In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 07/26/2005
at 10:00 AM, Ron and Jenny Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>Then that would be just plain pigheaded
PKB.
>you are restricting the number of paging paths, not increasing.
He's doing neither. The limit is still 2 exposures per paging data
set. If you're concerned with active I/O rather than suspended, the
normal activity level on PLPA is so low as to make the issue more
political or theological than technical.
>The logic in that defeats me.
Because your assumptions are all wrong.
>The number of paths to auxiliary is firstly the number of page
>datasets defined, and secondly the number of paths that they share.
>Your logic doesn't seem to work for this case.
His logic works fine; it's your non sequitor that doesn't work. What
he is doing saves him effort and has no impact on performance.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
