Most times "wrong" WLM settings lead to problems in stc's getting dispatched incorrectly. Is "online" running longer on a transaction basis or how do you know that online is being hurt by your low prio batch. If you problems persist you can send me some smf data and then we can talk in more detail of whats happening why...
That’s an cost free offer :-) Cheers from Germany Uwe -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] Im Auftrag von Natasa Savinc Gesendet: Dienstag, 19. Februar 2013 11:54 An: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Betreff: Low priority workload Hello! From time to time (certain days in a month) we hit group or system limit. We have different types of workload defined in WLM. Among others, most batch jobs have the lowest priority. At the peek times they apparently get no CPU resources, but when we make report at the end of the day, they managed to get some CPU seconds. We would prefer that those seconds were allocated to important online transaction. There are two opinions amoung our sysprogs: one is that we should cancel all low priority workload in order to help our online get all the resources, the other is that that is not necessary, as batch isn't getting any online's CPU resources anyway. It seams that when you hit the limits things become more complicated. Any thoughts about our dilemma? Any experiences with life on the edge? Regards, Natasa ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
