> >Due to IBM Health checker report we have to change mode of our Coupling > >facility to non Volatile.. CF is running in a partition on CPC, shared by 4 > >z/OS LPARs making it a sysplex. We are enabled for CICSPlex , DB2 Data > >sharing, RACF Database Sharing, SMSPlex, Catalog ECS etc etc.. > > > >Can someone point me in the right direction to measure performance gain (due > >to change of CF Mode) , if any. > > > >We are RMF, SAS/MXG and BMC Performance assurance (aka Visualiser, Best/1 ) > >site. > > > > A volatile coupling facility is one in which interruption of the > power supply causes loss of the memory contents. You can make the coupling > facility nonvolatile by adding to it an uninterruptible power supply or you > can use a battery backup, which uses internal batteries to provide power > during an outage.
We are talking about the XCF_CF_STR_NONVOLATILE check, right? Before going to the expense of adding a battery or power supply (or - IIRC - just fake it by setting the appropriate switch for the CF somewhere in the HMC, which was possible in the past), read up carefully what the health check says: It doesn't just talk about non-volatility. In essence it talks about non-volatility *and* failure isolation. (Read up on both in 'setting up a sysplex'.) Making the CF non-volatile will NOT make the exception disappear as long as your CF runs on the same *hardware* as any of the z/OSs that use this CF. You have the following chances of making this exception disappear: 1. Make sure that no z/OS that uses the CF is on the same hardware as the CF (failure isolation) *and* provide the battery to that hardware (non-volatility). 2. Buy a standalone CF (failure isolation) with the appropriate battery (non-volatility). 3. Delete this health check and go on as before (just for completeness). >From the top of my head, structures that would like to have a non-volatile, >failure-isolated CF are typically system logger structures. Assuming that you >configured them correctly, they will already automatically be duplexing data >written to the CF to staging data sets. Which will give you the result you >need: In case of power failure to the hardware your z/OS runs on, there is a >copy of the data still available somewhere (in this case, staging data sets). >You will gain a small benefit in performance because with a failure isolated, >non-volatile CF duplexing to staging data sets is no longer necessary for >system logger. Not sure if other structures also request non-volatile, failure isolated CFs. Barbara Nitz ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
