And please remember to have enough memory for failover from other CFs. Same for enough processor power. Most folks believe a CF won't fail. If you are brave enough to believe that for your mission critical data sharing applications, then no problem. BUT...
-----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Fagen Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2008 SYSN 07:58 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: CFLEVEL 16 and it's structure sizing On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 22:35:13 -0800, Edward Jaffe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I guess, as long as the "rule" holds true that higher CF levels nearly >always require the same or more storage, a "lazy" sysprog can't go wrong >using the values provided by CFSIZER, so long as s/he doesn't run out of >storage. In a short-on-storage situation, closer scrutiny would be >advisable. Dunno about "lazy," but simple economics do play...what's cheaper: Spending a few grand on some memory or wasting perfectly good sysprog cycles rearranging the deck chairs on the good ship Coupling Facility? Scott Fagen Enterprise Systems Management ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
