I know customers need both large and many. My point is that if you follow my VERY INFORMAL ROT that memory should be matched by 1 x -1.5 x paging space then we get into large numbers of 4GB (a fortiori smaller) paging data sets. I'm not sure what the implications of that are, other than noting that PAV support for ASM must help. (And I actually assume that "in the old days" when paging was last something to really worry about ASM was quite capable of driving many streams of I/O (even if one did have to be careful about page data set placement).
In the p$%*ing contest my social circle includes a customer with both a 96GB machine and a 90GB machine. Anybody yet in a position to p$%* higher up the wall? :-) In any case I expect those sizes to be dwarfed, going forward. Admittedly these aren't "single LPAR" machines but that doesn't really detract from my observation.; Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, MBCS CITP Martin Packer/UK/IBM 020-8832-5167 in the UK (+44) (MOBX 273643, Internal 7-325167, Mobile 07802-245584) "Las cosas de palacio van despacio" External Blog: http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/dw_blog.jspa?blog=476 Internal Blog: http://barney.adtech.internet.ibm.com/pilot/weblogs/comments/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
