enough secondary amount (and/
or primary as well) so that a one-volume allocation can even exceed
the 65K track limitation and still be within 16 extents.
Scott Barry
SBBWorks, Inc.
On Tue, 1 May 2012 15:52:41 -0400, David Betten bet...@us.ibm.com
wrote:
Just to clarify, DFSORT can cetrainly
DFSORT should be allocating as large format. Do you have VIO=YES as your
default. That might be preventing DFSORT from allocating as large format.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM Corporation
email: bet...@us.ibm.com
DFSORT/MVSontheweb at
Try this in your SYSIN
//SYSIN DD *
INDD(INDD1,OPTIONS(DUMP))
OUTDD(OUTDD1,TYPE(14:15))
DATE(2012125,2012125)
/*
In my example, the job would select only records from today. Change the
125 to the day you need to select.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance
Just to clarify, DFSORT can cetrainly use more than the 1st extent, it just
can't use multiple volumes. As long as DSNTYPE=LARGE is coded on the DD
statement, each of the SORTWK DDs should be able to use multiple extents.
Since a 3390-9 has a capacity of 10,017 cylinders, you should be able to
��z{S���}�ĝ� �xjǺ�*'���O*^��m��Z�w!j�
��z{S���}�ĝ� �xjǺ�*'���O*^��m��Z�w!j�
Sorry about this post. Trying to determine why my posts are coming out
garbled.
Dave Betten
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
I think for some reason it's related to when I do a Reply with History. I
recently went to a newer version of Lotus Notes and suspect something is
now different. Sorry for the bother to everyone.
David,
The two messages of yours which came through to me garbled had this in the
mail headers:
Just to clarify, DFSORT supports large format data sets for sortworks thus
allowing them to use more than
64K tracks. DFSORT's dynamic allocation allocates them as large format.
For JCL allocated sort works
you need to specify DSNTYPE=LARGE on the DD statements and DFSORT will
support that.
My
��z{S���}�ĝ� �xjǺ�*'���O*^��m��Z�w!j�
There can be many reasons they are now suddenly getting ICE046A. Can you
send a few sysouts from jobs receiving the ICE046A to the DFSORT Hotline,
dfs...@us.ibm.com ? Once we determine why they are getting the ICE046A, we
can determine the best approach for addressing it in your environment.
One thing I'll add to that is that if your internet service periodially
drops, it's a real pain if you're connected to a host 3270 session. For
example, my wife primarally does email and web browsing while working from
home. So if our internet signal drops for a few minutes and then comes
back,
I think you really need to figure out why your JCL sortwork is being
directed to VIO. Have you tried using a large space allocation. Usually
ACS routines set a MAXSIZE threshold for directing to a VIO storage group.
If you can stop the SORT work data set from being directed to VIO, then
DFSORT
I can't give specific recommendations without knowing more about these
sorts being executed and the environment. But perhaps I can offer a little
info that will be useful.
The reason the JCL SORTWKxx data sets get reallocated to SORTDKxx is
because VIO=NO is in effect. This is the installation
DFSORT was likely utilizing available central storage for memory object or
Hiperspace sorting. Normally I have not seen that cause spikes in Master
cpu utilization but perhaps there was a spike in paging that drove the
Master cpu. If so, there are DFSORT installation defaults that can be set
to
Back when we updated the pubs for V1R10, I thought I got rid of all those
outdated references. Looks like I missed one. I'll talk to Frank about
updating that one for our next release.
To your question, you are correct. If DFSORT's dynamic allocation is being
used, then DFSORT calculates the
If they are MOD-27s, you should be able to use more than 4300 cylinders on
each volume. Just make sure to code DSNTYPE=LARGE on the JCL SORTWK
statements.
For a sort this large, I would also make sure your DFSORT installation
default for DSA is set very large, like DSA=512. If you run into
Hello Yifet,
Sorry for the delayed reply but I was on vacation. I really can't go
into specifics of the algorithm since that is part of our proprietary
internals. We generally recommend that our customers use MAINSIZE=MAX and
let DFSORT's dynamic storage adjustment calculate the optimal
John sent me his complete sysout. The Intermediate Merge is the main cause
of the high elapsed time. However, in John's case, just increasing DSA is
not going to help because there is an installation exit (ICEIEXIT)
controlling the amount of virtual storage DFSORT can allocate. That exit
is
to:
IBM-MAIN
10/14/2011 08:37 AM
Sent by:
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Please respond to IBM Mainframe Discussion List
David Betten bet...@us.ibm.com wrote:
The Intermediate Merge is the main cause of the high elapsed time.
However, in John's case, just increasing DSA
Send the full joblog/sysout from the sort to dfs...@us.ibm.com and we can
take a look to see if there are any ways to tune the large sort for you.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM Corporation
email: bet...@us.ibm.com
DFSORT/MVSontheweb at
I am out of the office until 10/03/2011.
I am out of the office beginning Friday , 9/30 and returning on Monday,
10/03. My backup is Vicky Vezinaw, vezi...@us.ibm.com
Note: This is an automated response to your message Re: OT to my
collegues sent on 9/29/11 22:59:20.
This is the only
There is not enough information here to determine why the job ran longer.
Please send the complete joblog (not just the DFSORT messages) to
dfs...@us.ibm.com and we can analyze for you. Also, be sure to send
joblogs from multiple days so we can see the variance in elapsed time.
Have a nice day,
Wow, this really takes me back. I believe what you have to do is edit the
ASM source for the table and recompile/linkedit it. Based on the column
names it looks like you are using th eHSM_MIGR_SUM summary table (module
DREG0E3D) which is built off of the HSM_MIGRATE log table (module
DREG0E2D).
I am out of the office until 08/22/2011.
I am on vacation beginning Wednesday, 8/17 and returning on Monday, 8/22.
My backup is Vicky Vezinaw, vezi...@us.ibm.com
Note: This is an automated response to your message Re: Re : A question
on Menu's sent on 8/16/11 20:56:39.
This is the only
I am out of the office until 06/13/2011.
I am on vacation Friday, 6/10, returning on Monday, 6/13. My backup is
Vicky Vezinaw, vezi...@us.ibm.com
Note: This is an automated response to your message jes2 cold Start sent
on 6/10/11 3:57:22.
This is the only notification you will receive while
I can't get into specifics of our internal algorithms but I can give you
some explanations.
As for why you are still seeing 6 work data sets allocated for sorts
completed in core. You are probably seeing message ICE080I IN MAIN
STORAGE SORT. DFSORT tends to be a bit cautious about bypassing
DFSORT reports cpu time in field ICECPUT. This is basically the step TCB
time accumulated between the sort start time and the sort end time. So
that time is a subset of the TCB time reported in type 30 records. Also
keep in mind that it also means if there are things like user written E15
and
DFSORT evaluates the available resources and the characteristics of each
sort to determine whether or
not it would be beneficial to exploit Hiperspace, memory object or
dataspace. Even though your system
is not paging, it's possible that DFSORT determined there was not enough
central strorage
I am out of the office until 10/06/2010.
I am on vacation beginning Wednesday, September 29th, returning on
Wednesday, October 6th. If you need immediate assistance contact my backup
Vicky Vezinaw (vezi...@us.ibm.com) or my manager, Marc Casad
(mdca...@us.ibm.com)
Note: This is an automated
I think the real question was how to tell sort to stop reading anymore
input records when it reaches the first record that's greater than the
selection criteria instead of reading through the rest of the file but not
selecting any of those records. I'm not sure we have a way to do that but
I'm
I believe the discrepancy you are seeing is due to the 8KB block size not
allowing you to fully utilize each track. You are probably only getting 6
blocks per track or 49512 bytes since 7 blocks would put you over the track
capacity. Now if you muliply your used tracks of 135765 by 49512 that
I am out of the office until 08/17/2010.
I am on vacation August 11-16, returning on Tuesday, August 17. If you
need immediate assistance contact my backup Vicky Vezinaw
(vezi...@us.ibm.com) or my manager, Marc Casad (mdca...@us.ibm.com)
Note: This is an automated response to your message
:20:56 AM:
[image removed]
Re: Dynamic sortwork
Elardus Engelbrecht
to:
IBM-MAIN
07/07/2010 02:21 AM
Sent by:
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Please respond to IBM Mainframe Discussion List.
David Betten wrote:
Yes it is correct. We try to allocate all
Yes it is correct. We try to allocate all the required space using n-1
work data sets and we keep that 1 additional to use if the work space
requirement is larger than expected.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM Corporation
email: bet...@us.ibm.com
I am out of the office until 07/12/2010.
I am on vacation July 5-9, returning on Monday, July 12. If you need
immediate assistance contact my backup Vicky Vezinaw (vezi...@us.ibm.com)
or my manager, Marc Casad (mdca...@us.ibm.com)
Note: This is an automated response to your message Re: GML
They coincide with the z/OS EOS dates. DFSORT V1R5 is the DFSORT release
for z/OS 1.5 thru 1.9. So the EOS for z/OS 1.9 is the EOS for DFSORT V1R5.
I don't know what that date is off the top of my head. I can look it up if
you need it.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development,
Correct.
Thanks, so V1.5 is the oldest supported release, correct.
Jim McAlpine
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Your assumptions are correct. You can increase the total amount of work
space possible by increasing the number of work data sets that DFSORT
dynamically allocates. This is by using the n value in the DYNALOC
installation default or the DYNALLOC run time options. For example
OPTION
Frank will correct me if I'm mistaken but I believe you might need the
VLSCMP option. This will cause DFSORT to pad short variable
length INCLUDE/OMIT compare fields with binary zeroes.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM Corporation
email: bet...@us.ibm.com
List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf
Of David Betten
Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 8:48 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: SORTWK files
That's a very good point. You need to take into account how much virtual
storage is available when running parallel
sorts in the same
For DFSORT, we generally recommend 4 work data sets. I have done testing
with varied numbers of work data sets and not seen much variance in
performance until you start allocating very large numbers of work data sets
for small sorts.Also, I would recommend that you allocate total space
of
DFSORT tells me: Generally, DFSORT can automatically determine the input
file size. However, in a few cases, such as when an E15 supplies all of
the
input records,
Actually it's when E15 supplies all of the input records AND no file size
information is provided
to DFSORT. If you pass a file
[mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of
David Betten
Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 6:39 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] SORTWK files
For DFSORT, we generally recommend 4 work data sets. I have done
testing
with varied numbers of work data sets and not seen much
That's a very good point. You need to take into account how much virtual
storage is available when running parallel
sorts in the same address space. You could limit each sort by passing a
DSA value to limit DFSORT's dynamic storage
adjustment from allocating more storage than is available. This
generally all of it probably mean that using DFSORT for compressed
datasets is
not good idea.
I'm not sure I would agree with a general statement such as that.
First. There is a cpu overhead associated with compression and it effects
ALL applications, not just sort. The overhead
is generally
Good points Kees. The original question didn't indicate a paging
problem,
just an increase in page DS use and demand paging. So yes, tuning the
paging
subsystem is certainly a valid approach. I was speaking mainly from a
DFSORT
perspective on ways to minimize paging. Usually a small amount of
DFSORT memory used paging
R Hey
to:
IBM-MAIN
01/14/2010 09:20 PM
Sent by:
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Please respond to IBM Mainframe Discussion List.
Hi Frank/List,
My client has some very big SORT jobs.
When a few run at the the same time, the page DS
Recommend you start at the IBM DFSORT home-page where there are several
documentation and supplemental technical references on DFSORT and
memory usage.
Scott Barry
SBBWorks, Inc.
Suggested Google advanced search argument on this topic:
dfsort memory usage site:ibm.com
Good point
John,
The answer is that it's a little of both... technical reason and
we didn't think of it. We are looking at ways to improve our dynamic
allocation of work data sets to provide some additional flexibility. So it
is on our list of things we'd like to improve on.
Have a nice day,
Dave
Did you change the size of the IRLM lock structure? This is going back a
ways but I recall having a problem when the IRLM lock structure was too
large, it caused a loop when calculating the number of entries.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM Corporation
SMF type 15 is written for data sets that are opened for OUTPUT, UPDAT,
INOUT or OUTIN processing.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM Corporation
email: bet...@us.ibm.com
1-301-240-3809
DFSORT/MVSontheweb at http://www.ibm.com/storage/dfsort/
IBM Mainframe
John,
I think you should open a PMR and we'll research the cause of the
error.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM Corporation
email: bet...@us.ibm.com
1-301-240-3809
DFSORT/MVSontheweb at http://www.ibm.com/storage/dfsort/
IBM Mainframe Discussion List
I usually just terse with TRSMAIN, ftp the tersed file, then unterse with
TRSMAIN.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM Corporation
email: bet...@us.ibm.com
DFSORT/MVSontheweb at http://www.ibm.com/storage/dfsort/
IBM Mainframe Discussion List
I'm not that familiar with it but the RMF Spreadsheet Reporter might povide
you with some z/OS performance reporting.
I'm pretty sure it comes with RMF so it probably meets your requirement of
being something you already have.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM
It is FALSE. All of the control statements are read at initialization and
the include fields are evaluated during the input phase of the sort to
select only the records that meet the criteria.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM Corporation
email:
Thanks for your kind answer. Does that means that AFTER reading all the
matching input records, that subset is THEN sorted?
Correct. As each record is processed, the INCLUDE criteria is evaluated.
If a the record does not meet the INCLUDE criteria it is discarded and not
included in the sort.
I'm not entirely sure I understand your question but I'll try to explain
how DFSORT uses Hiperspace and maybe that will help.
As part of DFSORT initialization, the characteristics of the sort are
evaluated along with available resources and a decision is made about what
type and how much storage
I believe IBM's Tivoli Decision Support for z/OS collects SMF data into DB2
tables for analysis and reporting. I think this tool used to be called
EPDM.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM Corporation
email: bet...@us.ibm.com
DFSORT/MVSontheweb at
I think if you enter D IPLINFO from the console it gives you the IEASYS
list.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM Corporation
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DFSORT/MVSontheweb at http://www.ibm.com/storage/dfsort/
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
I would use DFSORT to extract the 0200 records and have your REXX read the
smaller file. Your REXX is probably using EXECIO and DFSORT will be able
to read through that entire file faster and use much less cpu time.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM
My knowledge of IMS is minimal but I seem to recall there being two flavors
of IMS batch processing
IMS DL/I was usually offline processing where files could not be accessed
concurrently by the onlines
IMS BMP (Batch Message Processing) was where the batch jobs accessed the
data bases through
Just remember that using ALLDUPS to do this assumes there aren't already
dupes in either of the files. I usually run the inputs through ICETOOL to
drop dupes first and then use those files as input to ALLDUPS.
//STEP1EXEC PGM=ICETOOL
//TOOLMSG DD SYSOUT=*
//DFSMSGDD SYSOUT=*
//IN
I'd also ask if when you see the dataset using 3 times what the user
requested, are you looking immediately after it's been defined or after
data has been loaded into it? It might be extending once it's populated.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM Corporation
Chris,
Since I joined the team as the performance lead a couple years ago,
Frank now defers these types of questions to me. Everything you (and all
the others that responded) have said are good points about DFSORT
performance. But the multitude of recommendations just reiterates the
point
Pawel,
It's really hard to say what is a good sorting rate. There are so
many factors that can impact the performance of the sort. File
characteristics, i/o contention, storage resources, etc. I have seen
customer sorts with much higher throughput rates than you and I've seen
some with
Herbie,
Send the sysout from your job directly to me ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and
I'll take a look. We may need you to open an ETR on this but let me take a
look first.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM Corporation
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DFSORT/MVSontheweb
I haven't seen any job output yet but I wanted to share this information
from DFSORT Application Programming Guide
***
For a copy application, the SORTIN data set should not be the same as the
SORTOUT data set or any OUTFIL data set because this can cause lost or
incorrect data or unpredictable
the lines of the DFSORT manual...
Regards
Herbie
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Frank Yaeger
Sent: 22 Januarie 2008 03:50 nm
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: DFSORT anomaly?
David Betten wrote on 01/22/2008 06:53
There can be a slight decrease in performance when you increase the number
of sortworks. Going from say 32 to 48 or 64 probably won't have a major
impact. However, jumping to something like 128 or 255, you will see a more
noticable impact. If you want to send me the sysout from the sort, I can
You can try this
//SORT EXEC PGM=SORT,REGION=5000K
//SYSPRINT DD SYSOUT=*
//SYSOUT DD SYSOUT=*
//SORTIN DD DISP=SHR,DSN=inputsmf
//SORTOUT DD DISP=(NEW,PASS),DSN=TEMP,
// SPACE=(CYL,(50,20),RLSE),DCB=*.SORTIN,UNIT=SYSLG
//SYSINDD *
SORT FIELDS=COPY
INCLUDE
Frank Yaeger just pointed out to me that the trailing blanks are not
necessary since DFSORT will pad the constant on the right with blanks to
the length of the field. So you can just code it like this
//SORT EXEC PGM=SORT,REGION=5000K
//SYSPRINT DD SYSOUT=*
//SYSOUT DD SYSOUT=*
//SORTIN
Try increasing your index CI size. Sometimes when the keys are very unique
you get a situation where the index CI can't hold enough pointers for an
entire data CA. That might be causing the CA splits.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM Corporation
email:
Good answer Martin. The only thing I'd add is that we have an info APAR,
II13495, that provides guidance for setting the DFSORT defaults related to
storage.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM Corporation
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DFSORT/MVSontheweb at
Also, remember that for Hiperbatch only the Data component is kept in the
DLF object. So you would still have to deal with I/Os to the index. You
can provide enough buffers to keep the index set in storage but you don't
get lookaside on the sequence set. With BLSR, you can avoid the seqence
set
Remember there are two types of DLF objects (Hiperbatch Retain and
non-Retain)
Non-Retain is the one that gets deleted when the open count for the dataset
is 0. This is the one that was intended for sequential use and you didn't
need a DLR object as large as the dataset. Just one large enough
I think the debate of whether this story is plausible or not is better
taken offline. Or you can just agree to disagree. I think the important
point that everyone would agree on is that when you are reaching maximum
CPU capacity, it's always a good idea to gather data and understand what's
Check out this manual for a good description of large format datasets.
z/OS
DFSMS: Using the New Functions
Document Number SC26-7473-02
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM Corporation
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DFSORT/MVSontheweb at
I don't want to circumvent the PMR process but thought I'd offer some a
thought based on this information. Double check the storage class that the
sortwork datasets are being assigned to and make sure the default unit
count is 1. Sortwork datasets cannot be multi-volume so there's no point
in
If your system is at z/OS 1.7 or higher, you can exceed 4000 cylinders on a
single volume by adding DSNTYPE=LARGE to your sortwork DDs and they will be
allocated as large format datasets. If you don't code JCL sortworks and
let DFSORT dynamically allocate the required sortwork space ( our
Anton,
Lizette is correct that the diagnostic messages are for use by our
L2/L3 teams and that's why they are not documented. The ICE751I and
ICE752I messages are informational (note they end with an I) and are issued
for both successful and unsuccessful sorts. Usually when a sort fails,
Anton,
If you send the entire sysout directly to my email
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) I can probably diagnose your abend easier.But at
first glance, I suspect the very limited main storage you are allowing the
sort (524288) is causing an intermediate merge and that's when you are
running out of
I already answered Anton in another post but I wanted to respond to this
and make clear that DFSORT work files cannot span multiple volumes. If you
coded UNIT=(SYSDA,10) on a SORTWKnn DD statement, DFSORT would still use
only 1 volume for each SORTWK data set.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT
I THINK (not positive) that if you added COND=(0,LE) to the job statement,
that would force all the steps after the restart step to flush.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM Corporation
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DFSORT/MVSontheweb at
Neal Eckhardt wrote:
I have been testing different values for HIPRMAX to limit the amount
of expanded storage it uses.
It appears that DFSort uses a Hiperspace OR a Data Space. Specifying
HIPRMAX=1% will result in no usage of Data Spaces. Why not?
The EXCP counts on SORTIN and SORTOUT are
Does the data set get assigned to the same storage class when allocated via
JCL and ISPF 3.2? Storage class is assigned prior to storage group and your
storage group routine could be assigning based on the storage class.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM
See my answers below:
We had a very large DFSort job that abended because of insufficient
Sortwk space with message ICE083A, indicating that 4 times 65535 tracks
were not enough.
I'm guessing your system is not a z/OS 1.7 yet. Just an fyi that for
systems at 1.7 or later, DFSORT allocates the
Frank Yaeger is always the best at answering these types of questions but
he's on vacation this week. So I forwarded your question to Vicky Vezinaw
and she supplied the following answers.
ANSWER to Q1:
When you say:
I used the following syntax:
OMIT
Those don't look like SORT messages but rather something that would come
out of the RMF post processor or exits. Does your job have an EXITLIB or
STEPLIB that's pointing to downlevel version of the code? Was there a
message id at the beginning of those messages like ERB that would
indicate
You may want to look at the DFSMSdfp Storage Administration Reference topic
6.6, SMS Volume Selection for Data Set Allocation. This discusses in
detail the criteria used by DFSMS for volume selection.
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM Corporation
email:
You can download a sample for processing DCOLLECT with DSFSORT from the
DFSORT web site.
http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/storage/support/software/sort/mvs/srtmdwn.html
Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
DFSORT Development, Performance Lead
IBM Corporation
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DFSORT/MVSontheweb
I need to comment on a few items here.
First, I'm pretty sure that the MEMLIMIT in SMFPRMxx is a default that's
used if you don't have MEMLIMIT on your JCL or REGION=0M. I don't believe
it overrides it. So if you really want to put a hard limit on the amount of
above the bar storage someone can
I apologize, my earlier append was not clear. DFSORT does check and if CFW
is not active in the controller, then the CFW bit is not turned on. Also, I
would agree that there is a performance benefit of using CFW since you
eliminate the need to write to the NVS. But I have seen many customers
You should not have a problem with DFSORT if you disable cache fast write
in your contoller. Even if the DFSORT default is CFW, the controller will
simply ignore the CFW flag and treat it as a normal write. Generally, I
have not seen a significant perfomrance impact to DFSORT when CFW is turned
Loadrunner actually does have a 3270 interface now so it can drive terminal
traffic to a mainframe CICS application. I believe it can simulate
multiple users using a tn3270 emulator to access the mainframe application.
No matter what tool you use, the real work is in developing an accurate
95 matches
Mail list logo
