Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 21:21:11 +0000
Reply-To: Jesper Sahner <jespersahner@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From: Jesper Sahner <jespersahner@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: 64-bit on z/OS
In-Reply-To: <200907151426.n6FAl5bY025366@malibu.cc.uga.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi Paul,
Thanks.
Your experiment confirms it is a 32-bit version of SAS as the reference suggests. I wonder why information about 32/64-bit is not simply represented in a system macro variable.
Still curious if a 64-bit version is available at all on z/OS? (according to the reference I guess not).
Regards,
Jesper
> Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 10:26:46 -0400
> From: sashole@BELLSOUTH.NET
> Subject: Re: 64-bit on z/OS
> To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU; jespersahner@HOTMAIL.COM
>
> Jesper,
>
> Let experiment be the arbiter. Run
>
> data _null_ ;
> a = addr (_n_) ;
> run ;
>
> and observe the log. The SAS note
>
> NOTE: ADDR function cannot be used on this platform. Use ADDRLONG instead.
>
> would be an indication you are running a 64-bit version of SAS. The reason
> is SAS numeric variable integer precision (irrespective of the version
> and/or platform) is not sufficient to accurately store all possible
> physical addresses, which is why in 64-bit SAS versions ADDRLONG is used:
> It returns a 20-byte character address (effectively a 256-base number
> capable of storing any integer up to 2**160-1) instead of ADDR returning
> the address as a SAS number uncapable of storing any integer greater than
> ~2**56 exactly on any platform.
>
> Kind regards
> ------------
> Paul Dorfman
> Jax, FL
> ------------
>
> On Wed, 15 Jul 2009 03:20:09 -0400, Jesper Sahner Pedersen
> <jespersahner@HOTMAIL.COM> wrote:
>
> >Hi!
> >
> >I am running SAS 9.1 on z/OS (IBM Mainframe). z/OS is 64-bit, but as I
> >understand it SAS 9.1 is only 32-bit.
> >
> >Reference:
> >http://support.sas.com/rnd/migration/planning/platform/sas9platforms.html
> >
> >Is it possible to run a 64-bit SAS-version on z/OS?
> >
> >Regards,
> >Jesper
| 
