<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>IT Answers &#187; 9117-MMA</title>
	<atom:link href="http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/tag/9117-mma/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2013 20:40:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
		<item>
		<title>9117-MMA Performance</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/9117-mma-performance/</link>
		<comments>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/9117-mma-performance/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 04:07:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tonks</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[9117-MMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DS6800]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OS/400]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V5R4]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false"></guid>
		<description><![CDATA[WE have recently installed a 9117 MMA p570 which has 11 partitions, 3 of which are iSeries. All disk is on DS6800. Our performance has gone backwards on the Production iSeries partition, runtimes blown out excessively though I have seen some batch jobs running faster. We  have heard thru the grapevine tripling the memory gets better [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WE have recently installed a 9117 MMA p570 which has 11 partitions, 3 of which are iSeries. All disk is on DS6800. Our performance has gone backwards on the Production iSeries partition, runtimes blown out excessively though I have seen some batch jobs running faster. We  have heard thru the grapevine tripling the memory gets better results which we have tried and had mixed results. IBM are wary this may be just masking the problem throwing extra memory at it. Since turning QPFRADJ off we have had better results. Found where increasing the Max Active in the BASE Pool helps but to what &#8230;. 1000, 10000, 20000 ?? <br/><br/> Any thoughts on this please Performance Tuning Guru&#8217;s ??!!!<br/><br/></p>
<!-- wpms-network-global-inserts -->]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/9117-mma-performance/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using memcached
Database Caching 3/12 queries in 0.019 seconds using memcached
Object Caching 317/326 objects using memcached

Served from: itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com @ 2013-06-19 00:46:54 -->