On 3/17/06, O'Brien, Dennis L wrote:
> Correction to item 1: z/VM 5.1 and below can support more than 2G of
> central storage in the LPAR, as long as you're on zSeries hardware.
> They just have to move pages below 2G when CP needs to do something with
> them, such as I/O.
But there's more to ex
n
Behalf Of Tom Duerbusch
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 09:19
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: VM Performance Question
I don't know for sure if it really helps, but I have been saying the
same thing for years.
Setting expanded storage is a good thing for an actively paging
system.
VM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: VM Performance Question
I don't know for sure if it really helps, but I have been saying the
same thing for years.
Setting expanded storage is a good thing for an actively paging
system.
Also by reducing the amount of central storage, would cause increased
p
I don't know for sure if it really helps, but I have been saying the
same thing for years.
Setting expanded storage is a good thing for an actively paging
system.
Also by reducing the amount of central storage, would cause increased
paging.
But if you are not actively paging, why have expanded sto
On 3/15/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The link below is a VM Performance article with the ending "Bottom Lines"
> recommendations.
>
> Has anyone done this and did it in fact improve performance?
I'm not sure what your question is. This recommendation is there
because it solv
The link below is a VM Performance article with the ending "Bottom Lines"
recommendations.
Has anyone done this and did it in fact improve performance?
Bottom Lines
|--|
|
