I have been meaning to post IBM's explanation of this problem.  I hope I 
explain this correctly.  I will paraphrase.

From a conference call about 2 weeks ago: 
IBM fixed a bug in 'base code' at 1.13.  The bug was that whenever a batch job 
performed vsam i/o, it was switched to the highest priority (this is normal), 
but then, when control was given back to the application task after the i/o, it 
continued to run at the highest priority INSTEAD OF the assigned WLM service 
class, which in our case was called BATPRDMED.  Our temporary workaround, in 
order to get the service we were used to on v1.11, has been to set these jobs 
to a 'hotter' service class, BATHOT.

IBM told us there was no tech doc or apar to document this change.  What we 
observed (and possibly you?) when we brought up v1.13 was their 'fix' to this 
problem.  The batch jobs were now running in the correct service class (WAD). 
They did not tell us exactly when the problem was introduced. 

A few days after this explanation 'soaked in', I suddenly remembered several 
instances, when we were on zOS v1.11, where batch jobs had preempted our online 
regions, which are supposed to ALWAYS run with higher priority than batch.  I 
remember thinking that we had a problem at that time, though we never pursued 
it with IBM.  I have now convinced myself that this was the manifestation of 
the bug they fixed at 1.13.

While the lack of doc and background info was upsetting, I think IBM made an 
honorable attempt to 'make up for it' by providing some very helpful vsam 
tuning advice. I have to say their advice has improved our batch performance 
significantly.  Their advice was to implement SMB in our long-running batch 
vsam jobs.

We are a VSAM-centric shop with only a tiny bit of DB2, so we were probably 
impacted more than the typical shop.

HTH,

-Jim

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to