> " Why couldn't IBM have implemented it properly to begin with."
Hindsight is a wonderful thing - but fair play to IBM that they are now performing the changes required to circumvent most of the problems. Have you looked to see if you can reduce the amount of times that you recycle the started tasks that leave the non-reus ASIDs? Can you tolerate an increase in MAXUSER and/or RSVNONR? If the address spaces causing this problem are DB2 STCs - have you investigated whether you could recycle RRS at the time that you shutdown DB2. If I remember correctly RRS X-Memory binds connections are by far the most numerous culprit in these cases - and they can be freed with a timely "SETRRS CANCEL". -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL Sent: 21 July 2005 20:00 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: RSVNONR -DB2 ... Hardly anyone is there yet, so the availability of that functionality is to an extent moot. ... I have hated this restriction since it came out with XM. Why couldn't IBM have implemented it properly to begin with. We are striving for 5-9's, a small shop, but we have to IPL every 6 weeks because of this restriction. Yes SYSPLEX helps; we have many affinities, so it doesn't help enough. Cr*p code is not enough justification to have to do this! -teD In God we Trust! All others bring data! -- W. Edwards Deming ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
