Keep in mind the placement on the volume was all about arm movement. On a
physical 3390 that meant something. As platters got wider, the arm with the
read/write heads had farther to travel from one end to the other. In a DASD
array where your 33xx volume is virtualized across a bunch of 3.5
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 12:02:00 -0500, Kenneth E Tomiak
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you really had time to monitor which datasets on a
volume were accessed the most often then you were overstaffed. Any shop I
worked in had more work to do than time to get it done in.
At my first sysprog job, we
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 17:23:49 -0400, Bob Shannon
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can't justify a mod-27 since about 60% of it would be empty - multiplied
by all our sysres sets: 2 for maintenance (one for each company), 6 for one
company environment, 3 or 4 sets for 3 other environments and a few more
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Eells
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 7:35 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: ServerPac Installs and dataset allocations
SNIP
Oddly enough I'd looked already. I wrote the SMS
Thompson, Steve wrote:
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of John Eells
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 7:35 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: ServerPac Installs and dataset allocations
SNIP
Oddly enough I'd looked already
George Dranes wrote:
We just recently installed z/OS 1.8 using ServerPac. We then applied all of
the latest RSU maintenance. I noticed many of the SYS1 datasets on our
SYSRES apparently were allocated too small by ServerPac jobs. I know some
may just need compressed but others such as
On Sep 10, 2007, at 5:49 PM, George Dranes wrote:
We just recently installed z/OS 1.8 using ServerPac. We then
applied all of
the latest RSU maintenance. I noticed many of the SYS1 datasets on
our
SYSRES apparently were allocated too small by ServerPac jobs. I
know some
may just need
On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 17:49:56 -0500, George Dranes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We just recently installed z/OS 1.8 using ServerPac. We then applied all of
the latest RSU maintenance. I noticed many of the SYS1 datasets on our
SYSRES apparently were allocated too small by ServerPac jobs. I know
There is a way in the ServerPac dialogs to globally alter the space
allocations. I usually add 25-50% to the allocations. After my initial
load of the datasets I compress all then reallocate as needed to minimum
50% free in a single extent. This is probably not needed but I like all
my system
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of George Dranes
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 5:50 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: ServerPac Installs and dataset allocations
We just recently installed z/OS 1.8 using ServerPac. We
(Re-post to the list. For NNTP users, sorry for the duplicate.)
Thompson, Steve wrote:
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of George Dranes
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 5:50 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: ServerPac Installs
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Eells
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 9:09 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: ServerPac Installs and dataset allocations
SNIP
The data set space allocations are not the result
-0600) America/Chicago
Subject: Re: ServerPac Installs and dataset allocations
There is a way in the ServerPac dialogs to globally alter the space
allocations. I usually add 25-50% to the allocations. After my initial
load of the datasets I compress all then reallocate as needed to minimum
50
Thompson, Steve wrote:
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of John Eells
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 9:09 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: ServerPac Installs and dataset allocations
SNIP
The data set space allocations
Mark,
Do you really get your whole Sysres on one 3390-3? I had to go to 2 volumes
back at OS/390 2.8, and maybe even 2.5. I know I usually spent a lot of
time going over allocations and making sure there was enough space for most
maintenance to go on without putting any datasets in multiple
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Eells
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:47 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: ServerPac Installs and dataset allocations
SNIP
Without the APAR numbers, it's a bit hard to say
9:45 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: ServerPac Installs and dataset allocations
I'm assuming if I go the re-allocate and copy direction I can use
IEBCOPY with the COPY parm (don't really want to use COPYMOD since it
will re-link everything) for PDSs and COPYGRP for the PDSEs
I put the heavily hit loadlibs such as SYS1.LINKLIB on one side of the VTOC,
and the ISPF libraries on the other side of the VTOC. With todays heavily
cached dasd, that probably will buy you very little anymore.
Very little.
Especially, since it's been over 15 years since IBM stopped
Ted MacNEIL wrote:
I put the heavily hit loadlibs such as SYS1.LINKLIB on one side of the VTOC,
and the ISPF libraries on the other side of the VTOC. With todays heavily
cached dasd, that probably will buy you very little anymore.
Very little.
Especially, since it's been over 15 years since
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 12:36:18 -0500, Eric Bielefeld [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Mark,
Do you really get your whole Sysres on one 3390-3? I
No. Not sure what I was thinking. I probably was thinking one 3390-9.
But the balance between too big and too small has to do with how many
volumes are
we were using two mod 9's, and finally went to mod 27 for the sysres at z/OS
1.8
- Original Message -
From: Mark Zelden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 3:45 PM
Subject: Re: ServerPac Installs and dataset
I know that when I worked at PH Mining, I wanted 6 or 8 mod 9s for my IPL
packs and Dlib packs for prod and test and new developement. In 1999, when
we had EMC dasd, my boss said no because a potential hot site might not give
us any mod 9s. Then, several years later when we got new Hitachi
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 15:59:44 -0400, Robert Justice [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
we were using two mod 9's, and finally went to mod 27 for the sysres at z/OS
1.8
I recently spilled to a 2nd mod-9 under 1.6 due to XML toolkit, so all
HFS/zFS is
on its own mod-9 now. z/OS 1.8 grew a little bit more
I can't justify a mod-27 since about 60% of it would be empty - multiplied by
all our sysres sets: 2 for maintenance (one for each company), 6 for one
company environment, 3 or 4 sets for 3 other environments and a few more
sets for sandbox environments. So at least 20 or so mod-27s in
all
Thompson, Steve wrote:
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of John Eells
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:47 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: ServerPac Installs and dataset allocations
SNIP
Without the APAR numbers, it's
We just recently installed z/OS 1.8 using ServerPac. We then applied all of
the latest RSU maintenance. I noticed many of the SYS1 datasets on our
SYSRES apparently were allocated too small by ServerPac jobs. I know some
may just need compressed but others such as SYS1.SHASLNKE which is a
26 matches
Mail list logo
