Re: Memory pool , object question

[Vernon Hamberg <vhamberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Paul

I would not put anything into *BASE using SETOBJACC - the article I 
cited says these should go into a pool where there is no work, a fixed 
pool, that will not be affected by any optimization - you want it static.

It is not just data that is paged in and out of a pool - it is also *PGM 
objects - and potentially almost anything else jobs work with. *BASE 
would be the place where almost everything will get paged out of main 
memory eventually and maybe not before too long a time.

Also be sure not to over-manage this stuff - see that article, again, 
for what makes good candidates for this technique.

Cheers
Vern

On 4/6/2018 10:18 AM, Steinmetz, Paul wrote:
-snip-
> I feel I can improve the performance of some long running batch jobs. Some of these run multiple times per day.
> What's the solution?
> SETOBJACC, Keep in memory (KEEPINMEM), combination of both.
>
> I'm considering the use of SETOBJACC, especially once the P9 arrives with ample memory.
> SETOBJACC needs to point to a storage pool.
> The objects being considered for SETOBJACC might be used by both interactive (*INTERACTIVE) and batch (*SHRPOOL1)
> My thoughts were run everything out of *BASE, SETOBJACC would point to *BASE.
-snip-