Thanks for the update on STEPLIB - I didn't see it in 2.1 but my search may have been using the wrong keywords.
I did some testing doing bpxwunix from rexx. 1 test was issuing the env command and the other a cd followed by an ls -la. With libraries in STEPLIB and in ISPLLIB the timing on my system (which is a z/VM guest) was 10 and 4 seconds respectively under ISPF and 4 and 2 seconds in native TSO. This pointed to the ISPLLIB as a tasklib so I removed everything from it and the timing under ISPF went from 10 down to 7 seconds and 4 to 1 seconds. Removing the STEPLIB got me to 2 and 0.5 seconds. Still not subsecond so I suspect there is something in the z/VM setup which I'm not sure how to diagnose but am looking. Thanks Lionel B. Dyck <sdg>< Website: http://www.lbdsoftware.com "Worry more about your character than your reputation. Character is what you are, reputation merely what others think you are." - John Wooden -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Kirk Wolf Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2019 7:20 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: OMVS Tuning ? Lionel, STEPLIB=none has been around for a long time, and I see it documented, for example, in the V1R13 z/OS UNIX Planning book. Can you offer any more details as to where the performance is bad or how you notice? I would assume that what you are describing is something relative to the time required to do a fork/exec or spawn. Which? local spawn? On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 2:04 PM Lionel B Dyck <[email protected]> wrote: > Found one major issue - the systems where the issue is are z/OS 2.1 > and the STEPLIB=none variable looks to have been new in 2.2. Reducing > the STEPLIB and ISPLLIB solved things. > > > Lionel B. Dyck <sdg>< > Website: http://www.lbdsoftware.com > > "Worry more about your character than your reputation. Character is > what you are, reputation merely what others think you are." - John > Wooden > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On > Behalf Of Lionel B Dyck > Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2019 12:58 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: OMVS Tuning ? > > I am working on a project where the omvs performance on some systems > is slower than one would like -definitely not sub-second. > > > > I'm looking for tuning suggestions. > > > > When under ISPF the elapsed time is more than double the elapsed time > when in native TSO. > > > > Note that the OMVS environment includes STEPLIB=none but my guess is > that the ISPLLIB may be the culprit when under ISPF - I just can't > prove that (yet). > > > > Thanks for any guidance. > > > > > > Lionel B. Dyck <sdg>< > Website: <http://www.lbdsoftware.com/> http://www.lbdsoftware.com > > "Worry more about your character than your reputation. Character is > what you are, reputation merely what others think you are." - John > Wooden > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
