On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:30:09 +0100, Vernooy, C.P. - SPLXM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Mark Zelden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message >news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... >> On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:17:20 -0500, Mark Jacobs ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >> >Is there any advantage in migrating CTC's from ESCON to FICON? >> > >> >> Of course. But I guess it could depend on the application. We saw >much >> better response times with MIM, VTAM and XCF CTCs when we migrated >> to FICON. Of course now the CF links are faster (again) than using >CTCs >> so the XCF part wouldn't matter as much. > >Yes, it does, because of the protocol. With the CTC protocol a message >is sent directly from the sender to the receiver. Via the CF structure, >a message is put in the Structure, the CF notifies the receiver that >there is a message and the receiver then retrieves the message. > >I just converted our testsysplex to CTC signalling paths and noted a 20 >times performance inprovement. This is of course due to the shared CF >engines, that perform relatively badly. However if I compare these CTC >figures to our Production CF Structure figures I still expect an >improvement there by a factor 2. > Yes - of course with a shared CF engine. But with current hardware (link technology, z9 engines) the links are once again faster. YMMV. Mark -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.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
