Dave,
sigh you are forgetting about the people that apply maintenance to a
live running system (UGH).
Ed
On Apr 28, 2014, at 3:28 PM, Gibney, Dave wrote:
Since I copy (and you should) my SMP/E Targets to an operational
RESVOL, so what if some APPLY stuff fails the first time. The PDS
tool from CBT makes it easy to add more space where it is needed
and re-run the APPLY.
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of John Eells
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2014 12:58 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: New install library size
One or two people at the past SHARE voiced this very same opinion.
Let's say, for the sake of argument, that that's four so far. How
do others feel
about this?
First, some background: As I recall, the current design of the
ServerPac dialog
does not allow space to be reduced below the default shipped
values, which
with a few exceptions include a fixed percentage of free space.
There are
sound reasons, in my opinion, to NOT allow those values to be
reduced from
what is shipped today.
Historically, those values have been minimized to help prevent the
allocation
of additional disk volumes when orders for, say, z/OS and other
products
included in z/OS orders don't happen to occupy space that's
comfortably far
away from typical volume boundaries. Editing the ALLOCDS job to
reduce
allocations and fit within a given number of volumes is painful.
Running out
of space during service APPLY processing is painful. Allocating
additional
volumes is painful.
On the other hand disk volumes are, by and large, probably rather
larger
these days. But we've no direct view of what everyone does with
volume sizes
"out there in the 'real world.'"
So...what should we do here?
a) We might blanket increase the free space for every data set.
(In this case,
by how much should we increase it?) This one has the benefit of
being easier
than the others, I suspect.
b) We might add a "recommended space" value and make it possible to
reduce space from "recommended" to "minimum." (What should
"recommended" be?)
c) We might make SMP/E recover from space abends when possible.
(Enough
space on the *same volume* would likely be a requirement. A
potential for
even more severe foot damage following careless use of SMP/E on a
running
instance of software might well ensue.)
d) We might add a "Super Size Me!" option to the z/OSMF Software
Management software instance cloning function.
e) We might do something else...what?
Bear in mind that, as always, this is a zero-sum game. So if we
give you any
of these things we will might well have to defer something else in
this same
area.
Vote early and often...as usual, no promises, except that I'll at
least listen.
R.S. wrote:
W dniu 2014-04-28 20:47, Mark Pace pisze:
I don't understand why library sizes on a fresh install of z/OS
never
seem to account for doing maintenance. <snip>
100% agreed.
<snip>
--
John Eells
z/OS Technical Marketing
IBM Poughkeepsie
[email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-
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
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
