WLM-managed Inits won't work as designed with multi-period Batch ServiceClass.
-----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Edward Jaffe Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 12:33 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: WLM : multiple periods not recommended for batch - why? On 5/1/2012 4:39 AM, Andrew Rowley wrote: > Hi, > > I have read a few articles that say that multiple periods are not > recommended for batch service classes. Multiple periods seems to be > considered a bit old fashioned. > > I haven't been able to find anything clearly explaining why. I have > always felt that they worked well. My best guess is that it is > something to do with the behaviour of WLM managed initiators but I'm not sure. > > Can anyone shed any light, or point me to some further reading? As I understand things, queue time (i.e., clock time accumulated from job submission through initiation) is associated with first period only. Therefore decisions based on queue time -- e.g., whether new initiators should be added -- will not take multiperiod batch transaction completions into account If only a small subset of batch transacations complete outside of first period, then this should not be a big problem. If most jobs complete outside first period, you get what you get. GIGO. -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 831 Parkview Drive North El Segundo, CA 90245 310-338-0400 x318 [email protected] http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
