John,

TAPEIOBUFS came in with 3.7.  All my storage pools are
on stk 9840s but they are emulating 3490's.  I have tapeiobufs set
to 9 anyway;  after the storage pools were in use, we
got some 9840's in 3590 mode.  I hoped that I could do the dbb
to the 3590s and it would be faster but it wasn't.

The only performance knobs I know of are bufpoolsize,
TxnGroupMax, MoveBatchSize and MoveSizeThresh.

Darlene's results are a mystery to me;  I haven't seen the same
performance improvement.  PQ38991 doesn't have anything to do with it
(unless she has an interim testfix for it)
since there isn't a ptf yet which fixes it, and the text is vague about
what exactly IBM plans to do.

--
--------------------------
--------------------------
Bill Colwell
Bill Colwell
C. S. Draper Lab
Cambridge, Ma.
bcolwell AT draper DOT com
--------------------------
In <5DA5491C2D46D311BACE00508B0AC0F1024D1597 AT ctnhemail02.corp.timken DOT 
com>, on 09/07/00
In <5DA5491C2D46D311BACE00508B0AC0F1024D1597 AT ctnhemail02.corp.timken DOT 
com>, on 09/07/00
   at 01:12 PM, "Talafous, John G." <Talafous AT TIMKEN DOT COM> said:

>Does anyone know when the TAPEIOBUFS parameter was introduced to *SM? I did
>a search of my ADSM 3.1 documentation and didn't find this parameter. I see
>the PTF on IBMLINK and it looks like, maybe, 3.7. Can anyone confirm? I
>could really use some CPU relief on OS390 with ADSM 3.1.

>John Talafous
>Information Systems Technical Principal
>Global Software Support - Data Management
>telephone:  (330)-471-3390
>e-mail:       talafous AT timken DOT com
>http://www.ctnvm.inside.tkr/~talafous/
>http://www.cis.corp.inside.tkr/networkstorage/

>Ask me about free firewood!

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Darlene E Wnukowski [mailto:Darlene.Wnukowski AT SFICORP DOT COM]
>Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2000 11:26 AM
>To: ADSM-L AT vm.marist DOT edu
>Subject: Cut MVS CPU Utilization


>I have been able to cut the MVS TSM server's use of CPU from a high of 60%
>of
>a 7060-H50 to under 10% of a 7060-H50 during backup of tape storage pools. I
>did it by changing two parameters in the server parameter file. One of them,
>TXNGROUPMAX, is not the one that made the difference but I am including it
>because I changed it as well to its maximum value of 256. The parameter that
>I
>believe had the greatest impact is TAPEIOBUFS. It is documented as being
>used
>for 3590 tapes but I found a PTF on IBMLink that implies it may also work
>for
>3480 and 3490 users. The PTF is PQ38991. I would have included it but I'm
>not
>sure how IBM would feel about that. We have only 3490's for ADSM use and I
>set
>TAPEIOBUFS to 9. As I said, it made a dramatic difference. I apologize if
>this
>is old news but I searched the ADSM listserve search site and found no other
>reports on this. Let me know if you find this useful. Thank you.



>Darlene E. Wnukowski
>Lead Systems Programmer
>Schreiber Foods, Inc.
>darlene AT sficorp DOT com
>920-455-6268




>Darlene E. Wnukowski
>Lead Systems Programmer
>Schreiber Foods, Inc.
>darlene AT sficorp DOT com
>920-455-6268





>**************************************************************

>This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential
>and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity
>to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email
>in error please notify Postmaster AT sficorp DOT com.

>This footnote also confirms that this email message has been
>swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

>**************************************************************





**************************************************************

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential
and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity
to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email
in error please notify Postmaster AT sficorp DOT com.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been
swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

**************************************************************