On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:06:54 -0500, Dave Butts dave.w.bu...@lowes.com wrote:
It was an OS problem after all, and not due to the MCLs.
APAR OA29370 has been opened.
We have been over the 65535 device boundry for a long time, but the bug
became exposed when I deleted over 5000 addresses the week
Dave Butts dave.w.bu...@lowes.com wrote in message
news:listserv%200906101506546047.0...@bama.ua.edu...
It was an OS problem after all, and not due to the MCLs.
APAR OA29370 has been opened.
We have been over the 65535 device boundry for a long time, but the
bug
became exposed when I
Per IOCDS.
Many of our addresses are open systems dasd (for FDR backup purposes).
Dave
On Thu, 11 Jun 2009 08:53:32 +0200, Vernooy, C.P. - SPLXM
kees.vern...@klm.com wrote:
Just out of curiosity: 65535 devices per what? IOCDS, storage device?
Makes me feel working in a small shop...
It was an OS problem after all, and not due to the MCLs.
APAR OA29370 has been opened.
We have been over the 65535 device boundry for a long time, but the bug
became exposed when I deleted over 5000 addresses the week before via
dynamic iogen activate. The PAV assignment code broke because of
- Original Message -
From: Dave Butts dave.w.bu...@lowes.com
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 4:07 PM
Subject: Re: Dynamic PAV assigment has stopped
It was an OS problem after all, and not due to the MCLs.
APAR OA29370 has been opened.
We have been
Just curious: why a POR?
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Dave Butts
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 3:07 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Dynamic PAV assigment has stopped
It was an OS problem after all
We have HyperPAV implemented on one test box. It is actually working fine.
Only the WLM dynamic PAV is not working (on the rest of the dasd farm).
Still working with IBM support. They are a little stumped so far, but have
been able to find that the root problem is that the DBVT (Device Block
Has anyone experienced all dynamic PAV activity just stopping?
RMF reports are showing me that there have been zero changes to our alias
assignments for the past couple weeks. Lickily our PAVs are currently spread
out enough over the production UCBs that we have not had terrible
performance
Dave Butts dave.w.bu...@lowes.com wrote in message
news:listserv%200906040916525513.0...@bama.ua.edu...
Has anyone experienced all dynamic PAV activity just stopping?
RMF reports are showing me that there have been zero changes to our
alias
assignments for the past couple weeks. Lickily
Has anyone experienced all dynamic PAV activity just stopping?
Check both your IODF WLM policy.
Both have to have PAV turned on.
If one doesn't, then it won't be active.
We implemented dynamic, aeons ago, in the following manner:
1. Assign one alias to each volume (we had enough at the time).
The MCLs were applied on May 2.
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009 16:47:59 +0200, Vernooy, C.P. - SPLXM
kees.vern...@klm.com wrote:
When was your MCL upgrade?
Our last upgrade was first half of April and I still see PAVs moving.
Kees.
--
In a message dated 6/4/2009 10:02:53 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
kees.vern...@klm.com writes:
When was your MCL upgrade?
Our last upgrade was first half of April and I still see PAVs moving.
Parts is parts. Guess we need to know more info.
z9---z/CHPIDs---z/Controller
MCL
Type and
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009 09:16:52 -0500, Dave Butts dave.w.bu...@lowes.com wrote:
Has anyone experienced all dynamic PAV activity just stopping?
RMF reports are showing me that there have been zero changes to our alias
assignments for the past couple weeks. Lickily our PAVs are currently spread
out
LS,
More important is your IOSQ time increasing ? Are the number of PAV adresses
insufficient ?
2009/6/4 Dave Butts dave.w.bu...@lowes.com
Has anyone experienced all dynamic PAV activity just stopping?
RMF reports are showing me that there have been zero changes to our alias
assignments for
More important is your IOSQ time increasing ? Are the number of PAV adresses
insufficient ?
The OP said he was fine, for now.
But, I/O patterns do change, over the day, and over time.
I still think the IODF and the WLM policy should be checked to see if it's
enabled in both.
It may be; it is
.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 2:03 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Dynamic PAV assigment has stopped
More important is your IOSQ time increasing ? Are the number of PAV adresses
Indeed, and that may be exactly what happened: a change to the workload
eliminated or reduced volume contention such that PAV redistribution is no
longer needed.
I didn't say a change to the workload.
I said a change to WLM or IODF.
-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!
:24 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Dynamic PAV assigment has stopped
Indeed, and that may be exactly what happened: a change to the workload
eliminated or reduced volume contention such that PAV redistribution is no
longer needed.
I didn't say a change to the workload.
I said a change
Ah, but you did:
But, I/O patterns do change, over the day, and over time.
And I agree with that as well the rest of your excellent advise.
I guess I wasn't clear.
I find it difficult to believe that not a single PAV was re-assigned in a month.
That was the purpose of my 'pattern' statement.
Yea, we checked the IODF and the WLM policy. No changes there. Last IODF
change was earlier in April and everything is still set for PAV in there and in
the WLM policy.
I liked the idea of reactivating the policy, but I checked and we have
activated new policies with minor changes a couple
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Dynamic PAV assigment has stopped
Has anyone experienced all dynamic PAV activity just stopping?
RMF reports are showing me that there have been zero changes to our
alias assignments for the past couple weeks. Lickily our PAVs are
currently spread out enough over
Good!
All I said was: check it out!
Never said it was the issue.
Yea, we checked the IODF and the WLM policy. No changes there.
Last IODF change was earlier in April and everything is still set for PAV in
there and in
the WLM policy.
-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!
22 matches
Mail list logo
