Re: Couple Datasets and MAXSYSTEM in monoplex
Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] cell00.bisx.prod.on.blackberry... If I were to set them up from scratch, is the recommendation for a monoplex to take the default of 8 or should maxsystem be set to 1?? Its tough to find any information for the smaller monpolex systems. If you ever have to expand, it's a SYSPLEX wide cold-start. Really, I don't think so. Allocating a larger coupleds with new parameters and migrating to it will do. You cannot migrate to a coupleds with less maxsystems (and other smaller values), because the contents of the current coupleds will not fit in the new one. Kees. ** For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered number 33014286 ** -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Couple Datasets and MAXSYSTEM in monoplex
If you ever have to expand, it's a SYSPLEX wide cold-start. Really, I don't think so It was when we had to do it! I only had to do it once, and that was one time too often. I always recommend going with 32. (PS: Why would I want to have to re-allocate everything? A little up front planning, with a trivial overhead introduced, is preferrable) When in doubt. PANIC!! -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Couple Datasets and MAXSYSTEM in monoplex
We are running a couple of LPARS in MONOPLEX mode. We have XCF, LOGR and WLM couple datasets defined. I was curious about the maxsystem value. The sample job provided by IBM for WLM allocation uses 32 for maxsystem since its the max value so I went ahead and used 32 for my XCF and LOGR datasets. Since we are in monoplex mode, will this value cause any problems? Should I redefine these datasets using a smaller maxsystem value and if so, what should I use? IBM seemed to think leaving them as 32 is the way to go but I would like some other opinions. Thanks for any help. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Couple Datasets and MAXSYSTEM in monoplex
On Thursday 02 November 2006 08:07, George D Dranes wrote: We are running a couple of LPARS in MONOPLEX mode. We have XCF, LOGR and WLM couple datasets defined. I was curious about the maxsystem value. The sample job provided by IBM for WLM allocation uses 32 for maxsystem since its the max value so I went ahead and used 32 for my XCF and LOGR datasets. Since we are in monoplex mode, will this value cause any problems? Should I redefine these datasets using a smaller maxsystem value and if so, what should I use? IBM seemed to think leaving them as 32 is the way to go but I would like some other opinions. Thanks for any help. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html If you are a monoplex you can only have one system in the sysplex so 32 is overkill. It won't really hurt you but XCF has to perform additional I/O to update the couple dataset since it is larger than it needs to be. -- Mark Jacobs Time Customer Service Tampa, FL - If was one thing all people take for granted, was conviction that if you feed honest figures into a computer, honest figures come out. Never doubted it myself until I met a computer with sense of humor. Manuel O'Kelly Davis in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Couple Datasets and MAXSYSTEM in monoplex
George D Dranes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... We are running a couple of LPARS in MONOPLEX mode. We have XCF, LOGR and WLM couple datasets defined. I was curious about the maxsystem value. The sample job provided by IBM for WLM allocation uses 32 for maxsystem since its the max value so I went ahead and used 32 for my XCF and LOGR datasets. Since we are in monoplex mode, will this value cause any problems? Should I redefine these datasets using a smaller maxsystem value and if so, what should I use? IBM seemed to think leaving them as 32 is the way to go but I would like some other opinions. Thanks for any help. See z/OS V1R6.0 MVS Setting Up a Sysplex: SA22-7625-10 Chapter B 2 mentions some considerations about MAXSYSTEM. AFAIK to high a value only takes a little more space in the Couplds's. Kees. ** For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered number 33014286 ** -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Couple Datasets and MAXSYSTEM in monoplex
On Thu, 2 Nov 2006 07:07:49 -0600, George D Dranes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are running a couple of LPARS in MONOPLEX mode. We have XCF, LOGR and WLM couple datasets defined. I was curious about the maxsystem value. The sample job provided by IBM for WLM allocation uses 32 for maxsystem since its the max value so I went ahead and used 32 for my XCF and LOGR datasets. Since we are in monoplex mode, will this value cause any problems? Should I redefine these datasets using a smaller maxsystem value and if so, what should I use? IBM seemed to think leaving them as 32 is the way to go but I would like some other opinions. Thanks for any help. To redefine them you'll have to take a sysplex wide outage! g,d, r There are some considerations in regards to reply IDs when the XCF couple data has MAXSYSTEM 8 (see the Setting up a Sysplex manual). But other than taking up more space, I don't think you need to worry about it...especially in a monoplex. Somewhere I think I recall reading or hearing that there is also a slight performance impact if you code 32 compared to 8, but that is also probably for a small sysplex, not a monoplex. Bottom line: Don't worry, be happy. Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - GITO mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] z/OS and OS390 expert at http://searchDataCenter.com/ateExperts/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Couple Datasets and MAXSYSTEM in monoplex
If I were to set them up from scratch, is the recommendation for a monoplex to take the default of 8 or should maxsystem be set to 1?? Its tough to find any information for the smaller monpolex systems. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Zelden Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 8:19 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Couple Datasets and MAXSYSTEM in monoplex On Thu, 2 Nov 2006 07:07:49 -0600, George D Dranes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are running a couple of LPARS in MONOPLEX mode. We have XCF, LOGR and WLM couple datasets defined. I was curious about the maxsystem value. The sample job provided by IBM for WLM allocation uses 32 for maxsystem since its the max value so I went ahead and used 32 for my XCF and LOGR datasets. Since we are in monoplex mode, will this value cause any problems? Should I redefine these datasets using a smaller maxsystem value and if so, what should I use? IBM seemed to think leaving them as 32 is the way to go but I would like some other opinions. Thanks for any help. To redefine them you'll have to take a sysplex wide outage! g,d, r There are some considerations in regards to reply IDs when the XCF couple data has MAXSYSTEM 8 (see the Setting up a Sysplex manual). But other than taking up more space, I don't think you need to worry about it...especially in a monoplex. Somewhere I think I recall reading or hearing that there is also a slight performance impact if you code 32 compared to 8, but that is also probably for a small sysplex, not a monoplex. Bottom line: Don't worry, be happy. Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - GITO mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] z/OS and OS390 expert at http://searchDataCenter.com/ateExperts/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Couple Datasets and MAXSYSTEM in monoplex
If I were to set them up from scratch, is the recommendation for a monoplex to take the default of 8 or should maxsystem be set to 1?? Its tough to find any information for the smaller monpolex systems. If you ever have to expand, it's a SYSPLEX wide cold-start. Your choice. When in doubt. PANIC!! -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Couple Datasets and MAXSYSTEM in monoplex
IBM seemed to think leaving them as 32 is the way to go but I would like some other opinions If you are ever going to grow, I would define it to 32. 32 is the current (and always has been the) maximum the architecture supports. When we first implemented in 1994, I recommended the max be specified. They ignored me an set it to the current number of images. Two years later, we tried to expand by two, and it was a mess! There is very little overhead in defining the max, and it can reduce future headaches. The overhead comes when the systems activate. When in doubt. PANIC!! -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
