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.

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