When we were transforming our environment from separate CPUs/LPARs to sysplex,
we did so by subdividing existing systems into sysplex members rather than
combining systems into sysplexes. Resulting sysplexes were based on traditional
workloads. We ended up with one sysplex that only one member. No other system
had the same workload, and no one could justify subdividing it just on
principle. No problem.
There was one scheduled housekeeping job that did heavy ICF catalog reading. On
all sysplexes it ran with x resource utilization except for this one sysplex,
where the same job used 2x or 3x resources. I finally asked the question, how
is this sysplex different from all other sysplexes? It was also the only
parallel sysplex that was still running traditional ring GRS only because with
a single system, it didn't seem worth additional CF structure overhead. IBM at
the time said for up to four members, GRS ring was adequate. I'm not much into
measuring and micro analyzing, so on a hunch I converted this single member
sysplex to GRS star. The change was dramatic. Suddenly, with no other changes,
the catalog housekeeping job dropped to x resource utilization.
This was quite a few years ago. Things may have changed, but I still recommend
GRS star for any parallel sysplex regardless of the number of members.
.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW
robin...@sce.com
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On Behalf Of
Edgington, Jerry
Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2020 10:39 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):XCF/GRS question
CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL
We are running on single SYSPlex with two LPARs (Prod and Test) with 2 ICFs,
all running on the GPs. We are experiencing slowdowns, due to PROC-GRS on
Test, PROC-XCFAS on Prod. Weights are 20/20/20/80 for ICF1/ICF2/Test/Prod. We
have setup XCF Structures and FCTC for GRS Star
Higher Weight:
PROC-GRS 3.4 users
PROC-GRS 2.4 users
ENQ -ACF2ACB 100.0 % delay LOGONIDS
PROC-GRS 99.0 % delay
PROC-GRS 13.0 % delay
Lower weight:
PROC-XCFAS 14.1 users
PROC-XCFAS 13.1 users
PROC-XCFAS 99.0 % delay
PROC-XCFAS 45.0 % delay
PROC-XCFAS 16.0 % delay
PROC-XCFAS 11.0 % delay
PROC-XCFAS 33.0 % delay
PROC-XCFAS 77.0 % delay
PROC-XCFAS 45.0 % delay
GRSCNFxx:
GRSDEF MATCHSYS(*)
SYNCHRES (YES)
GRSQ (CONTENTION)
ENQMAXA(250000)
ENQMAXU(16384)
AUTHQLVL(2)
RESMIL(5)
TOLINT(180)
IEASYSxx:
GRS=STAR, JOIN GRS STAR
GRSCNF=00, GRS INITIALIZATION MEMBER
GRSRNL=00, GRS RESOURCE LIST
D GRS:
RESPONSE=TEST
ISG343I 13.38.49 GRS STATUS 604
SYSTEM STATE SYSTEM STATE
MVSZ CONNECTED TEST CONNECTED
GRS STAR MODE INFORMATION
LOCK STRUCTURE (ISGLOCK) CONTAINS 1048576 LOCKS.
THE CONTENTION NOTIFYING SYSTEM IS TEST
SYNCHRES: YES
ENQMAXU: 16384
ENQMAXA: 250000
GRSQ: CONTENTION
AUTHQLVL: 1
MONITOR: NO
Any advice or help on what I can do about these delays, would be great?
Thanks,
Jerry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
