I'd agree. On the surface, it seems like a good performance idea. But you really should measure SOMETHING before and after. LFO has been around for a short while, but unless you are real current on DB2 or Java using apps, you couldn't use it. I also find it hard to believe that IBM specifically documents and markets how it will work, and then says it isn't designed that way; seems like an APARable situation. Oh- I would not recommend EVER trying something new on a Production system. If you don't have a Test or SysProg environment, you should.
zNorman -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gerhard Adam Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2010 Saturday 3:52 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Anyone Using z10 Large Pages in anger? >Thus there is a hole in the RMF metrics (unless ALL large pages are being >used) covering >unused large pages, and indeed, the total large pages present >on the system. Actually my thought is also a "so what". It seems that the other issues of 4K to 1M split and coalesce are certainly legitimate issues as well as an IPL for LFAREA. However, this has nothing to do with the original point about metrics. What is interesting is that despite the fact that no one seems to have measured any performance metrics regarding benefits for large page support, it seems the obvious question is then why use it? This solves all the concerns in one stroke. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
