Looking at the data in hand, the sorts don't seem to be the prime culprits. CPU times and connect times and EXCP counts appear to be rational between the 1.11 and 1.13 data. STEP5, that the poster says was not a sort, is consistent with the other steps.
Something changed to effect the number of service units in all the steps, but the elapsed time for STEP5 really ballooned up. The elapsed time for SORT5, the only substantial sort, went down from about 230 seconds to about 30 seconds. Actually, the elapsed time for all the sort steps went down. I see two things to chase from this. #1, What caused the service units to blow up like they did? #2, What changed in STEP5? Did the application make a change to how it works? Or were there other configuration changes made at the same time. One shop I worked in reconfigured the DASD and by accident put all the high activity volumes on the same group. Can you say massive IOS Queue times? Anyway, check what RMF can tell you. It may give a hint. Chris Blaicher Senior Software Engineer, Software Services Syncsort Incorporated 50 Tice Boulevard, Woodcliff Lake, NJ 07677 P: 201-930-8260 | M: 512-627-3803 E: [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joe du Plumber Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2012 12:02 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Drowning in service units on z/os 1.13 after migrating from v1.11 Bob grumbled: Have you processed the SMF data to insure you don't have an error in your IEFACTRT exit? Bob Shannon Rocket Software - Bob, Lets pretend that the OP knows how to tell time and since the elapsed times are clearly posted can't we please presume that the numbers (which are proportionate) tell the story as it happened? I am wondering if the 1.11 sorts were mostly in-storage ("in-core") sorts while the 1.13 sorts were mostly not (i.e., requiring sortwk I/O which consumed service as well as additional elapsed time). OP, could you please post the sort sysouts from the larger sorts, both before and after for comparison? *sigh* Joe ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ATTENTION: ----- The information contained in this message (including any files transmitted with this message) may contain proprietary, trade secret or other confidential and/or legally privileged information. Any pricing information contained in this message or in any files transmitted with this message is always confidential and cannot be shared with any third parties without prior written approval from Syncsort. This message is intended to be read only by the individual or entity to whom it is addressed or by their designee. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are on notice that any use, disclosure, copying or distribution of this message, in any form, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and/or Syncsort and destroy all copies of this message in your possession, custody or control. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
