Re: Timeslice recommendations

[jpcarr@xxxxxxxxxxxx]

Jay

Remember the system value QTSEPOOL  . This says that if the job still has
work to do, and hits timeslice end,  take it out it's existing pool and run
it in (what ever you put in QTSEPOOL like *BASE).

So you may seeing jobs that are running "Too lean"  not really being bumped
out of memory(hence a low Act-Inel)  because you specified *BASE as your
QTSEPOOL value.

This is just one more variable for tuning.   It's more like a helecopter.
About 5 controls all affecting each other.

John Carr
Another John(not Jon)
-0--------------------------------------------

X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for
spam.

John,

I liken the tuning of  the timeslices to the high speed jet on a
carburator.
Too rich (ie too large a time slice) and it bogs down on heavy load and
won't recover till the load is removed. Too lean (ie too small a time
slice)
and the system really sputters. On the AS/400-iSeries that would equate to
Wait-to-Inel. So far that hasn't occured with the timeslices I have
currently set. I wonder if anyone has hit the point of too-lean.

It is my understanding that the 400 will hold that memory until the
timeslice is complete, even if the job has long past completed. That is why
I keep trying smaller timeslices.

The other classes I mentioned are for TCP and Spool services. If a TCP
service has a 2000 millisecond timeslice and the transaction only takes 20
milliseconds, then given the heavy TCP load on today's 400's (iSeries),
there would be more memory that could be recovered for immediate
processing.

I think this is important on the 7XX boxes, cause IBM chooses to kill the
batch CPW when the interactive feature is maxed.

Thanks for your feedback.

Jay