RE: WRKSBMJOB, WRKUSRJOB slug-li

Spool files are counted as jobs as well. They are part of that large count
using WRKSYSSTS, shoot our count is 2157, but using WRKACTJOB the count is
only 143.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: D.BALE@handleman.com [SMTP:D.BALE@handleman.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 6:33 AM
> To:   MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
> Subject:      Re: WRKSBMJOB, WRKUSRJOB slug-li
> 
> James,
> 
> Thanks for the reply!  I had never known to look for this before but,
> needless
> to say, I was a little shocked when I found the following numbers:
> 
> WRKSYSSTS shows Jobs in system = 514  (for the past 10 minutes, it's been
> hovering in the 512 - 515 range)
> 
> Our system values:
> QACTJOB  - Initial number of active jobs           20
> QADLACTJ - Additional number of active jobs        10
> QADLTOTJ - Additional number of total jobs         10
> QTOTJOB  - Initial total number of jobs            30
> 
> Are these the shipping defaults from the factory?  I _think_ I want to
> change
> QTOTJOB to 500, but will wait for advice from those who know better on the
> list.  I have no reason to believe that 514 number goes much higher; we
> run
> fairly level all day long.
> 
> Just to compare, we have a V3R7 box that currently has 799 "jobs in the
> system" and has the same system values as shown above.  However, both
> WRKSBMJOB & WRKUSRJOB respond within 1-2 seconds.  Does the RISC box
> manage
> fragmented job data better than CISC?
> 
> Dan Bale
> IT - AS/400
> Handleman Company
> 248-362-4400  Ext. 4952
> 
> 
> ----------------- Original Message -----------------
> Dan,
> 
> You may want to look at the system values for initial number of jobs and
> additional number of jobs, then the total number of jobs on the system.
> 
> I've seen this happen when job data is fragmented.
> 
> D.BALE@handleman.com wrote:
> >
> > Good grief!  WRKSBMJOB & WRKUSRJOB are absolutely slug-like on this V3R2
> > system.  It can take up to 30 seconds to get a response, everything else
> > (i.e., WRKSPLF, WRKACTJOB) is at or near sub-second response.  This on a
> > system where the CPU usage is 8.2% for a two minute interval (right
> now).
>  Is
> > this a V3R2 issue?
> >
> <<snip>>
> +---
> | This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
> | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
> | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
> | To unsubscribe from this list send email to
> MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator:
> david@midrange.com
> +---
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---