Being that this is a one-time effort, I wouldn't worry too much about where the bottleneck is because you indicate can't do anything about it
anyway. Better is simply to estimate the amount of time it will take to some gross level of precision. If you were going to be doing it regularl y then it becomes a more important question and could drive configuration changes. I know tape drives are not involved in your process, but I do know that DDR is very effective at driving the channel to them. We have a bank of 4 3590's shared between VM and z/OS on 2 ESCON channels. When I had 2 DDR' s writing to 2 of the tapes drives it effectivley saturated the channels from the VM LPAR and the z/OS jobs trying to use the other 2 tape drives suffered horribly. The reports from Velocity's ESAMAP made it easy to diagnose this cross-LPAR interference. (I ended up moving my DDR's to a different time slot.) I mention this to say that it will be good that there will not be other production workload going on to the DASD when you do this. BTW, the 3-4% channel utilization I mentioned in my other post is on 2G FICON channels. Obviously, 4G or 8G channels would make a big difference . Brian Nielsen On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 16:45:23 -0800, Schuh, Richard <[email protected]> wrot e: >I will have to check with the TPF and H/W folks to get answers to most of your questions - VM was not included in the planning for the install. Since this is a one-time effort, I doubt that I can justify any new feature. I am fairly certain that the Ficon to the target disks is 4G. We are on a z10 (one I can answer authoritatively). The configuration of the switch is one that I absolutely cannot answer until I get an answer from the h/w folks. Unfortunately, they are in an earlier time zone, so I cannot get the answer until tomorrow.
