essteam at juno.com wrote: >Im not a performance analyst, Im a CICS & MQ Sys-Prog. I dont understand this >new "paradyne".
Neither me. >March 1 Our Development Team introducd some new functionality. Have them remove those 'new functionality' until they fix the source of those abends on a sandbox. >Our development management are telling is (Systems & Operations) that it is >"cheaper to Upgrade the mainfame than to have the application programmers >review their code for performance oppurtunities". Based on what? Have them give a case study and tell IBM-MAIN. It is the very first time I heard this second hand utter cr*p. >Are You F...ing kidding me. They're kidding you, because they are incompetent and bored+lazy to fix their own errors. >In todays era is this true, because I havent heard of it ? >The Systems teams spent three weeks trying to compensate and adjust our >performance configuration (LPAR Weights, CICS File Adjustments etc.) to >accomodate the additional CPU that was introduced. Shame, give them rest. The System teams are wasting their own time. >I have not seen any documents produced stating that it would be cheaper to >Upgrade to a larger machine. What about the License costs for all our products >? Your vendors will hijack your upgrade to give you a higher fee. >Can someone explain and rationalize for this new paradyne ? "cheaper to >Upgrade the mainfame than to have the application programmers review their >code for performance oppurtunities". Have them produce evidence for that claim. Ok, enough grumbling. I think if you can tell IBM-MAIN about the nature of the new functionality + level/version of your z/OS, CICS, MQ, etc., perhaps someone could give you a workaround for these abends. Groete / Greetings Elardus Engelbrecht ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
