It's not too faded Ted. And yes, Walsh. ftp://ftp.software.ibm.com/software/mktsupport/techdocs/allreal_v11.pdf
Ted MacNEIL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Given that ESQA will just overflow into ECSA is there any real reason not to allocate ESQA fairly low so that it is always at 100%, and then size/monitor ECSA for the combined requirements? I am aware that that would not be a good thing below the line, but I haven't read of any clear reason to 'tune' ESQA rather than ESQA/ECSA as a combined area. I have always been of the opinion that a little SQA/ESQA conversion is okay, but not a lot. IBM (I believe) used recommend as little as possible. But, now with 64-bit addressing, and no expanded storage I think you cannot get away with it. IIRC, IPL-processing needs more ESQA to build page tables, and that will not be allowed to overflow into CSA, since the entire system is not up yet. There's a paper on the WTC site explaining this. And, as my faded memory recalls, it might have been written by Kathy Welsh/Walsh (?). - Too busy driving to stop for gas! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
