small LPARs
can be problematic. Somewhere in the middle is ideal, but where that is will
depend.
First off, the most significant impact is you don't want LPARs whose processor
count is so high that it crosses drawers. (In most
n that might be counter-productive
because some customers change the LPAR name when they move between CECs either
for DR or site swap or even just because they upgraded to a new machine.
If it's possible to do something, somebody probably will.
Scott Chapman
On Wed, 5 Jun 2024 07:25:29 -0400,
found the below bit. It
seems you might want to try running under BPXBATSL to see if that impacts
what's reported. If you have shell scripts calling other "unix" commands that
the combination of BPXBATSL and the _BPX* settings here might (possibly) get
you to the all in one a
Further clarification from my memory banks:
That priced feature is required for the common use cases by the operating
system, such as HSM. Those use cases use a method of calling the compression
that works via the SAPs to manage calling the hardware instructions.
But the underlying hardware in
As others have said, there are multiple ways to go look at what was using the
CPU during a particular interval, depending on what tools you have access to
and what the system configuration is. To recap:
SMF 30 interval (subtype 2 & 3) records will show CPU utilization by interval
by address spa
it needs to read from the zFS needs
to be in ASCII, but that's usually not too big of a deal--ISPF can edit ASCII
ok, you just need to tell it that it's ASCII. (Although at the moment I can't
remember exactly where/how that's done.)
Scott Chapman
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 01:46
The RMF Distributed Data Portal emits XML. So you can write your own app to
issue requests to it and interpret the results--perhaps building friendlier
html pages from a subset of values that are of interest to the target audience.
You could either do that all in the browser (relatively easy) or
ch was unexpected. It was in the single
digit percentage range, but it was consistent across multiple different
workloads. I never did get that difference understood to my satisfaction.
Scott Chapman
--
For IBM-MAIN subs
On Sat, 6 Feb 2016 16:02:52 -0600, Kirk Wolf wrote:
>I doubt that there is a significant difference in CPU resources between
>running the JVM in JZOS vs BPXBATC**.
I was surprised too.
>Perhaps the differences that you are seeing have to do with not measuring
>all of the address spaces?
That's
On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 08:56:17 +, Martin Packer
wrote:
>And if you think that's bad try making your favourite slide or email
>editor keep the "z" lower case. Permanent nightmare. :-)
Amen. But the Ctrl-z every time after you type it reinforces what platform
you're writing about. :)
Scott
-
On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 18:16:53 +1100, Andrew Rowley
wrote:
>Memory leaks are not a usual case, but I would suggest you will still
>want to garbage collect.
>
>I'm not arguing against large memory - I am all in favour of as much as
>you can afford. It's just the suggestion that avoiding Java GC is
I believe that while chargeback is an important issue that SMT messes up,
that's already somewhat messed up today because there's more variance from
execution to execution. I.E. run the same exact job twice and even absent SMT
you'll get different CPU measurements. That's always been the case, b
>Scott Chapman wrote:
>>Software billing is based on available/consumed capacity.
>
>IBM's is/are not. It's based on *peak* four hour rolling average
>utilization per month -- or, effectively, per subscription year for
>products that are not Monthly License Charge pr
current slice is a
cap slice, the work unit is moved to the back of the queue (subject to priority
order).
Scott Chapman
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu
how the work
overall is performing and monitor for the work degrading over time.
Monitoring the delay samples over time is one of the things I highly recommend,
especially in the situations where you're always running at 100% busy or always
running at cap or something like that.
Scott Ch
Alas no, but there's a number of products out there that will read said
records, including our own. ;) Pivotor does have a free tier, but it's not open
source.
Scott Chapman
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff
make sure that SC has a resource group
that limits how much CPU the work can consume.
Scott Chapman
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Absolute CP capping caps the LPAR at the specified number of CP's worth of
capacity. It avoids the issues with initial capping (by weight) in which LPAR
A's available capacity can change when LPAR B or C is activated or deactivated
if LPAR A's weight isn't readjusted too.
-
cost to that, but in the grand scheme of things, the costs are not nearly as
significant as GCP capacity, so err on the side of having too much zIIP
capacity. That would be an interesting study: what's common ratio of zIIP
capacity to GCP capacity? I suspect that that ratio has been creeping
l for reporting on those.
Scott Chapman
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
I/O priority management enabled
may be leading to WLM not being able to effectively manage certain service
classes.
Note again: this is something I'm still researching and I hope/expect to
present on the topic at the next SHARE.
Scott Chapman
Enterprise Performance Strategies
On Fri
SMF30PFI includes flags indicating that the service class was changed either
during or before execution.
Scott Chapman
Enterprise Performance Strategies
On Thu, 8 Nov 2018 17:59:19 +, Sankaranarayanan, Vignesh
wrote:
>Hello list,
>
>Apart from 99.2, can I find info on serv
Yup.. should be SMF30PF1 that "1" and "I" look pretty close at the font size I
had up.
Scott
On Fri, 9 Nov 2018 07:16:03 -0600, Elardus Engelbrecht
wrote:
>Sorry, but is it not SMF30PF1 (number one instead of letter i)?
--
On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 22:27:52 +0100, David W Noon
wrote:
>> the keys. Yes, I know, if this sort of thing is a requirement, we need Db2
>> (or is it DB2), but that is _never_ going to happen around here.
>
>It is DB2. But that isn't really necessary.
Except they really did change the branding to
1 garbage collector (which I believe will be the new default) will also
get string deduplication:
http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/192
Since those are internal JVM things, if those make will it into the IBM JVM I
of course don't know.
eplacement option.
Scott Chapman
https://www.pivotor.com
On Thu, 23 Nov 2017 09:04:40 +, Martin Packer
wrote:
>When you say "planning to" I hope you really mean "beginning to consider".
>There are just so many ways this could turn out to be a bad idea.
>
>But th
basis and I'm not
sure what that implications of that might be.
Obviously I might be slightly (although I hope not much) biased at this point,
but I think the points are worth consideration.
Scott Chapman
www.pivotor.com
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 21:16:00 +1100, Andrew Rowley
wrote:
>
and start back up and ran into more "interesting" AWS issues/limitations. It's
been an "interesting" week.
Hopefully this all will be less painful on z/OS.
Scott Chapman
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 15:26:04 -0600, Tom Marchant
wrote:
>On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 21:44:29 +0100,
Since Alexa is mentioned...
http://www.theverge.com/2016/11/4/13525172/amazon-alexa-big-mouth-billy-bass-hack-api
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the
On Tue, 6 Dec 2016 13:54:27 -0500, Steve wrote:
>If you look at the sheer cost if setting up a zOS ecosystem, its not cheap.
Yeah, that's the key point not mentioned in the article: building your system
on AWS starts at $0. However... AWS costs can add up too. Most of their rates
are in penn
I don't see anything there that says one can do real production business work
using z/OS, starting at $0. Or $500. Or really any amount.
Would be happy to be shown otherwise.
On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 13:37:37 +0800, Timothy Sipples wrote:
>Charles Mills asks:
>>Is there any good reason IBM could no
> I would point out that the cost to provide z/OS services, or any computing
> services for that matter, is greater than zero, especially but not only for
> "real production business work." If you'd like to suggest that any company
> price its set of products and associated services below cost,
he change is made. "
See PDF page 93, indicated page 75 in:
http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redbooks/pdfs/sg247281.pdf
Scott Chapman
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@li
I think that's a better overview of the issue Martin, because you bring out the
important fact that z/OS doesn't forget about how to prioritize work just
because it's on a specialty engine. It's probably would also be a similarly
good rule of thumb that you shouldn't let your GPs get over 50% bu
I believe that you can have a mixed CTN where one CEC doesn't have STP, but in
that case the external time source must be the 9037 and I'm pretty sure that at
least one of the CECs must be both STP and 9037 capable. I don't know what the
implications are from converting from a pure STP environme
>That was what we originally though too, but our local IBM support person
>told us we couldn't. Thinking further about configuration activities to
>migrate to mixed CTN mode, I'm not seeing how on the non STP capable
>processor we're going to be able to set the name of the mixed CTN, since
>it isn'
Ahh... I had forgotten about that. That is the kicker here.
>I do not believe that anything z196 and up can do ETR at all. I'm pretty
>sure I read that in the z196 Tech Guide redbook somewhere. (Page 14 - STP
>section)
>
>Thomas Ambros
>Operating Systems and Connectivity Engineering
>518-436-643
Since RMF has it, I would presume that it's in a control block somewhere, but
where I can't say. Maybe it's only internal to RMF.
If you have the RMF Distributed Dataserver up, you can access:
http://{rmfsys}:{port}/gpm/reports/CPC?resource=,{lpar},MVS_IMAGE
Where {rmfsys} is the system where GP
Every time I've reduced the machine's CPUs (either CBU or OOCoD), I've always
varied CPUs offline from z/OS such that no running system has more CPUs online
than what I'm reducing to. I'm not sure that it's an absolute requirement, but
it seems like an easy precaution to take.
Never have had a
values for DASD devices
while migrating from one DASD box to another. Always made me a little nervous
about the actual migration: minute-long I/Os seem like they could result in a
less than fully "non-disruptive" migration.
Scott Chapman
On Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:32:24 -0500, Brian Fra
re. point of operlog: one of my favorite features is: "prev 23 m" to move
backwards 23 minutes in the log. You can move by (d)ays, (h)ours, (m)inutes, or
(s)econds. You can also do "next 3 s" to move forward in the log.
Certainly a small thing, probably not worth the trouble to set up operlog j
pacting those lower importance workloads worthwhile.
Scott Chapman
On Wed, 7 May 2014 18:37:03 -0500, Shane Ginnane wrote:
>On Wed, 7 May 2014 10:47:49 -0400, John Eells wrote:
>
>>I'm not sure we have a white paper.
>
>I would think a search of Techdocs for "Kat
u upload to the
mainframe where it's executed. But the tool itself is all run on z/OS.
Certainly, I download the produced CSV to my workstation, but there's no
software delivered with SCRT that uses that output in Windows. At least that I
know about.
What have I missed?
Scott Chapman
Those numbers sound about right to me. Prices probably better in some deals,
etc., etc.
But don't forget that server memory typically is at least ECC memory whereas
typical PC memory is not. And z memory is now RAIM--with significant redundancy
and continual scrubbing. It's a different physical
On Fri, 30 May 2014 13:47:26 +0200, R.S. wrote:
> Well, defence without attack.
Sorry--not meaning to defend nor offend. Just wanted to point out that which
many of us already understand, but which the uninitiated, stumbling upon this
conversation, may not.
Interesting about the availability o
to put up with the quirks.
A couple of years ago I would have assumed that portability of applications
between databases would be relatively easy, but it turns out that it's really
not easy at all.
Scott Chapman
On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 07:51:14 -0500, John McKown
wrote:
>Can _you_ say &q
In short, in my experience, Java performance on the mainframe is acceptable to
very good today.
If you're trying to make the case that "my mainframe processor is faster than
your processor in your laptop", that's somewhat difficult to prove because the
processors and systems are designed for d
1) zAAPs were only doing Java work. The z10 machines at the time had no option
for zAAP on zIIP, so we're talking about real zAAPs here, which only are
eligible for Java work.
2) Yes, when I said "zAAP-eligible" I meant just JVM work, not including stuff
that isn't eligible. For example, if yo
We've been mirroring our DASD with Global Mirror for several years (and SRDF
before that). Our policy currently is to mirror everything. No problems at all.
And it makes it a lot easier when you get to DR--there's no issue of "oh well
that dataset we need for production really happens to be on a
1) Look at SMF70BPS
2) Are you looking at parked processors? (See SMF70PAT)
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
The correct answer is that it (of course) depends. However, I went and looked
and my smaller systems are SQA=(10,848) and my larger systems are
SQA=(10,1030). My comments in IEASYSxx indicates that I increased them in the
OS/390 2.8 timeframe when we were adding more WASes. They are perhaps a li
that seem to run long" to "I need to
add capacity".
That's how I would go about things.
Scott Chapman
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
It appears you have a single CP. If the CPU is busy on one of the other systems
when PROD wants to be dispatched, it will have to wait for the other system to
give up the processor or for PR/SM to steal it away. My guess is that's why
you're seeing what you're seeing that, and my inclination is
As Martin mentioned, "unaccounted" could be multiple things. However, from the
reports you've shown, my first guess would also be that it's likely related to
CPU contention.
However, I would start by looking at RMF III's DELAY, PROC, and ENCLAVE (if
we're talking about DDF threads) and looking
IANAL, but I can understand IBM's reluctance to ship any GPL code with the
operating system. At least I'm assuming their reluctance--if anybody knows of
GPL code that ships directly with z/OS, that would be a good precedent for
including Bash.
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLInPropr
y are improving things in that area.
But when you hear from your users that processes that used to take them 6-8
hours are now completing in <10 minutes, it's a pretty compelling argument for
spending the time to work the kinks out.
Scott Chapman
FWIW: we use STP, and use a couple of HMCs as the NTP source for STP, with the
HMC servers themselves getting time from our stratum 1 NTP servers which use a
GPS receiver for the time. That makes the HMC stratum 2. And if z/OS was then
serving the time via NTP, I believe z/OS would be considered
1 - 100 of 169 matches
Mail list logo
