The most current recommendation I've seen comes from Health Checker. At
z/OS 1.9, an 'OK' result gives the message below. I would not venture to
guess whether fast DASD and channels would allow you stray from the blessed
path.
IXCH0243I For each couple dataset type the primary and alternate reside
on different volumes this is consistent with the IBM recommendation.
IXCH0241I The following PRIMARY couple datasets reside on unique
volumes:
SYS1.COUPLE.SYSPLEX1
SYS1.COUPLE.CFRM1
SYS1.COUPLE.LOGGER1
This is consistent with the IBM recommendation that the primary SYSPLEX
couple dataset, the primary CFRM couple dataset, and the primary LOGR
couple dataset, should be placed on different volumes.
.
.
JO.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
626-302-7535 Office
323-715-0595 Mobile
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lizette Koehler
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ING.COM> To
Sent by: IBM IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Mainframe cc
Discussion List
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject
.EDU> Placement of Couple Data sets
10/19/2007 02:57
PM
Please respond to
IBM Mainframe
Discussion List
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
.EDU>
The last manual I read on this was from 1999
Parallel Sysplex Performance Healthcheck
Case Study: DMdata/Danske Data
http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redbooks/pdfs/sg245373.pdf
I was wondering if this case study was still valid or if with the faster
CPUs and ICF and DASD whether or not I need to revisit the placement of the
CFRM, ARM, SFM, LOGR, SYSPLEX and OMVS Couple Data sets?
I would like to know if all primaries on one volume and all alternates on a
secondary would be valid now.
And if with hardware like EMC Symmectrix and IBM 2105's with a source
string
and target string, whether or not placement is all that big of a deal?
Lizette
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
