QPFRADJ=2 vs 3

I understand the arguments against QPFRADJ because of granularity,
timeliness of change, or it doing changes when you don't want it to
because you'd rather it be tuned for process "x". However we're going to
continue to use that. IBM is recommending we change it from 2 to 3. Their
argument is your system spends quite some time getting it tuned for normal
production, why should you let an IPL throw that all out of whack? Seems
to make sense to me. Questions I ponder though include:

What about new memory adds? Adjustment at IPL would surely help that. The
counter to that is are you changing memory often enough that you can't
just change it manually the few times you do that? Mightn't you also
change your max/min's on WRKSHRPOOL at that same time also? To me, those
counter questions kill the new memory exception.

Is your system still tuned for production anyway at IPL time? Let me
explain. Let's say you bring your system down to restricted state. You
run RCLSTG for 14 hours. You do a full system save for 8-10 hours. You
IPL. Was that a good snapshot of your production memory usage anyway? Why
not let the IPL readjust it? Let's say that just about every time you IPL
these are your normal steps.


Rob Berendt