Re: WRKSBMJOB, WRKUSRJOB slug-li

[D.BALE@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

In addition to my last post, WRKACTJOB shows Active jobs = 127.

Got smart (?) and looked up the help for the QACTJOB & QTOTJOB values.  Seems
clear how to set these at the lowest level.  Should I set a value high enough
for these so that the "additional" jobs never (or hardly ever?) has to kick
in?  What's the penalty for setting these too high?

When do these changes take effect?  Next IPL?  (Help didn't say.)

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
+---