Sorry, Dave. I can't do that.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
rpinion865
Sent: Monday, April 10, 2023 10:22 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: AI wipes out humanity?
CAUTION! This email originated outside of the organization. Ple
Take a look at RMF Monitor III reports taken during intervals of TSO activity.
What is the performance index for your TSO service class periods? What are the
delay percentages for your TSO users' address spaces?
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Al
As your zIIP utilization approaches 100 percent what you should expect is a
corresponding increase in zIIP-on-CP time. That is a system-wide processor
optimization technique. It does not deal directly with the subject of WLM
workload dispatching priorities.
-Original Message-
From: IB
Is it possible the "\" is taken as an escape character?
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
ITschak Mugzach
Sent: Sunday, January 23, 2022 7:08 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Chaining unix commands
CAUTION! This email originated outsi
I'm old enough to remember reading the source code for VM on microfiche.
Eventually, IBM got smart and went with OCO.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu wi
IIRC, Batch LSR was developed at IBM by the BCP team; SMB was later developed
by the DFdfp team. SMB is not BLSR under-the-covers, but it offers the same
advantages.
SMB is the more modern solution. It has worked wonders at my shop. Just mind
your REGION size. If you haven't converted some
No surprise. FedEx announce years ago that they were getting off the mainframe
"next year."
Sincerely,
Winston Smith
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
David Crayford
Sent: Friday, July 8, 2022 3:15 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [EXTERNAL] F
For a given ASID, look at OUCB +B0. JES2, STC or TSO should appear.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Seymour J Metz
Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2024 9:20 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Couple of questions about job id
CAUTION! T
Shivang,
It's an option on the Resource Group panel. “No” is the default.
Modify a Resource Group
Enter or change the following information:
Resource Group Name . . . . : SPRT_B
Description . . . . . . . . . SPRT_B Resource Group
Define Capacity:
1 1. In Service
Although that might not answer your question about period switch.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Dave Barry
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2024 11:36 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] WLM question : Is ziip service units counted in
"Duration is the amount of weighted SU (including zIIP) that a UOW (unit of
work) may consume before it is switched to the goals of the next .period."
Bear in mind that zIIP-eligible work can run on a GCP.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
I dimly recall from decades ago a recommendation to run CICS in key 7. IIRC,
it had something to do with aligning a buffer on a page boundary. Long
obsolete advice, I'm sure.
==
Peter Relson wrote:
>.
>
>
>May I ask why you n
If I'm not mistaken, FDR has an ENQ/NOENQ option. You decide which you can
tolerate in your situation.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Clark Morris
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2021 7:24 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
We had the same issue with SAS driving up the R4HA. We put the work in a
service class with a resource group cap. The type 72 records gave us a
reasonable target service units/second for starters, and we reduced the cap
incrementally until we were satisfied. The jobs ran longer afterward, but
Charles,
In theory, you divide the rated SU/second by the number of processors giving
SUs/processor/second, adjusting for "MP effect" overhead. Similarly, you could
use MIPS/processor such that:
273.8 (2064-2C3) divided by 426.1 (2094-722) equals 0.643.
0.146 seconds times 0.643 equals 0.093
ubject: Re: Help with elementary CPU speed question
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 18:47:13 -0400, Dave Barry wrote:
>In theory, you divide the rated SU/second by the number of processors
>giving SUs/processor/second, adjusting for "MP effect" overhead.
No, the SU/second is called the SRM
In the old paradigm, technology was managed by technologists. In the new
paradigm, technology is managed by accountants. Computer hardware and labor
costs wind up on different lines of the general ledger. They have different
budgetary constraints and are treated differently for tax purposes d
Ahem... Did you mean to say zEnterprise? System z is so last year. ;-)
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of zMan
Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2013 9:56 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Crypto Facility performance
I remember having this issue years ago when using the old IPO SMFDUMP program.
We forced a switch at midnight and dumped the last of the previous day's data
on two loosely coupled systems. IIRC, the type 19s were produced by the IEFU29
exit under a global IPO1.SMF enqueue. The two dumps' time
d time. A good explanation can be found in "LSPR Workload Categories"
on IBMs Web site at
https://www-304.ibm.com/servers/resourcelink/lib03060.nsf/pages/lsprwork?OpenDocument.
Sorry if this is more than you wanted to know, but IBM-MAIN is definitely a
good place to ask.
Dave Barry
D
Kees,
I'd like to know more about the lack of cooperation between weight management
and softcapping. Can you enlighten us?
Much obliged,
db
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Vernooij, CP - SPLXM
Sent: Tuesday, Februar
Jan,
Omegamon has no way of attributing MVS overhead. It simply subtracts the RMF
processor busy time from the interval time and reports the difference.
Being time-driven, WLM uses very little CPU on it's own behalf. In fact, as
has been pointed out, when capping is in effect, IRD weight mana
Available to whom? For networked applications, you might try a SELECT from
SYSIBM.SYSDUMM1 table. For batch applications, you might have some console
automation response to the DSN9022I message stating"DSNYASCP 'START DB2' NORMAL
COMPLETION" on one hand and the DSNY002I message on shut-down o
It occurred to me to add to my previous comment:
For batch applications, you might have some console automation response to the
DSN9022I message stating"DSNYASCP 'START DB2' NORMAL COMPLETION" on one hand
and the DSNY002I message on shut-down on the other. You would use the response
to activa
Some third-party software in use here at UPS has used this technique for years.
The assumption is perfectly valid.
Think about it: If an initiator allocates a migrated dataset specifically on
behalf of IEFBR14 -- which cannot even open it, much less use it -- just to
process a normal disposit
The problem is that the SVC99 dynamic allocation is unconditional. If the
resource is already owned, the subsequent allocation request fails. At that
point there is no enqueue conflict to show in any monitor because no exclusive
or shared waiter was added for that resource in the GRS list.
St
[mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2015 3:58 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Dataset enqueue, how to find the culprit.
On 2015-09-23 11:54, Dave Barry wrote:
> The problem is that the SVC99 dynamic allocation is unconditional.
See John Arwe's seminal work on the subject described at
ftp://public.dhe.ibm.com/s390/zos/wlm/WLMpresrb.pdf.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of michelbutz
Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2015 1:39 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV
It happens that certain CSA allocations are not really orphans; they're more
like emancipated minors.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Rob Schramm
Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2015 2:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
29 matches
Mail list logo
