Re: IPL intervals
- From: Efinnell15@xxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 31 Aug 2006 10:45:56 -0700
In a message dated 8/31/2006 10:41:32 A.M. Central Standard Time,
Norman.Gee@xxxxxxxxx writes:
Is there a check list of parameters that I would need to change to
accommodate fewer or no IPLs? Are there control blocks I would need to
be concern with? Will I now run into spool space issues with long
running system tasks?
Guess your biggest issue is currency and storage creep. Six months is the
life cycle of new releases. So if you've got the resources to do parallel
testing on new/test/current and resolve the imcompatibilities no problem. Then to
monitor storage creep of bleeders and free bleeders might be invoking the
name of the unscheduled IPL due to gobbled up storage. RMFPP is pretty good at
tendencies, but can't predict new workloads or applications.
We had one a couple years back where we thought we had downsized ciriculum
tracking to a middleware solution only to find the end-user much preferred the
host application for manipulating the numerous feeds/feeder programs so they
were up/down/up/down loading complete data base nightly to keep in SYNC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to listserv@xxxxxxxxxxx with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
.
- Prev by Date: Re: IBM announces Encrypting tape drives
- Next by Date: Re: S.M.S. Question
- Previous by thread: Re: IPL intervals
- Next by thread: Re: IPL intervals
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
