Yes I did. I even suggested they do a VTAPE sort because our VTAPE device is 4X faster than our ESS 800s and ESS F20s.
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 9:40 PM, Joel C. Ewing <[email protected]> wrote: > I suppose you have at least tried to explain to those users that if they > actually tell a sort program it can use 150 GiB more storage than the real > storage on the machine that not only will they NOT get a fast sort, but they > will get an incredibly slow and expensive one because of paging delays and > paging overhead - and everything else running on the machine for the long > time it will take this to run will also see response go to the dogs. They > might not care about the latter, but some other users of the system with > more clout might. > > A decent sort utility that is given a realistic amount of virtual storage > that can be kept in its working set in real storage, and which knows that > the bulk of its temporary storage is on slower external devices can optimize > circles around the abuse of the paging system these users are requesting. > > If the users can't understand that argument, you can probably expect them to > also write their own sort program and use a bubble sort - and be surprised > when it takes several years to run with that volume of data! The task of > sorting 150 GiB of data shouldn't be delegated to neophytes that don't > understand that resources have limits and that there are good reasons why > some techniques are deprecated. > J. C. Ewing > > > On 03/22/2011 03:41 PM, Mike Schwab wrote: >> >> I have some users who requested 150GB of Paging packs so they could do >> an in core reorg of multiple M9 volume DB2 databases, because that was >> the fastest way. I told them that was too much and they needed to >> specify sort work statements. They resisted and the request is >> pending. >> > >> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Mark Pace<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I assume that since it used 1792MB it has to be from above the line. >>> >>> There is not a dump. The program ends nicely with an error message, not >>> an >>> IBM message, that it is out of memory. >>> >>> It's batch utility to massage SMF data and was not written inhouse. The >>> SE >>> is talking with them now. There suggestion was to process less data. :-D >>> >>> The LPAR is 4GB and I really don't know how much is to much. >>> >>> I don't have a default region size, that I know of. I allow the use of >>> REGION=0M and don't have any exit to limit that size. > > > -- > Joel C. Ewing, Fort Smith, AR [email protected] > Bentonville, AR [email protected] > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > -- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
