Re: Journaling without commitment control (WAS iSeries and SSD drives) -- MIDRANGE-L

Charles - I was told some time ago, by a former boss who was on the journaling team at IBM, that there is a way to get the benefit without paying for option 42. Again, it might be in Rick Turner's stuff. He may even have visited us at Centerfield once, hey, it's been like 9 years!!

Maybe it's that you just turn on commitment control in a job, then never actually commit or rollback anything. Then turn it off after you're done.

Where's that Dr Pepper? No coffee for this Swede, yeah?

Vern

On 1/18/2013 12:59 PM, Charles Wilt wrote:

Jack,

In order for the OS to bundle journal entries, at least one of two
following things have to be true..
1) You are using commitment control
2) You have the HA Journal Performance (aka option 42) installed and
JRNCACHE(*YES) set.

Charles

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Jack Kingsley <iseriesflorida@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:

Rob, I am not licensed to option 42, I found this link, maybe the fact of
just doing bundle cache to main storage does the magic.

http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=nas1443fa6ceeb42ecc2862578e2004c2ac2

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 12:59 PM, <rob@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

These times are valid. Let me restate them because the commas are
confusing. These are month end times for Infor.
The tables were all journaled.
January: No SSD's. No option 42.
February: With SSD's. No option 42.
March: With SSD's. With option 42 of SS1.
Process Jan Feb March
CST600C 90 min 89 min 56 minutes
INV900C 115 min 108 min 52 minutes
of which
INV900 98 min 87 min 35 minutes

SSD's gave us some time back. But not nearly as much time as what adding
option 42 gave us. And 42 was a much lower cost.

And I have dozens of disk arms. On a 9117-MMA. That was probably

yawning

and begging for something to do as far as memory and processor at that
time.

Real world times. Real world data. Real world system.

I do not have the capability to rewrite all of my vendor applications to
start using commitment control. Too often another real world situation.
And frankly, slapping on option 42 would have been much cheaper than
rewriting the thousands upon thousands of programs to use commitment
control. Granted, I could have done some Pareto analysis to determine
which programs used the most time and just did those but, again, would I
have gained the performance I did for the cost that I did? Assuming that
my devopers are not slaves that I would have had to feed and care for
regardless of whether or not there was real work to do.

Rob Berendt
--
IBM Certified System Administrator - IBM i 6.1
Group Dekko
Dept 1600
Mail to: 2505 Dekko Drive
Garrett, IN 46738
Ship to: Dock 108
6928N 400E
Kendallville, IN 46755
http://www.dekko.com

From: Charles Wilt <charles.wilt@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date: 01/18/2013 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: Journaling without commitment control (WAS iSeries

and

SSD drives)
Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx

Quite possibly...

But remember, at this point it's unlikely anybody is turning on

journaling

for the first time...

So really, if you were to turn off journaling your 1hr batch job might

run

in 20-30min.

But are you really going to turn it off to see? So either run the
tools...or turn it on and try it free for 70 days...

Rob was impressed :)
http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l/201004/msg00016.html

Process Jan, pre anything Feb, w/SSD March, w/opt 42 + SSD
CST600C 90 minutes 89 minutes 56 minutes
INV900C 115 minutes 108 minutes 52 minutes
of which
INV900 98 minutes 87 minutes 35 minutes

Charles

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 11:45 AM, D*B <dieter.bender@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

wrote:

Charles,

you are really telling (and believing) a batch application running 1 h
without journal will take 3 h, if you would start journaling for the
files??? I've never seen any numbers in this range within 20 years!!!

D*B
--
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.

--
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.