Well, I know that VSE can't do PAV, but z/VM 5.2 w/ APAR VM63952 can do it for VSE, providing that the volumes are minidisks. I just don't think that it is going to get me much (if anything) with a single guest.
Would VM minidisk caching help throughput in a large batch environment? The manager is looking at the performance monitors and seeing less than full usuage on the Shark's channels, I'm thinking we need to look closer at the COBOL programs running there than the Shark... > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: PAV and VSE guest > From: Eric Schadow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Mon, March 19, 2007 4:27 pm > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > > Dave > > If you made the DASD mini-disks instead of DEDICATED you can try VM mini disk > caching. > > I am pretty sure PAV is z/OS only... > > All the regular tuning things can reviewed also > - VSAM buffer tuning - > - Sequential file blocking > - Application s/w tuning > - VSE or VM paging? > > etc > etc > > > > Eric > > > > At 04:18 PM 3/19/2007, you wrote: > >I was recently reviewing this: > >http://www.vm.ibm.com/storman/pav/pav2.html > >at the behest of my manager. He is looking to extend the life of and > >better utilize our current hardware. We are running z/VM 5.2 on a z800, > >with a single z/VSE 3.1.2 guest, using Shark 2105-F20 disk. We currently > >use DEDICATED volumes for z/VSE. I am not necessarily against changing > >these volumes to minidisks if there is a performance benefit to be > >gained. However, from my reading of the above referenced article, it > >appears to me that converting them to minidisks and running PAV is > >going to gain me about ZERO, since all I have accessing the disks is a > >single z/VSE guest. > > > >Is this true, or am I missing something and should look into PAV and > >minidisks for my single z/VSE guest? It looks to me that multiple z/VSE > >guests sharing volumes on minidisk _may_ benefit from PAV under VM, but > >a single one won't. > > Eric Schadow > Mainframe Technical Support > www.davisvision.com
