, 2010 6:05 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: ZFS problems
You should mount the sysres zFS files read only (as you should have been
doing with HFS also). But also make sure you have this in your zFS parms:
romount_recovery=on/* see APAR OA22351 */
Mark
--
Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting
they are mounted? Tks
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Mark Zelden
Sent: Saturday, May 22, 2010 6:05 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: ZFS problems
You should mount the sysres zFS files read only (as you should have been
| READ)
Jon L. Veilleux
veilleu...@aetna.com
(860) 636-9179
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Dazzo, Matt
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 9:05 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: ZFS problems
, 2010 6:05 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: ZFS problems
You should mount the sysres zFS files read only (as you should have been
doing with HFS also). But also make sure you have this in your zFS parms:
romount_recovery=on/* see APAR OA22351 */
Mark
--
Mark Zelden - Zelden
Can this be done to ROOT without system interruption?
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Veilleux, Jon L
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 9:31 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: ZFS problems
You can use the ISHELL pull
: ZFS problems
Can this be done to ROOT without system interruption?
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Veilleux, Jon L
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 9:31 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: ZFS problems
You can use
Again, a z/OS 1.11 change, right?
Right. I just had my 1.11 education called Technical University in Berlin. :-)
If you're sharing HFSs and haven't yet converted to zFS, you may want to
wait until you're at least 1.11 to avoid the two rolling IPLs or the sysplex
outage to get your zFS migrated to
When zFS file systems are mounted R/O in a shared file system environment,
read requests don't have to be function shipped to the owning system. But
the same applies to HFS. Is there another performance benefit you are
referring to?
The cache in zFS maybe. There is no such (synchronized) cache
Fancy that - Barbara being cranky with the support centre who'da thunked
;-)
Everyone in this discussion (except me) is probably a reasonable sized shop
with a reasonable
sized 'plex.
I still say go zFS - HFS has had its day.
Shane ...
On Tue, May 25th, 2010 at 9:23 PM, Barbara Nitz
On Tue, 25 May 2010 06:23:41 -0500, Barbara Nitz nitz-...@gmx.net wrote:
When zFS file systems are mounted R/O in a shared file system environment,
read requests don't have to be function shipped to the owning system. But
the same applies to HFS. Is there another performance benefit you are
On Sun, 23 May 2010 11:35:27 -0500, Mark Zelden mzel...@flash.net
wrote:
When zFS file systems are mounted R/O in a shared file system environment,
read requests don't have to be function shipped to the owning system. But
the same applies to HFS. Is there another performance benefit you are
On Mon, 24 May 2010 16:05:03 -0500, Arthur Gutowski aguto...@ford.com wrote:
Has anyone out there quantified the so-called performance benefits of ZFS in
R/O mode - outside of the IBM labs?
On Sun, 23 May 2010 11:35:27 -0500, Mark Zelden mzel...@flash.net
wrote:
When zFS file systems are
On Sun, 23 May 2010 15:12:44 +1000, Shane Ginnane ibm-
m...@tpg.com.au wrote:
In the unlikely event a filesystem is unmounted uncleanly *AND* the
subsequent mount is changed from R/W to R/O, the
decision not to run the journal should be the customers.
Has anyone out there quantified the
On Sun, 23 May 2010 08:51:15 -0500, Arthur Gutowski aguto...@ford.com wrote:
On Sun, 23 May 2010 15:12:44 +1000, Shane Ginnane ibm-
m...@tpg.com.au wrote:
In the unlikely event a filesystem is unmounted uncleanly *AND* the
subsequent mount is changed from R/W to R/O, the
decision not to run the
Recently I first time IPLed z/OS 1.11. I followed IBM's recommendations
and completely switched to ZFS filesystem (this is default in
ServerPac). So long so good.
However, possibly after some unclean system close (this is sandbox
system) I had serious problems with IPL. OMVS could not
Radoslaw, this sounds like journal (log) replay issues.
I guessing you had the root mounted read/write. You *really* don't want to be
doing that - even
on test systems, remount as r/w only for the time you need it (say for mkdir).
zFS has had its share of latch contension issues, but I'd lean
You should mount the sysres zFS files read only (as you should have been
doing with HFS also). But also make sure you have this in your zFS parms:
romount_recovery=on/* see APAR OA22351 */
Mark
--
Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS
You have to wonder why this is even a consideration.
The journal should be run automagically unless the customer chooses not to. In
the unlikely event a
filesystem is unmounted uncleanly *AND* the subsequent mount is changed from
R/W to R/O, the
decision not to run the journal should be the
18 matches
Mail list logo
