Thank you very much Kolusu.
That did the trick
Best wishes
Jack
On Thu, 13 Jul 2023 at 17:40, Sri h Kolusu wrote:
> Jack,
>
> If your intention is to count the number of Storage group and DASD Model,
> then you can init with a counter of 1 and then sum it up.
>
> Here are the updated control ca
First position for the company first letter and six digits with the
employee number. For external people, "EX" and five digits for a sequence
number. "Y" for service userids with up to seven letters taken from the
product name (as these do not logon to TSO, eight positions could be used)
Regards
Ja
My favourite (admittedly on a sandbox) was an IMS guy with the right
initials who snagged DL1.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-
W dniu 14.07.2023 o 02:32, Paul Gilmartin pisze:
On Thu, 13 Jul 2023 20:17:38 -0400, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
A place I worked used initials followed by a 5 digit employee ID. xxn
Many years ago someone reported here that in Canada it was illegal to
use an employee# as a UID because it's con
Hi Paul,
EEOC is an American thing. In Canada, we have an equivalent.
Please explain: "... Five digits isn't enough. ..." Enough for what?
(I think you're confusing employee number with SIN (equivalent to
American SSN).
Regards,
David
On 2023-07-13 22:53, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jul
No replaceable routine.
Got it.
On Fri, 14 Jul 2023 01:55:39 +0200 Bernd Oppolzer
wrote:
:>If there is no explicit LE option to override the standard subpools
:>(which are 1 and 2, AFAIK),
:>then I would try to use the LE option which allows to have an alternate
:>heap handler
:>and use a mod
On Fri, 14 Jul 2023 at 12:57, Binyamin Dissen
wrote:
>
> No replaceable routine.
>
> Got it.
I'm a bit surprised... The LE Vendor Interfaces book has all kinds of
talk about providing your own heap storage manager. Maybe this
interface isn't available in your environment, or has too many
restrict
Some of the UK banks use your D.O.B as an account number - such as
601225JC12 ! which exposes sensitive information.
At one point some of us had two userids. SYSPROG1 ... for sysprog stuff,
and a personal ID.
When anyone moved on they just reallocated SYSPROG1 to a new user, and all
the accesses
We still have remnants of IDs from M&A activities. Some of them are a 2
character department followed by 3 random digits, the other is EMP. Not
sure if they used CON for contractors or some other combination of letters
for non-employees.
Rex
-Original Message-
From: IBM Main
I also want STACK storage.
On Fri, 14 Jul 2023 13:15:10 +0200 Tony Harminc wrote:
:>On Fri, 14 Jul 2023 at 12:57, Binyamin Dissen
:> wrote:
:>>
:>> No replaceable routine.
:>>
:>> Got it.
:>
:>I'm a bit surprised... The LE Vendor Interfaces book has all kinds of
:>talk about providing your own h
Auditors don't like multiple user ids, but sysprogs are usually in multiple
roles, with different authority requirements.
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Colin Paice
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2023 7:57 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subje
IHASLMSG is not distributed. It is not a programming interface.
The DataAreas book contains the information for that macro, as has been
mentioned.
Peter Relson
z/OS Core Technology Design
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff /
You'll get plenty of help over in the IBMVM mailing list.
When you issue the LOAD prior to the GENMOD, be sure to include the RLDSAVE
option. This ensures that your program can be loaded anywhere in memory, and
CMS will not overlay the current program. In fact, the first MODULE can invoke
ano
On Fri, 14 Jul 2023 at 14:33, Binyamin Dissen
wrote:
>
> I also want STACK storage.
OK - I'm not an expert in LE interfaces. I just saw that there's a
documented heap manager interface that you can supply services to.
Maybe there's something similar for stacks. Maybe stacks are allocated
from hea
Hi R'Shmuel AMV"SH,
You said: "...Auditors don't like multiple user ids..."
It's not the first time auditors have had illogical ideas.
OTOH, 2 or more people sharing a Userid is BAD.
Regards,
David
On 2023-07-14 08:38, Seymour J Metz wrote:
Auditors don't like multiple user ids, but sysprogs a
I think it’s not having multiple ID inasmuch as the implied sharing. Oddly
enough, I’ve run into a situation where some customers want to map multiple
distributed IDs to a shared mainframe ID for a given function in an application
to avoid creating hundreds of IDs for the application support p
I like the part about service IDs. One of the challenges at most installations
I've worked at is being able to identify non-human IDs; they're easy enough to
spot by eye (because of the name attached to it), but I need some sort of
indicator when writing a program.
---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...
I hope that they're not, e.g., defense, financial, health.
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Matt Hogstrom
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2023 9:18 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Userid schemes
I think it’s not having multiple ID in
You could connect them all to a dummy group with no privileges.
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Bob
Bridges
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2023 9:27 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Userid schemes
I like the part about service IDs.
I fully agree with the general principle that one ID must have no more than one
owner. (I'll admit to exceptional cases, but I'll argue about them first.)
I've never understood the reverse principle that every user must have only one
ID. I think the folks who make a rule like that are simply
Radek, I can't read the mind of Canadian legislators, but I would guess it has
to do with fraud. I'm told that one can go through someone's trash, find old
bills (telephone, power etc) and use that information to convince someone at
the power company that I'm the householder because I have the
I did RTFM before asking. I was surprised that it wasn't an obvious thing in
the vendors guide.
On Fri, 14 Jul 2023 15:11:07 +0200 Tony Harminc wrote:
:>On Fri, 14 Jul 2023 at 14:33, Binyamin Dissen
:> wrote:
:>>
:>> I also want STACK storage.
:>
:>OK - I'm not an expert in LE interfaces. I just
On Fri, 14 Jul 2023 06:43:49 -0400, David Spiegel wrote:
>
>EEOC is an American thing. In Canada, we have an equivalent.
>
Just remarking that "man number" is conspicuously gender-specific.
>Please explain: "... Five digits isn't enough. ..." Enough for what?
>
IBM has over 300,000 employees. A
Hi Paul,
You said: "...Just remarking that "man number" is conspicuously
gender-specific. ..."
True, but, you have to remember the historical context for it.
You said: "...IBM has over 300,000 employees. Are the numbers required
to be unique? ..."
AFAIK, my number was unique in Canada.
My Re
Paul Gilmartin wrote, in part:
>IBM has over 300,000 employees.
While it's not relevant to the point you were making, I suspect that number is
much smaller these days. I'd heard that IBM was down to fewer than 25,000 U.S.
employees several years ago, before the Kyndryl spinoff and several more W
Maybe it wasn't a "man number" as in "male human being", but rather a
"machine automation number number"? /s (but ya gotta admit, it DOES sound
like something IBM would have, complete with redundancy!)
On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 9:59 AM David Spiegel <
0468385049d1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Binyamin,
Is this desire perhaps for use in a CICS "threadsafe" or "open" TCB? If so,
doesn't CICS itself provide some CICS-unique storage facilities to LE programs,
and are those not sufficient to your needs?
As many others have mentioned, the LE Vendor Interfaces manual has information
on h
I can verify that CA would adjust the userid if the resulting userid was
'inappropriate'. One of my coworkers was such a case. Unfortunately, its
been too long ago and I can't remember the specifics. When CA bought our
company and told us the new rules, one guy just busted out laughing and
it t
Being a RACF geek and a contractor for roughly half my career I've seen most of
the conventions people have shared here in this thread. The best laugh I get
talking with other mainframe geeks though was from a large bank where the
algorithm went:
First 5 letters of SURNAME + first initial of f
I had 3 id's on each system, but all had the same sysprog capability.
Mainly it was to avoid the embarrassment of having to go to another
sysprog to fix my #1 id after I messed it up testing or changing
something. But they also came in handy for testing things like enqueues
and multiple tasks.
English has many nouns that have both gender neutral and gender specific uses;
demanding that we stop using terms that are in no way derogatory is linguistic
fascism.
OTOH, there are words that really derogatory, and we should refrain from using
those.
For testing authorized code, it helps to have a userid with minimal privileges.
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Tom
Brennan
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2023 10:56 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Userid schemes
I had 3 id's on ea
I believe that it's because a single id is easier to audit. Apparently easy
audits are more important than actual security.
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Bob
Bridges
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2023 9:34 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sub
Hi:
from IBM documentation (z/OS 2.4):
<< There can be up to 64 REXX worker tasks running TSO=NO execs and up to 8 TSO
server address spaces running TSO=YES execs.>>
On the other hand, in System Rexx configuration member AXRxx, you have the
parameter MAXWORKERTASKS, whose maximum value is 32. MA
CPU Affinity has not been supported for many years.
I don't remember if it ever was on an address-space basis as opposed to begin
on a work-unit basis (I know that you could identify CPU affinity for a
scheduled SRB, for example).
The "multiprocessor effect" (or perhaps it's the "multiprocessin
I don't know if this ancient history will be of any use in your
case Binyamin:
In the early 1990s, I was working on IBM Prolog for 370 (MVS). I
was asked to help the VM group migrate their code to MVS and they
explained their issues with Stack/Heap. We discussed storage keys
and what they wer
Nah, that's an old myth that (I think) sprang up only in my
lifetime. "Man" has always applied, in English, to humans and also to adult
males, depending on context. I'm still unembarrassed to use the term
"man-hours".
At about the same time sprang up the myth that "my" indicates ownership, a
I've never looked at IXGLOGR address space but my guess is that IXGLOGR would
have multiple tasks (TCB's) running at the same time if there are multiple logs
active.
As for batch running slower at night after you went from 1 CPU to 4, that
doesn't make sense unless other things changed. SRM di
Hi All,
I am trying to help the python ibmdb team help me solve an S0C4 abend issue
with (we think maybe) their code on the IBM Zxplore LPAR by generating an
SVCDUMP that the ibmdb team could analyze. The admins at Zxplore have tried a
couple of times to set a SLIP to catch the S0C4 abend that
I'm pretty sure that each TCP of a task can run on a separate CPU.
Brian
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
On 7/14/2023 3:01 PM, Jon Perryman wrote:
> As for batch running slower at night after you went from 1 CPU to 4,
that doesn't make sense unless other things changed.
I'm thinking it could be as simple as say, going from a 701 to a 504.
The overall MIPS are bumped up, multi-task address spaces
On Sat, 15 Jul 2023 00:16:23 +, Farley, Peter wrote:
>...
>Any and all assistance to help us catch this abend and generate the SVCDUMP
>that the ibmdb team have requested to help solve the root cause would be much
>appreciated.
>
No assistance, but an observation that SLIP has appeared to
Every address space has multiple TCB. Only TCBs that are not in a wait
(dispatchable) are eligible to run on separate CPUs. You are correct but all
TCBs in a wait are not eligible to run.
On Friday, July 14, 2023 at 05:56:58 PM PDT, Brian Westerman
wrote:
I'm pretty sure that each TC
While each cpu in the 504 is slower than a 701 cpu, running 4 batch jobs at
the same time should reduce run time because each batch job expect reduced wait
because there is reduced competition for the CPU. However, you could be correct
if the 4 batch jobs are experiencing heavy I/O wait.
On
44 matches
Mail list logo
