I am curious: Why is Rocket Software defending missing SDSF actions and bad
documentation??? Has IBM 'outsourced' the SDSFAUX server?
I am annoyed with the ISFTABL thing (which we addressed in our logon
procedure), too, because that message was irritating all of us.
The ISF.CONNECT thing is muc
>Many require additional SAF authorization to run even though they appear on
>the user's menu. I would prefer that they not appear at all if not authorized,
>but that's grist for RFE Land.
Is it? I thought it was part of SDSF customization to let different groups see
different sets of functio
>
> >What would it take for IBM to allocate just a couple of people to make it
> available as a supported product?
>
Having someone left in POK who knows how to code. Not sure there's anyone
left...
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / si
Thank you Charles.
I think you will find this site has much more information.
http://start.oscar-jol.com/
And indeed, it was a language written specifically to replace JCL and
was used by some of the largest companies in the world for decades.
The JCL problem is basically unchanged after de
Many years ago when CMOS machines (9672) first came on the scene, individual
CPs were a lot slower--by 3x--than the bipolar CPs they were replacing. Not a
big issue for transactional processes like CICS, but batch suffered because of
long standing jobs that suddenly were getting S322 abends doin
For those who have not yet come face to face with the latest SDSF (2.3), here's
the current menu of available functions. Many require additional SAF
authorization to run even though they appear on the user's menu. I would prefer
that they not appear at all if not authorized, but that's grist for
Some background, first.
I was asked to help a COBOL application calling DFSORT internally via INPUT /
OUTPUT PRODECURE (E15/E35) interface. The input data size is unknown, but
varying greatly. FILESZ cannot be supplied. So, DFSORT has no way to calculate
the required disk work space.
The appl
Rob Schramm wrote:
>Does that include HPE mainframe consulting? I think that the old HP did
>contracts for Mainframe work.
Yes, EDS/HP Global Services/HPE Services/(now) DXC do mainframe outsourcing
and consulting. Definitely not part of HPE any more!
As an HPE software division with mai
On 7/4/2018 11:00 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
JCL has numerous restrictions and inconsistencies due to antiquity,
IBM i supports Cobol. Come on down :)
--
Jack J. Woehr # Science is more than a body of knowledge. It's a way of
www.well.com/~jax # thinking, a way of skeptically interrogating
I just stumbled across this a z/OS V2.1 - Just in case anyone else is having to
work with z/OS Dynamic Exits
In SDSF there is a new function/PanelDYNX - I found it to be very helpful
Lizette Koehler
statistics: A precise and logical method for stating a half-truth inaccurately
---
On 7/4/2018 12:13 PM, Rob Scott wrote:
For the record, you do not need ISFTABL to be allocated for SDSF to function
and, in fact, I run without ISFTABL on many of the systems that I use.
If ISFTABL is not found, SDSF retrieves and stores system commands in the ISPF
profile dataset and in this
Does that include HPE mainframe consulting? I think that the old HP did
contracts for Mainframe work.
Rob Schramm
On Wed, Jul 4, 2018, 11:54 AM Phil Smith III wrote:
> David W Noon wrote:
>
> > Last I heard, HPE was still running some big iron to support "legacy"
> > applications.
>
>
>
> Pos
When total CPU time used by the address space is the issue, that can be
handled using an IEFUTL exit, setting a default JOB TIME parameter by
job class in JES2, and overriding that with TIME parameters on the JOB
and EXEC statements as appropriate. The IEFUTL exit can be written to
either cancel t
On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 11:21:27 -0500, Joel C. Ewing wrote:
>On 07/04/2018 02:53 AM, Ward Able, Grant wrote:
>> I seldom post here, but have been intrigued by this thread.
>>
>> What are the problems (perceived or real) that will be resolved by replacing
>> JCL with REXX?
>>
JCL has numerous restrict
On 07/04/2018 06:46 AM, Peter Hunkeler wrote:
>> But if you specify the desired time on the job statement (the OP said 30
> min?), IEFUTL would get called and could take the desired action (extend for
> another 30 after generating some console message?).
>
>
>
>
> I stand corrected. I had in min
> or someone would produced an alternative by now
Not touting it -- I know nada about it, nor am I on the front lines of dealing
with production JCL -- but someone has, right? That JOL product that pops up
here from time to time.
https://sites.google.com/site/clarkecomputersoftware/oscar_jol_de
Tom,
I think the "ISF.CONNECT.system" issue should have been a migration action and
I will see if I can get the documentation updated.
Rob Scott
Rocket Software
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Tom Conley
Sent: Wednesd
On 07/04/2018 02:53 AM, Ward Able, Grant wrote:
> I seldom post here, but have been intrigued by this thread.
>
> What are the problems (perceived or real) that will be resolved by replacing
> JCL with REXX?
>
>
>
> Regards – Grant.
>
> In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice
For the record, you do not need ISFTABL to be allocated for SDSF to function
and, in fact, I run without ISFTABL on many of the systems that I use.
If ISFTABL is not found, SDSF retrieves and stores system commands in the ISPF
profile dataset and in this mode the user can store up to 50 commands
On 7/4/2018 11:23 AM, Rob Scott wrote:
Tom,
I think "cheated" is a bit strong.
If migration actions were omitted it was not by design or with intention to
deceive, it was most likely because it got missed due to human error.
Rob Scott
Rocket Software.
Rob,
When I asked why the ISFTABL mes
David W Noon wrote:
> Last I heard, HPE was still running some big iron to support "legacy"
> applications.
Possibly, but I suspect those went with the ex-EDS folks. The internal stuff
(not that I've seen it other than as an end-user) seems to be all
Microsoft-based.
Tom,
I think "cheated" is a bit strong.
If migration actions were omitted it was not by design or with intention to
deceive, it was most likely because it got missed due to human error.
Rob Scott
Rocket Software.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@L
On 7/4/2018 6:38 AM, Rob Scott wrote:
Barbara,
From the SDSF z/OS 2.3 Operation and Customization Guide :
"As of z/OS V2R3, SDSF requires the SDSF and SDSFAUX address spaces to be
active for full functionality. The SDSF address space manages connections,
processes ISFPRMxx statements, handles
On Tue, 3 Jul 2018 21:02:41 -0400, Phil Smith Iii (li...@akphs.com)
wrote about "Re: SUSE splits from Microfocus" (in
<00a201d41332$b65763a0$23062ae0$@akphs.com>):
> David W Noon wrote:
[snip]
>> A lot of the old EDS mainframers were made redundant because HP felt the
>> mainframe was dead. The ma
On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 03:24:00 -0500, Vince Getgood wrote:
>Saurabh,
>How much is your management willing to spend on achieving this requirement?
>
>From the few posts that I've seen, I'd suggest no-one here does this now, or
>has ever done it. If a company wants to monitor it's mainframe resource
>But if you specify the desired time on the job statement (the OP said 30
min?), IEFUTL would get called and could take the desired action (extend for
another 30 after generating some console message?).
I stand corrected. I had in mind he wanted an alert when some address space
consumes more t
That’s fine and Thanks Liz for your comments.
On Wednesday, July 4, 2018, Lizette Koehler wrote:
> Depending on your windows for IPL
>
> My favorite way is to
>
>1) Add the new MOD54 and DRAIN the MOD9
>2) IPL the system so that any STC/TSU are moved to the MOD54
>3) Purge/route/O
Barbara,
From the SDSF z/OS 2.3 Operation and Customization Guide :
"As of z/OS V2R3, SDSF requires the SDSF and SDSFAUX address spaces to be
active for full functionality. The SDSF address space manages connections,
processes ISFPRMxx statements, handles operator commands, and starts and
stops S
Something has changed with SDSFAUX between z/OS 2.1 and z/OS 2.3.
Under z/OS 2.3, each and every user gets a RACF Message when they access their
part of SDSF (that's the primary RACF panel). That missing right is for
ISF.CONNECT.system, which is described as access to SDSFAUX. None of those
use
Saurabh,
How much is your management willing to spend on achieving this requirement?
From the few posts that I've seen, I'd suggest no-one here does this now, or
has ever done it. If a company wants to monitor it's mainframe resource usage
dynamically, it buys and impliments a product. (BMC Mai
I seldom post here, but have been intrigued by this thread.
What are the problems (perceived or real) that will be resolved by replacing
JCL with REXX?
Regards – Grant.
In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice,
there is.
There is no such thing as the Cloud.
31 matches
Mail list logo
