Re: Why separate pools? -- MIDRANGE-L

Rob, a couple ideas, as QPFRADJ is relatively slow to respond. There is benefit, usually, to separating resources into distinct pools. And it is usually, IMO, a good idea to get non-system activity out of *BASE, which has a lot of stuff in it.

1. Do a CHGSHRPOOL before each startup. Set the size to the 500 meg. Then let QPFRADJ go from there.

2. Get AutoTune from help Systems. It has much more control for you. You can have it be more aggressive for some pools, and you have some control over time-of-day configuration. Of course, it isn't free. QPFRADJ does a pretty good job much of the time, but sometimes you need more. They also have LPAR balancing stuff, IIRC.

Vern

At 03:19 PM 11/22/2004, you wrote:

Since many people are setting QPFRADJ at 2 or 3 I think this begs the
question:  "Why use separate memory pools?"  QPFRADJ is supposed to
balance memory between pools.  However IBM puts some limits on it to make
sure that not everything swings one way or the other too radically.  This
causes a problem when you do have a major job shift and you do want a more
radical shift.  If I am using QPFRADJ in this manner that why not just put
everything into one or two pools?  I could still have numerous subsystems,
(if that buys me anything), but why not run them all through the same
pool(s)?

For example, if I start up my eleven Domino partitions on the machine,
each with a recommendation of 500mb, you know how long it takes for
QPFRADJ to finally balance out???  But if I were running them in the same
pool as QBATCH, QINTER, etc the memory would be available instantly.
Processor doesn't seem to be a constraint on our machines.
% CPU used . . . . . . . :       15.4
Sys      Pool   Reserved    Max  ----DB-----  --Non-DB---  Act-
Pool    Size M   Size M     Act  Fault Pages  Fault Pages  Wait
  1    1541.48    476.43  +++++     .0    .0    3.1   3.1   75.5
  2    4654.24     44.66   1156     .6    .6   19.2  60.7   6859
  3    6019.41       .19    458     .0    .0   13.8  25.8  170.0
  4    5903.89       .02     80     .0    .0     .0    .0     .0
  5     183.01       .03     46     .0    .0     .0    .0   75.5
Memory does.
Seems a shame to have a big chunk tied up somewhere when other processes
could be using it.


Rob Berendt
--
Group Dekko Services, LLC
Dept 01.073
PO Box 2000
Dock 108
6928N 400E
Kendallville, IN 46755
http://www.dekko.com

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.