Re: Question re: MXG-L post "common storage usage question"

2017-07-10 Thread Elardus Engelbrecht
Peter Hunkeler wrote: >> Wasn't this asked here recently? Check the archives. >Sorry, I missed that one. My excuse is: Been on holiday :-)-- But does that discussion started by Rex Pommier relates to that two APARs? Groete / Greetings Elardus Engelbrecht

Re: Question re: MXG-L post "common storage usage question"

2017-07-10 Thread Peter Hunkeler
> Wasn't this asked here recently? Check the archives. Sorry, I missed that one. My excuse is: Been on holiday :-)-- Peter Hunkeler -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to

Re: Question re: MXG-L post "common storage usage question"

2017-07-10 Thread Tom Marchant
On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 14:43:00 +0200, Peter Hunkeler wrote: >Below text was posted on MXG-L recently. It made me curious, so I tired >to read the APARs mentioned. Unfortunately, IBM's support site does not >have them (for public access) anymore. >Can someone shed some light on this? What was the

Re: Question re: MXG-L post "common storage usage question"

2017-07-10 Thread Elardus Engelbrecht
Peter Hunkeler wrote: >Below text was posted on MXG-L recently. It made me curious, so I tired (sic) >to read the APARs mentioned. Unfortunately, IBM's support site does not have >them (for public access) anymore. Can someone shed some light on this? What >was the original problem? Why did it

Question re: MXG-L post "common storage usage question"

2017-07-10 Thread Peter Hunkeler
Below text was posted on MXG-L recently. It made me curious, so I tired to read the APARs mentioned. Unfortunately, IBM's support site does not have them (for public access) anymore. Can someone shed some light on this? What was the original problem? Why did it increase CPU time for many STCs

Re: FW: common storage usage question

2017-06-26 Thread Jim Mulder
n 06/26/2017 07:24:37 AM: > From: Barry Merrill <ba...@mxg.com> > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Date: 06/26/2017 03:38 PM > Subject: FW: common storage usage question > Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> > > My 2003 Newsletter has t

FW: common storage usage question

2017-06-26 Thread Barry Merrill
g.com tel: 214 351 1966 fax: 214 350 3694 -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Vernooij, Kees (ITOPT1) - KLM Sent: Monday, June 26, 2017 4:11 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: common storage usag

Re: common storage usage question

2017-06-26 Thread Vernooij, Kees (ITOPT1) - KLM
> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of Pommier, Rex > Sent: 20 June, 2017 16:12 > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: common storage usage question > > Hi all, > > Curiosity questio

Re: common storage usage question

2017-06-20 Thread Edward Gould
> On Jun 20, 2017, at 3:37 PM, Ed Jaffe wrote: > > On 6/20/2017 8:24 AM, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: >> SWA is another candidate, but don't just move it up across the board without >> some testing. Above the line can cause problems there. > > Of course SWA is private,

Re: common storage usage question

2017-06-20 Thread Ed Jaffe
On 6/20/2017 8:24 AM, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: SWA is another candidate, but don't just move it up across the board without some testing. Above the line can cause problems there. Of course SWA is private, not common... -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 831 Parkview Drive

Re: common storage usage question

2017-06-20 Thread Tom Marchant
On Tue, 20 Jun 2017 14:11:39 +, Pommier, Rex wrote: >Hi all, > >Curiosity question. Due to some storage issues we've had >recently with old 24 bit programs, I am revisiting our common >storage configuration - CSA and SQA. Taking fragmentation >into account, it appears that I'm using

Re: common storage usage question

2017-06-20 Thread Jesse 1 Robinson
⇐=== NEW robin...@sce.com -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Roach, Dennis Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 8:12 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: common storage usage question Things to consider SQA can expand

Re: common storage usage question

2017-06-20 Thread Roach, Dennis
8799 dennis.ro...@aig.com | www.aig.com -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Pommier, Rex Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 9:12 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: common storage usage question Hi all, Curiosity question.

common storage usage question

2017-06-20 Thread Pommier, Rex
Hi all, Curiosity question. Due to some storage issues we've had recently with old 24 bit programs, I am revisiting our common storage configuration - CSA and SQA. Taking fragmentation into account, it appears that I'm using about 38% of my allocated SQA and about 46% of my allocated CSA.