Re: ACCPTHSIZ parmeter, is it realy critics?

[Pete Massiello <pmassiello@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

They didn't make you go to the 1TB Access paths (Logical File) for the size, 
they
made you go for the way that the 1TB access path locks records differently than
the 4GB.  You will have less seizing and locking on a 1TB access path than a 
4GB,
because the 1TB only locks a page at a time.

    Pete Massiello

Dimitri Efimov wrote:

> As I sad befoure, we had a 40 min. sustantion of all process which had to
> add new records to DB in our 740. (all QDBSRV jos were in LCKW).
> Finaly, after 1 month of the war (IBM support stuff was included also), the
> sistem won and decided to switch to our new 840 system. The sistem is stable
> now, and are in the investigation process. IBM found that we had ACCPTHSIZ
> set in 4GB (now is 1T) in our old system. From IBM point of view this is the
> cause.
>
> Can somebody tell if it realy critic? We checked all our files and no one is
> bigge than 4GB.
>
> Thanks
>
> Dmitri
> +---
> | 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
+---