|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
Ken Swanston
New User
Joined: 27 Nov 2012
Posts: 1
Location: Canada
|
|
|
|
We have started converting our Storage Group DASD from 3390 mod-3's to mod-9/27/54's on an EMC VMAX box after finally getting HYPERPAV installed on our z/OS v13R1 system. As a Storage Admin I'd like to know...
Would IMS/DB2 get better performance if their files were consolidated on single volumes or split across multiple DASD?
...the DASD file splits have been done historically but I'd like something (assuming it is appropriate) to convince our relatively conservative DBA's that this won't break our system performance.
If this Post is best put in another forum please let me know.
Thanks! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Pete Wilson
Active Member
Joined: 31 Dec 2009
Posts: 582
Location: London
|
|
|
|
Try and get EMC to provide you with a map of the Raid Groups and physical volumes behind them and which are the parity volumes, and the internal pathing etc so you can get a proper picture of what's going on and work out how to load the box up evenly.
Hyper PAV's help to massively reduce device queuing so moving to larger volumes shouldn't be a problem for the application data. Your DBA's will just have to get used to that as volumes are getting larger all the time, but the controllers are getting smarter and more powerful too.
For DB2 Logcopy datasets make sure they're striped across enough volumes and controllers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
