Re: Why not *SHRPOOL1?

Just curious, what is the paging setting for these pools?

I notice that *SHRPOOL1 already has more memory - is this the status before starting the big job?

Also, you have to have at least 3 pools - including *BASE. And probably 4, with *SPOOL.

Now it IS possible to change shared pools so they have a minimum size, using WRKSHRPOOL (F11). So you could reserve a certain percentage of main memory, even if a subsystem becomes relatively inactive.

There's also a priority for shared pools, I assume for which gets memory or activity levels first.

Also, with so many activity levels in *INTERACT, it may take longer to get things going.

Now, if by experience witht the app, you have an idea how much it needs, do a CHGSBSD to adjust the pool size first.

HTH

Vern

At 09:10 AM 1/27/2003 -0500, you wrote:

On our 840 12-way we have system value QPFRADJ set to "2=Adjustment at IPL
and automatic adjustment".  And we have the following pools:
System    Pool    Reserved    Max
 Pool   Size (M)  Size (M)  Active  Pool
   1     2618.98    655.60   +++++  *MACHINE
   2     6307.05     55.12     530  *BASE
   3     3935.35      <.01      80  *SHRPOOL1
   4      303.44       .00      20  *SPOOL
   5     1835.15       .20     227  *INTERACT

Actually, this does a pretty good job.  However, if you start this big
whopping job in one subsystem, or the other, then it takes awhile until
QPFRADJ switches memory over.  In the Rochester lab (just last week) we
had a Query take 3 minutes until we switched QINTER to run in *SHRPOOL1.
They were still scratching their heads to figure out how often QPFRADJ
adjusts.  After the switch it took only a very few seconds.

So now my boss asked me a good question.  Why don't we just use two pools:
 *MACHINE and *SHRPOOL1?  And avoid that time lag of QPFRADJ.

Questions and comments appreciated.

Rob Berendt