Hi. Hello. I believe that the problem is the CICS and not in the SQA area. I suggest to check the following thing: All the transactions and programs must be stored on the line of 16mb, thus we can reduce the value of parameter "DSALIM" and this we unloaded the SQA.
Saludos a todos, desde Chile. Atte. Alvaro Quintupray B. Ingeniero de Sistemas Nexus S.A. Fon : 420 8149 Fax : 420 8508 -----Mensaje original----- De: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] nombre de Jon Brock Enviado el: MiƩrcoles, 05 de Octubre de 2005 11:55 Para: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Asunto: Consequences of lowering SQA spec We are trying to fix a problem that one of our CICS regions has with going short-on-storage below the 16MB line. (In the UDSA and CDSA pools, to be exact.) As part of this effort, I am trying to expand the size of our private area. (Insert your Viagra joke here.) At the moment, we have a private area of 11240K, which seems pretty good to me, but I am considering lowering our current specification of SQA in IEASYSxx from 10 to 6. Our system seems to be maxing out at using about 36% of the space currently allocated. What I need to know is what sort of problems I could be letting myself in for if I lower the SQA allocation too much. Will I be up for a week and then start having mysterious file problems or some such? Thanks, Jon ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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