On Sat, 31 Dec 2016 20:10:05 -0700, Jack J. Woehr wrote:
>
>We have empirical proof of that at one of my clients . Took down a monitoring
>system this evening.
>
>Was peacefully spawning services and suddenly the last-started time was in the
>future and it spawned 100 in a second and
>choked.
>
On Sat, 31 Dec 2016 20:10:05 -0700, Jack J. Woehr wrote:
>Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>> I had believed it happened at 23:59:60 UTC regardless of what time zone
>> you're
>> in. So, in America/Denver, 16:59:60.
>
>We have empirical proof of that at one of my clients . Took down a monitoring
>system
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
I had believed it happened at 23:59:60 UTC regardless of what time zone you're
in. So, in America/Denver, 16:59:60.
We have empirical proof of that at one of my clients . Took down a monitoring
system this evening.
Was peacefully spawning services and suddenly the last-
On Sat, 31 Dec 2016 18:31:08 -0600, Walt Farrell wrote:
>>>
>>>It should happen at 00:00:00 in each time-zone. In one timezone that will be
>>>1 second later than in all the others, but still at 00:00:00 :)
>
>The most recent question, I think, and the one I answered, was "when will
>Google rele
On Sat, 31 Dec 2016 16:39:17 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>On Sat, 31 Dec 2016 16:32:04 -0600, Walt Farrell wrote:
>>>ITYM 23:59:60.
>>
>>It should happen at 00:00:00 in each time-zone. In one timezone that will be
>>1 second later than in all the others, but still at 00:00:00 :)
>>
>I ha
On Sat, 31 Dec 2016 16:32:04 -0600, Walt Farrell wrote:
>>>
>>ITYM 23:59:60.
>
>It should happen at 00:00:00 in each time-zone. In one timezone that will be 1
>second later than in all the others, but still at 00:00:00 :)
>
I had believed it happened at 23:59:60 UTC regardless of what time zone
On Sat, 31 Dec 2016 16:11:48 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>On Sat, 31 Dec 2016 11:53:41 -0800, Charles Mills wrote:
>
>>11:59:60?
>>
>ITYM 23:59:60.
It should happen at 00:00:00 in each time-zone. In one timezone that will be 1
second later than in all the others, but still at 00:00:00 :)
--
On Sat, 31 Dec 2016 11:53:41 -0800, Charles Mills wrote:
>11:59:60?
>
ITYM 23:59:60.
I actually got a Linux system to display 23:59:60 for a carefully chosen
TZ and time value. Them guys is thorough.
What if your program balks at that value? Well, it's the fault of that
program.
(I should ha
11:59:60?
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2016 10:40 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Here comes an extra second
See today's Google Doodle. When will t
If IPLINFO isn't working.. which would be weird .. my first thought is that
you not authorized for command
Barring that and other "head slapping" " DOH" (Homer Simpson reference)
possibilities... Then it would make me start questioning the system
Integrity.
D IOS,CONFIG?
Rob Schramm
On Wed, Dec
And 00 always gets used.. unless there isn't one.
Rob Schramm
On Thu, Dec 29, 2016, 8:18 AM Peter Relson wrote:
> You can have as many IEASYSxx as you can fit into the LOADxx statement or
> the reply to "specify system parameters".
>
> >the IPLINFO is not showing up
> DISPLAY IPLINFO will show
On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 08:50:36 -0600, Edward Gould wrote:
>https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/12/161228213356.htm
>
>On December 31, 2016, a "leap second" will be added to the world's clocks at
>23 hours, 59 minutes and 59 seconds Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). This
>corresponds to 6:59
On 2016-12-31, at 09:54, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote:
> Sorry for not following this thread properly. I don't know why OP wants a PDS
> dataset. Nothing wrong with that; it just puts the user in charge of getting
> the right attributes.
>
> Suggestion: Use XDC to create a brand new sequential datas
Sorry for not following this thread properly. I don't know why OP wants a PDS
dataset. Nothing wrong with that; it just puts the user in charge of getting
the right attributes.
Suggestion: Use XDC to create a brand new sequential dataset with SDSF's
preferred attributes. Then use ISPF 3.2 to c
14 matches
Mail list logo
