I believe, when IBM was working on the zap, I was told that there was a problem moving from the 4.1 version - something about a legacy member table instead of the backup groups table problem. I'm running at the 5.2.1.1 level with the zap.
-----Original Message----- From: Stumpf, Joachim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 9:19 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Z/OS and TSM - preferred server level?? Jim, I didn't recognize that you are at 4.1. I think theres no problem with the upgrade for you, because the problems we had were with the systemobjects of windows nodes which were included with 4.2. Our migrations: 3.7 --> 4.1.3 --> 4.1.5 --> 5.1.0.0 --> 5.1.1.6 --> 5.1.5.0 --> 5.1.5.3 --> 5.1.6.1 ---> 5.1.6.3 and now we are migrating to 5.2.1.1 I think our problems with the systemobjects occured somewhere during migration from 4.1.5 to 5.1.6.3. -- mit freundlichen Gr��en Joachim Stumpf ------------- Original-Nachricht folgt ------------- Joachim, Thanks, I remember seeing something about this earlier. I wonder if it applies, though, as we are moving from 4.1.x and the problem description specifically references 4.2 and 5.1 >From what release did you jump to 5.1.6? "Stumpf, Joachim" wrote: > > Hi, > > at the moment we are migrating from 5.1.6.3 to 5.2.1.1. > If you are at 4.x you should have a look at: > http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg1PQ80211 > > We had big problems with the performance during upgradedb (AuditDB run 80h with a 16GB database and used over 65h CPU). > After the ZAP the Upgradedb took nearly 30min and used 3min. CPU. > > So the ZAP mentioned in the ARPAR worked for us. > > Good Luck ;-) > > -- > mit freundlichen Gr��en / regards > Joachim Stumpf > > > ------------- Original-Nachricht folgt ------------- > > We are closing in on bringing up Z/OS 1.4 and with it a new version of > TSM server. It looks like 5.1.7 was delivered with our server pac (FMID > HDN5510). In a meeting earlier this week a Tivoli rep recommended that > we go ahead and pull down the latest server level (5.2.1 w/5.2.2 due in > early Dec.) > > Any recommendations or experiences with this platform and TSM levels out > there worth passing along? We're currently at 4.1.4.2 > > As always, thanks in advance! > > -- > Jim Kirkman > AIS - Systems > UNC-Chapel Hill > 966-5884 -- Jim Kirkman AIS - Systems UNC-Chapel Hill 966-5884
