On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 14:35:37 -0600, Bill Holder <[email protected]> wrot e:
>It doesn't look like either level (5.3.0 SLU 0702 or 5.4.0 SLU 0801) >contains either APAR in question (VM64082 or VM64510), so unless you've >applied them proactively, it sounds like we can rule them out. I think >we're going to want to look into what's going on in a little more detail - >it's possible it's an example of the issue I mentioned, but it's also >possible that 5.4.0's decision might actually be a better overall tradeoff. > >- Bill Holder, z/VM Development, IBM Endicott I did some looking, and saw in the z/VM Performance Report under z/VM 5.4 Performance Considerations in the MDC Changes section it says that: "APAR VM64082 to z/VM 5.2 and 5.3 changes the behavior of the MDC storage arbiter. Recall the arbiter's job is to determine how to proportion storage between guest frames and MDC. This APAR, rolled into the z/VM 5.4 base, is not on any z/VM 5.2 or 5.3 RSU." So VM64082 should be on my z/VM 5.4 system. I read the descriptions for both APARs and it does sound like it is my problem. I see that VM64510 is on SLU 0802, but in the meantime I may adjust my MDCACHE minimum size and/or bias values as suggested in the above referenced Performance Report section. Is there a potential that doing s o will cause problems in the other storage routine processes mentioned in the APARs? Brian Nielsen
