(subsystem QSPL pools)...very interesting. And that is not the only sbsd like
that.
Unfortunately I don't manage the system(s), but can suggest..
I imagine the sbs descriptions are carried over changes long ago.
Jim
________________________________
From: Charles Wilt <charles.wilt@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wed, January 30, 2013 4:26:33 PM
Subject: Re: Spool APIs performance and memory pools
Your's is...and it's modified values don't follow IBM's recommendations...
Every subsystem should have *BASE as pool 1, as the first pool is where OS
threads managing the SBS run.
Your routing entries should then point to pools 2-whatever :)
Charles
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 4:22 PM, J Franz <franz400@xxxxxxx> wrote:
We have determined the batch job resources are all coming from the pool
for our
batch processing.
I was thinking under the covers some parts might run in QSPL, but not that
we
have seen.
Nathan - either your system or ours has the QSPL subsystem modified - in
ours,
*SPOOL is pool 1 and *BASE is 2..
I'm in the process of setting up a monitor (data queue) on the originating
outq
and dividing up the processing. We not only convert the original spool, but
sometimes merge additional spools together, generate a .tif from the afpds
spool, then direct the afpds to various outqs around the country.
We have 2nd processor in the hardware, but not activated - it's in the
budget
but they are slow to sign.
Thanks to all,
Jim
________________________________
From: Nathan Andelin <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wed, January 30, 2013 3:45:34 PM
Subject: Re: Spool APIs performance and memory pools
Is the pool *SPOOL used when batch programs are calling QUSLSPL,
QUSRSPLA ...
The *SPOOL memory pool is associated with a subsystem, not an API. What
subsystem is your "batch process" running in? Only the QSPL subsystem on my
servers use *SPOOL, and even that one has *BASE memory pool in position
"1" and
*SPOOL in position "2".
I doubt your performance issues have anything to do with memory
constriction in
the *SPOOL memory pool, but check to see which subsystem your "batch
process" is
running in, and the memory pool(s) associated with it.
If you can't throw more hardware and memory at the problem, you may need to
split your "batch process" into multiple instances that run concurrently
and can
take advantage of multiple CPUs. That probably entails some redesign.
-Nathan
--
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.
--
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.
