In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 01/24/2007
at 06:06 PM, George D Dranes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>I'm currently in the process of trying to tune CSA, ECSA and Common
>Page Size and was looking for some recommendations.
Unless you are close to the edge for private storage
On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 08:43 -0600, George Dranes wrote:
> I guess my question is does 150M
> look good for ECSA us or is that still excessive? We would be running at
> around 45-50% usage. In the future we are planning to do more with the
> distributed side of DB2 and more Websphere apps so I'm
h the
distributed side of DB2 and more Websphere apps so I'm assuming we should
allow for growth.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Shane
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 2:11 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: ECSA and C
On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 08:42:24 +0100, Vernooy, C.P. - SPLXM
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>First: what you define costs nothing, only what the system uses costs
storage. So overdefining ECSA is no problem, it even will save your system
when suddenly more ECSA is really needed and you can deliver it. Y
On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 08:42 +0100, Kees wrote:
> First: what you define costs nothing, only what the system uses costs
> storage. So overdefining ECSA is no problem,
M - now hold on there Kees.
ECSA eats region - for everybody. I've had to deal with subsystems that
have died because of (31-bi
"George D Dranes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>...
> I'm currently in the process of trying to tune CSA, ECSA and Common Page Size
> and was looking for some recommendations. We currently have CSA=(3072,256M)
> set in out I
I'm currently in the process of trying to tune CSA, ECSA and Common Page Size
and was looking for some recommendations. We currently have CSA=(3072,256M)
set in out IEASYSXX member. Looking at Omegamon it appears we hover around 70-
80 Meg for ECSA and around 660K of CSA. I'
7 matches
Mail list logo
