Hi Mark,

I implemented Buffer Beyond Close in February without incident and I see a 
large number of PDSEs that are accessed frequently that are benefiting from 
this. You can use MXG TYPE1415 to do some simple reporting.

I would actually like to see member data cached (Data In Memory is good) but 
have had enough other projects the concern about causing CPU increase has kept 
me away from exploring it.   

BROWSE    SYS1.PARMLIB(IGDSMSA1) 
 Command ===>                     
********************************* 
SMS ACDS(SYS2.SMS.ACDS)           
    COMMDS(SYS2.SMS.COMMDS)       
    ACSDEFAULTS(NO)               
    ASID(*)                       
    DB2SSID(DB2P)                 
    DESELECT(OPCMD,MSG,DISP)      
    DINTERVAL(150)                
    INTERVAL(10)                  
    JOBNAME(*)                    
    OAMPROC(OAM)                  
    OAMTASK(OAM)                  
    PDSESHARING(EXTENDED)         
    PDSE_RESTARTABLE_AS(YES)      
    PDSE_BUFFER_BEYOND_CLOSE(YES) 
    PDSE1_BUFFER_BEYOND_CLOSE(YES)
    REVERIFY(NO)                  
    RLS_MAXCFFEATURELEVEL(A)      
    RLSINIT(YES)                  
    SELECT(ALL)                   
    SIZE(500K)                    
    TRACE(OFF)                    
    TYPE(ERROR)                   
******************************** B

        Best Regards, 

                Sam Knutson, GEICO 
                System z Performance and Availability Management 
                mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
                (office)  301.986.3574              

"Think big, act bold, start simple, grow fast..." 



-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark 
Zelden
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 3:58 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: PDSE(1)_BUFFER_BEYOND_CLOSE & PDSE(1)_HSP_SIZE

I'm confused.

I want to turn on buffer beyond close (for PDSE1) now that **most of the bugs
are hopefully worked out and ISV software should be set (I recall some
issues back at z/OS 1.6 when this was introduced).  I was forced to test
this some weeks back as a work around to problem on one of our
z/OS 1.9 systems (see HIPER APAR OA25618 - PTFs available 07/17/08). 

(** Most, not all... see recent DFSMSdss APAR OA21934)

However, since OA11068 the default HSP_SIZE is 0 due to high CPU. 
So if HSP_SIZE is 0, is there any benefit to buffer beyond close?
Is just directory data cached? 

Some of my systems still have PDSE1_HSP_SIZE(256) coded (now 
overriding the default of 0) from our 1.6 implementation, but we 
haven't seen the high CPU issue described by OA11068 (as far as I know).

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

====================
This email/fax message is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of this
email/fax is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
destroy all paper and electronic copies of the original message.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
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

Reply via email to