RE: why RCLSTG

> Jim Damato:
>I don't know how to do my job.  Please help me.

> Al Barsa:
>Regarding RCLSTG times, IBM has been very focused in improving this
>performance, and they changed RCLSTG some releases ago (I'd like to say
>4.1 or 4.2) to be multi-threaded under the covers.

> Andy Nolen-Parkhouse:
>What I remember is that some of the DST disk pumping utilities
>don't really work with the operating system (obviously it's
>not loaded).  Objects are moved but damaged objects may be
>omitted.  Unfortunately, the only way to remove the damage flag
>is to run a RCLSTG.

> Tony Corbett:
>I'm not "the" expert, but I've been caught in a bind a couple times by
>not doing the RCLSTG, so I'd try to figure out a schedule which will
>allow it.  I've done a lot of upgrades and have forgotten to do the
>rclstg on a few of them...and regretted it.


We're running V5R1.  I'd hate to see what performance would be like if it
were slow.

Thanks for everyone's advice.  I may be able to use Andy's observations to
justify the RCLSTG.  Tony - It would help to know how you were caught in a
bind or what happened that caused regret.

My real situation is that management has said we don't need to waste time on
the RCLSTG, and I have to prove that we do, or live with the consequences.

Much thanks...

-Jim

James P. Damato
Manager - Technical Administration
Dollar General Corporation
<mailto:jdamato@dollargeneral.com>