I don't know what happened this time.But, this looked like garbage (poorly formated on my BlackBerry), so I'm trying again with better formatting.If it came out better for everybody else, I'm sorry for the duplicate post. >Sorry to say Ted, but I think you've really missed the boat on this one....
Possibly, but I don't think so. I was probably over-reacting.We don't implement a 4TB system overnight. We plan and understand (sometimes on both points) >If that system programmer is the DB2 sysprog that decided to playwith his test >subsystem and define 30G of buffer pools, he willquickly put my system in a >wait state (assuming DB2 actually tried touse that storage)... Again, we plan. If a SYSPROG doesn't know better, I don't want him on my account. Gone are the days where you ask: 'what would happen if I did this?'. If I really needed 30GB of storage I would put it into the box. THEN, I would define it. We don't suddenly drop DB2 V8 (for example) into the environment, and say: 'Oh crap! We forgot about MEMLIST and IEFUSI!'. We say: “Let's change IEFUSI to allow DB2 to do what is required. IE: It's DB2. Salute, and let it enter.' >The DB2/CICS/WAS/ISV/etc. folks typically look at things from their >ownperspective only. Part of the job in my group is to be the gate keeper.... Again, it's documented. We don't complain about the amount of resource (within reason). If the business needs it, it needs it. >As a capacity guy you should understand that because you have the >sameresponsibilities to the health of the overall system.... >What if every authorized program / product felt "they knew more" andbypassed >IEFUSI and just used whatever above the bar storage theywanted with no overall >system control?... Again, we don't blindly implement, do we? My point was more of don't mess with it. Let it go through. Only, because it's documented and we understand it. If I inadvertently implied a blind 'the vendor said so, so it must be true', that is my error. What I meant was, don't limit DB2, but make sure you know what the DBA's are doing. I also meant that SYSPROG-types should not be applying arbitrary limits and impacting the business.DB2 V8 can save a ton of money because of the cost of CPU (hardware & software) that has been consumed in V6 & V7 to reduce the impact of the 2GB limit and the use of HIPERPOOLs. Staple additional memory on the box, back out the unusual acts you had to perform to get around the 2GB limit. And, accept that IEFUSI has no effect with DB2. Don't mess with DB2's decisions. But, plan -- so it doesn't take you by surprise. Implement -- in chunks, in case something goes South. And, monitor. But, don't impose arbitrary limits. SYSPROGs don't always 'know better'. -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
