Re: AW: Re: MEMLIMIT not honoured by DB2 utility job

2014-10-30 Thread nitz-...@gmx.net
Peter, I have found plenty of places where the discussion is about DB2's DBM1 and IRLM address spaces. Those ignore any MEMLIMIT setting and set this limit to values defined in DB2. I could not find anything related to the utility program DSNX9WLM regarding MEMLIMIT. Waiting for an

Re: AW: Re: MEMLIMIT not honoured by DB2 utility job

2014-10-30 Thread Elardus Engelbrecht
Barbara Nitz wrote: I don't think that this is written down anywhere. Except for modify command for IRLM - F IRLM,MLT = valueunit I also don't see anything for other DB2 address spaces. Just look at the memlimit column in SDSF DA, you'll see exactly which address spaces have adopted this

AW: Re: AW: Re: MEMLIMIT not honoured by DB2 utility job

2014-10-30 Thread Peter Hunkeler
Check the archives, I seem to have a dim memory that we discussed this here and I got bashed when I objected to such a practise. Thanks Barbara. I've got that hint yesterday, and was then checking the archives. I have indeed found the threads you're talking about (and this is what I

Re: AW: Re: MEMLIMIT not honoured by DB2 utility job

2014-10-30 Thread Scott Chapman
I'm with you Barbara: authorized code can be as impolite as it wants, but that doesn't make it right. Scott On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 07:40:02 +0100, nitz-...@gmx.net nitz-...@gmx.net wrote: Peter, I have found plenty of places where the discussion is about DB2's DBM1 and IRLM address spaces.

Re: MEMLIMIT not honoured by DB2 utility job

2014-10-30 Thread Peter Relson
I don't know about the DB2 utility itself, but any authorized program is allowed to bypass region limits (and that includes MEMLIMIT). Whether they should, and by how much they should choose to exceed, are different questions. This is little different in spirit (perhaps different in scale) than

Re: AW: Re: MEMLIMIT not honoured by DB2 utility job

2014-10-30 Thread Martin Packer
...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: Peter Hunkeler p...@gmx.ch To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 29/10/2014 14:47 Subject:AW: Re: MEMLIMIT not honoured by DB2 utility job Sent

Re: AW: Re: MEMLIMIT not honoured by DB2 utility job

2014-10-30 Thread Martin Packer
://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: nitz-...@gmx.net nitz-...@gmx.net To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 30/10/2014 06:40 Subject:Re: AW: Re: MEMLIMIT not honoured by DB2 utility job Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN

AW: Re: AW: Re: MEMLIMIT not honoured by DB2 utility job

2014-10-30 Thread Peter Hunkeler
Isn't DSNX9WLM the program for DB2 Stored Procedures server address spaces? And not a DB2 Utility program? Yep, I wrote that in the initial post. --Peter Hunkeler -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access

Re: MEMLIMIT not honoured by DB2 utility job

2014-10-30 Thread Tom Marchant
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 13:58:56 +0100, Peter Hunkeler wrote: We've got a DB2 utility job (running DB2 Utilities Stored Procedures, PGM=DSNX9WLM), thst is using much more storage that we want it to use. I don't know if this applies to your situation, but an authorized caller of IARV64 can specify

MEMLIMIT not honoured by DB2 utility job

2014-10-29 Thread Peter Hunkeler
We've got a DB2 utility job (running DB2 Utilities Stored Procedures, PGM=DSNX9WLM), thst is using much more storage that we want it to use. Some time ago, we found that REGION=0M was specified but no MEMLIMIT. Since we're running with the default IEFUSI (do nothing, successfully), this

Re: MEMLIMIT not honoured by DB2 utility job

2014-10-29 Thread Jousma, David
616.653.2717 -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Peter Hunkeler Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 8:59 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: MEMLIMIT not honoured by DB2 utility job We've got a DB2 utility job (running DB2

Re: MEMLIMIT not honoured by DB2 utility job

2014-10-29 Thread R.S.
W dniu 2014-10-29 o 13:58, Peter Hunkeler pisze: We've got a DB2 utility job (running DB2 Utilities Stored Procedures, PGM=DSNX9WLM), thst is using much more storage that we want it to use. Some time ago, we found that REGION=0M was specified but no MEMLIMIT. Since we're running with the

AW: Re: MEMLIMIT not honoured by DB2 utility job

2014-10-29 Thread Peter Hunkeler
Some hints: REGION=0 means ignore MEMLIMIT. I understand that specifying REGION=0K/M and *not* specifying MEMLIMIT (and not having IEFUSI limiting it) implies MEMLIMIT=NOLIMIT. But if MEMLIMIT *is* explicitly specified, it will be honoured and REGION=0K/M does not have any influence in

AW: Re: MEMLIMIT not honoured by DB2 utility job

2014-10-29 Thread Peter Hunkeler
Pretty sure that I read somewhere that DB2 has been written to ignore memlimit. Thanks. Will try to find this in DB2 docs. --Peter Hunkeler -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to

Re: AW: Re: MEMLIMIT not honoured by DB2 utility job

2014-10-29 Thread R.S.
W dniu 2014-10-29 o 15:10, Peter Hunkeler pisze: Some hints: REGION=0 means ignore MEMLIMIT. I understand that specifying REGION=0K/M and *not* specifying MEMLIMIT (and not having IEFUSI limiting it) implies MEMLIMIT=NOLIMIT. But if MEMLIMIT *is* explicitly specified, it will be honoured and

AW: Re: MEMLIMIT not honoured by DB2 utility job

2014-10-29 Thread Peter Hunkeler
Pretty sure that I read somewhere that DB2 has been written to ignore memlimit. Thanks. Will try to find this in DB2 docs. I have found plenty of places where the discussion is about DB2's DBM1 and IRLM address spaces. Those ignore any MEMLIMIT setting and set this limit to values defined in

AW: Re: AW: Re: MEMLIMIT not honoured by DB2 utility job

2014-10-29 Thread Peter Hunkeler
Do you say that DFSORT will ignore MEMLIMIT? Yes, and no. I had problems with some DB2 ulitity (reorg) which use DFSORT under the cover. It consumed to much virtual memory causing paging. I set MEMLIMIT in the jobcard. After that the problem still occured, but DFSORT, instead of using 64-bit