John, 

our private size on z/OS R9 below is
(MXI VMAP command, IPLINFO from Mark Zelden provide the same info)

Area              Start     End        Size(K)
Extended Private  2DF00000  7FFFFFFF  1344512K
Extended CSA      0C4F6000  2DEFFFFF   550952K
Extended MLPA     0C1F8000  0C4F5FFF     3064K
Extended FLPA     --------  --------        0K
Extended PLPA     07576000  0C1F7FFF    78344K
Extended SQA      019BF000  07575FFF    93916K
Extended R/W Nuc  01946000  019BEFFF      484K
Extended R/O Nuc  01000000  0194568F     9493K
R/O Nuc           00FE4000  00FFFFFF      112K
R/W Nuc           00FD7000  00FE36B7       49K
SQA               00E3D000  00FD6FFF     1640K
PLPA              00C5E000  00E3CFFF     1916K
FLPA              --------  --------        0K
MLPA              00C3F000  00C5DFFF      124K
CSA               00A00000  00C3EFFF     2300K
Private           00006000  009FFFFF    10216K    <------------------------
V=R               00006000  00025FFF      128K
System            00002000  00005FFF       16K
PSA               00000000  00001FFF        8K

Unfortunally no more z/OS R7

Roland


>        IBM appears to be expanding use of storage below the 16M line,
>rather than converting their own code to 31-bit addressability. Here is
>the reply I received when I ETR asked CICS why I could no longer get a
>certain DSALIM value in TS22 after going to zos 1.08.
>        "There is Common Storage shared by all address spaces, and not
>considered
>part of the private storage available for address space (task) use.
>In OS/390 2.10 the amount of Common Storage needed by the system was
>smaller than is required by z/os 1.8, which has much more function.
>When Common Storage increases, the amount of private storage decreases.
>My guess, based on my years of experience is that in your 2.10 system
>the amount of private storage available was 10M or possibly 11M. It
>must be on a meg boundry. In z/os 1.8 the amount of storage available
>for CICS , or any other address space has shrunk to 9M based on the
>increase in Common Storage."
>        It appears to me that IBM is assuming that the below the line
>storage is now free and available for their use, and rather than going to
>31-bit addressing themselves, they are expanding use of 24-bit.
>Interesting.  Looks like a bit of "do as I say, not as I do."

----------------------------------------------------------------------
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

Reply via email to