IBM Mainframe Forum Index
 
Log In
 
IBM Mainframe Forum Index Mainframe: Search IBM Mainframe Forum: FAQ Register
 

Avoid contention on PSB


IBM Mainframe Forums -> IMS DB/DC
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Yogendra Miraje

New User


Joined: 27 Feb 2012
Posts: 3
Location: India

PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:38 pm
Reply with quote

Hi,

I faced a contention issue on PSB.
There was a job reading a PSB ( PROCOPT G- read with integrity ) and a transaction tried to access the same PSB at the same time and it failed.

PROOPT allows transaction to update PSB. So initially it looked like transaction was trying to update the PSB and job's PROCOPT - G option, it did not allow the update.

But later I found that the transaction has never updated the PSB ( from table that has PSB access info i.e. no. of inserts/delete/updates/reads done by transaction) and in fact it does not need to update anything on PSB.

So I am going to change transaction's PROCOPT to G.
Could you please tell me whether this will avoid contention issue.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
satish kompella

New User


Joined: 22 Feb 2012
Posts: 4
Location: india

PostPosted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:26 pm
Reply with quote

Transaction updating the PSB? Can you please be more clear?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Yogendra Miraje

New User


Joined: 27 Feb 2012
Posts: 3
Location: India

PostPosted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 6:39 pm
Reply with quote

Hi Satish,

Transaction has processing option A that allows it to update the PSB.
But I have data over the span of 12 years and this transaction has never updated anything on PSB.
So basically, it is meant for reading only, but while defining PSB many years ago, it was just copied and was not updated propely.
So I am sure when contention occured transaction was trying to READ the PSB.
My question is whether Processing option is the factor that does not allow to read the PSB, if it is being read by some other job/transaction and when if I change PROCOPT to G would avoid contention in future.

Hope it's clear now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
don.leahy

Active Member


Joined: 06 Jul 2010
Posts: 765
Location: Whitby, ON, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 7:12 pm
Reply with quote

If you are sure it is read only, you could also consider PROCOPT=GO or GOT.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Yogendra Miraje

New User


Joined: 27 Feb 2012
Posts: 3
Location: India

PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 2:40 pm
Reply with quote

Requirement is Read with integrity, so I need to stick with option G ,but doing this would solve similar kind of contention issue ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
View previous topic :: :: View next topic  
Post new topic   Reply to topic View Bookmarks
All times are GMT + 6 Hours
Forum Index -> IMS DB/DC

 


Similar Topics
Topic Forum Replies
No new posts How to avoid duplicating a CICS Web S... CICS 0
No new posts DB2 utilities, contention or failure? DB2 2
No new posts Display ZEDLMSG without Pressing F1 &... CLIST & REXX 8
No new posts GRS contention on IMS resource IMS DB/DC 7
No new posts How to avoid/Omit Addtional qualifer ... TSO/ISPF 2
Search our Forums:

Back to Top