I'm with you Barbara: authorized code can be as impolite as it wants, but that doesn't make it right. Scott
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 07:40:02 +0100, nitz-...@gmx.net <nitz-...@gmx.net> wrote: >Peter, > >> I have found plenty of places where the discussion is about DB2's DBM1 and >> IRLM address spaces. Those ignore any MEMLIMIT setting and set this limit to >> values defined in DB2. >> >> I could not find anything related to the utility program DSNX9WLM regarding >> MEMLIMIT. Waiting for an answer from my DB2 colleagues. > >I don't think that this is written down anywhere. All you need to do is dump >the running job and check the value of memlimit in the RSM control block (I >believe it was an RSM control block). You'll find that DB2 overwrites whatever >the installation specifies with what DB2 wants by the simple expedient of >being APF authorized. They just go and put their own value into the RSM >control block, effectively overwriting usual controls. Check the archives, I >seem to have a dim memory that we discussed this here and I got bashed when I >objected to such a practise. In my case it was GRS (they do the same), I >think, back in z/OS 1.2 or 1.4 days. >Just look at the memlimit column in SDSF DA, you'll see exactly which address >spaces have adopted this practise. (In our case, it was even more evident, >because I had limited *everybody* to 6GB MEMLIMIT in IEFUSI/SMF, for the >simple reason that the system didn't have enough real storage to back any more. > >Barbara > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >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
