Hear, hear!


Regards
Thomas Berg
____________________________________________________________________
Thomas Berg   Specialist   z/OS\RQM\IT Delivery   SWEDBANK AB (Publ)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]]
> On Behalf Of Farley, Peter x23353
> Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 5:38 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Storage paradigm [was: RE: Data volumes]
> 
> <Rant>
> Like a few others on this list, I have often gritted my teeth at the
> necessity to estimate disk storage quantities that vary widely over
> time in a fixed manner (i.e., SPACE in JCL) when the true need is just
> to match output volume to input volume each day.
> 
> Why is it that IBM (and organizations that use their mainframe systems)
> so vigorously resist a conversion off of the ECKD "standard"?  (Yes, I
> know it's all about "conversion cost", but in the larger picture that
> is a red herring.)  Not that I'm likely to see such a transition in my
> lifetime, but in this dawning time of soi-disant "big data", perhaps it
> is past time to change the storage paradigm entirely, not from ECKD to
> FBA but to transition instead to something like the Multics model where
> every object in the system (whether in memory or on external storage,
> whether data or program) has an address, and all addresses are unique.
> Let the storage subsystem decide how to optimally position and
> aggregate the various parts of objects, and how to organize them for
> best performance.  Such decisions should not require human guesstimate
> input to be optimal, or nearly so.  Characteristics of application
> access are far more critical specifications than mere size.  The
> ability to specify just the desired application access characteristics
> (random, sequential, growing, shrinking, response-time-critical, etc.)
> should be necessary and sufficient.
> 
> EAV or not EAV, guaranteed space or not, candidate volumes, striped or
> not striped, compressed or not compressed - all of that baggage is
> clearly non-optimal for getting the job done in a timely manner.  Why
> should allocating a simple sequential file require a team of "Storage
> Administration" experts to accomplish effectively?
> </Rant>
> 
> Peter
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]]
> On Behalf Of Ed Jaffe
> Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2013 10:47 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Data volumes
> 
> On 6/9/2013 7:12 AM, Scott Ford wrote:
> > We need bigger dasd ...ouch
> 
> The largest 3390 volumes in our tiny shop hold 3,940,020 tracks or
> 262,668 cylinders. That is the maximum size supported by the back-level
> DASD we are running. Newer DASD hardware can support volumes up to 1TB
> in size. I assume nearly all zEC12 and z196 customers are capable of
> exploiting these large sizes. But, do they?
> 
> I spent three years dealing with, and eventually helping IBM to solve
> (via OA40210 - HIPER, DATALOSS), a serious EAV bug that should have
> been seen in most every shop in the world that uses the DFSMSdss
> CONSOLIDATE function (with or without DEFRAG). The experience was a
> real eye-opener for me and I concluded that almost nobody is using EAV!
> 
> Why not? Personally, I would find it embarrassing if the Corsair thumb
> drive in my pocket held more data than our largest mainframe volumes.
> But, that's just me...
> --
> 
> This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the
> addressee and may contain information that is privileged and
> confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended
> recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient,
> you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is
> strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
> please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any
> attachments from your system.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send
> email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to