Subject: RE: $$A$SUPI
abunton@co.slo.ca.us
Date: Wed Aug 19 2009 - 10:48:15 EDT
Allan,
A few weeks ago I changed from $$A$SUPX to $$A$SUPI with z/VSE 3.1. The
primary memory difference at that release was from the CHANQ change (I
used the default). One system went from 255 to 1034, others less dramatic.
It took 38K to go from 255 to 800 on my test system (I also added 10 tape
drives). I had to adjust the low memory in PSIZE and GETVIS on all my
systems, with the most extreme needing about 50K more memory.
An alternative to adding huge amounts of memory is to specify CHANQ less
than the default. For SUPX the max is 255.
Arlyn Bunton
VSE System Administrator
County of San Luis Obispo, CA
805.788.2453
abunton@co.slo.ca.us
"Have I done any good in the world today?"
From:
"Allan Peterson" <Allan.Peterson@revera.co.nz>
To:
"VSE Discussion List" <vse-l@Lehigh.EDU>
Date:
08/18/2009 07:52 PM
Subject:
RE: $$A$SUPI
Sent by:
owner-vse-l@Lehigh.EDU
This now has me wondering ...
I created an asiproc $IPLZ and did a prompted IPL using it
It IPL'd but I lost 1Mb
I changed some parameters recataloged $IPLZ shutdown and ipled OK back to
where the production
However I did very little "testing"
I am planning to put supi into production come daylight saving time in 6
weeks , BUT, since I am at VSE/ESA 2.3.1+ and the other stuff at 9901 and
I'm now thinking am I headed for issues and just leave it on supx.
Allan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-vse-l@Lehigh.EDU [mailto:owner-vse-l@Lehigh.EDU] On Behalf Of
Steve Mondy
Sent: Wednesday, 19 August 2009 2:04 a.m.
To: VSE Discussion List
Subject: RE: $$A$SUPI
Tom,
If your VSE and vender software are at current version/release levels and
you have any service above those levels that relates to the >254 issue you
should be in good shape. We did this change in either 2.4 or 2.6. As
others have stated you will need to watch your shared area boundary. SUPI
will be larger and the additional DASD will increase the number of CHANQ
and COPY-BLOCKS allocated by VSE. Some of this may be recovered from the
24-bit system getvis rounding and by decreasing the values for the SDL,
PSIZE & GETVIS on SVA IPL statement. If your SDL entries are over
allocated you can get back 4K per 56 entries removed. Not a big amount
but can help when you are close to a boundary.
I know you don't have it but just a note on BTAM. If all the available
BTAM service is applied to BTAM it will run with SUPI and on devices that
are added above 254. It even runs on z/VSE 4.1. We have one product that
still requires it. So we keep dragging it forward. I will let know about
4.2 in a few weeks.
Steve H. Mondy
Mainframe Technical Support Manager
Open Solutions Inc.
3900 Essex Lane, Suite 400
Houston, TX 77027-5100
Office 713-965-8457
Cell 281-409-2870
Fax 713-965-8405
Email steve.mondy@opensolutions.com
www.bank.opensolutions.com
www.opensolutions.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-vse-l@Lehigh.EDU [mailto:owner-vse-l@Lehigh.EDU] On Behalf Of
Tom Duerbusch
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 1:24 PM
To: VSE Discussion List
Subject: $$A$SUPI
One of my clients is running the older $$A$SUPX supervisor on a z/VSE
3.1.0 system.
We are getting a new dasd subsystem and for a while, we will double the
number of dasd volumes. This far exceeds the 254 device limit in
$$A$SUPX.
We don't know if the newer $$A$SUPI (with 1024 device limit) was tried and
if it was tried, if it was backed out. The previous systems programmer
retired.
This is a production system, without a test system (uggg).
So this weekend, I'm planning on IPL'ing the SUPI supervisor. If
everything comes up fine, I'll leave it up.
However, I would like to make a list of items that may cause us to bail on
SUPI.
1. BTAM requires the supx version.... no BTAM here.
2. Some software that directly access the PUB table. (have no idea if
that is here)
3. Some software that accesses the PUB table via macros, that hasn't been
reassembled with the new control blocks (that has a 10 bit PUB length).
Anything else?
We are up to snuff on all vender software that we license. But we are
running some software, legally, that was purchased, but we did not buy the
maintenance side.
Anyone have suggestions on vender products that had problems with the
expanded PUB control block? Even if it was fixed in the last 5 years, I
want to make sure it is a product that we have upgraded since then.
I really, really love making changes on a production system without
testing, but if a shop doesn't support a test side, then they really don't
care about up time. Just hate to have them crash on something trivial.
Thanks
Tom Duerbusch
THD Consulting
NOTICE:
This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is
addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or
otherwise exempt from disclosure. If the reader of this e-mail is not the
intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the
message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please
immediately notify us by replying to the original message at the listed
email address. Thank You.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Wed Sep 02 2009 - 20:20:10 EDT