Off and on we VSAM RLS false contention plateaus going over IBM's recommended .5% rate. We don't see any kind of triggering behavior in CICS or the CICS application.
I would like to at least see the datasets causing the false contention but all the false contention buckets in the RMF type 42 subtype 16 records are zero. The true contention buckets have values. It's my understanding the subtype 16 are supposed to have dataset level information. I specified several dataset name levels in RMF VSAMRLS options. I also see the same dataset levels in SMS display MONDS commands. Is it possible I'm missing something that causes DFSSMS to write dataset level false contention data? Am I looking in the wrong place? Thanks. Robert Crawford Mainframe Management United Services Automobile Association (210) 913-3822 "Moy glaz! YA ne dolzhen dobavlyat' v nego puding!" - Tolstoy Please send requests to mainframe management through our front door at go/mfmfrontdoor -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Seymour J Metz Sent: Tuesday, October 5, 2021 3:33 PM To: [email protected] Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: PL/I vs. JCL And before that MVS-OE., with MVS before Open. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://mason.gmu.edu/*smetz3__;fg!!GryZGb6B1VCs0SfC!TBwvJ8AO8e9VuDJE7lIsISBnAl6KAhctOQOxm3s7DJUmS0PMKUDPz75eQK5LMQqR2TA$ ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of David Spiegel <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, October 5, 2021 1:37 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: PL/I vs. JCL Maybe they should've left it as "Open MVS"? (OS/390) On 2021-10-05 13:08, Tom Brennan wrote: > I always thought IBM's position on that was pretty silly. If you make > up a new three word name, expect it to quickly be turned into an > acronym. If they didn't want us to reuse an existing little-known > acronym they should have named it something else. > > On 10/5/2021 9:56 AM, Seymour J Metz wrote: >>> USS has always meant Unix System Services. >> >> >> Not unless you have a time machine; Unformatted System Services dates >> to the 1970s. Further, the last post here from IBM on the issue said >> that USS was not an approved abbreviation for Unix System Services. >> >> -- >> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook >> .com/?url=http*3A*2F*2Fmason.gmu.edu*2F*smetz3&data=04*7C01*7C*7C >> 66d0453903554718720608d98822bd8d*7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa*7 >> C1*7C0*7C637690505140660718*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwM >> DAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C1000&sdata=Lx >> w1EM03nZsemipAC1ktZCbgKrL*2BedD7*2BDDlG*2Fiwn*2B8*3D&reserved=0__ >> ;JSUlJX4lJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!GryZGb6B1VCs0SfC!TBwvJ8AO8e9VuDJE7lIsI >> SBnAl6KAhctOQOxm3s7DJUmS0PMKUDPz75eQK5LiSU-R24$ >> >> >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on >> behalf of Joe Monk <[email protected]> >> Sent: Monday, October 4, 2021 9:11 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: PL/I vs. JCL >> >> USS is a VTAM term for Unformatted System Services. >> >> USS has always meant Unix System Services. >> >> Joe >> >> On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 7:30 PM Mike Schwab <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> U.S.S. Unformated System Services, until Unix System Services tried >>> to take it over. >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 1:24 AM Paul Gilmartin >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Mon, 4 Oct 2021 17:35:41 +0000, Seymour J Metz wrote: >>>> >>>>> While TSO does not support unambiguous truncation for command >>>>> names, it >>> does for keywords. I don't know about ICCF. >>>>> >>>> Unambiguous truncation is treacherous. Addition of new >>> commands/keywords can break >>>> legacy art. For that reason I eschew abbreviations in code and >>> pedagogy. The worst >>>> case occurs when one command is a proper prefix of another command. >>>> >>>> I freely abbreviate on a command line. >>>> >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> On Sat, 2 Oct 2021 20:56:43 -0700, Charles Mills wrote: >>>>> I have no problem with the DD/member ambiguity: >>>>> \edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN >>>> >>>> -- gil >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> --- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >>>> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO >>>> IBM-MAIN >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA >>> Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> -- 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 >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> - 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 . ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
