|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
Hooman24
New User
Joined: 20 Sep 2012
Posts: 35
Location: US
|
|
|
|
hi,
After running GRS monitor tool(ISGAUDIT) and getting reports about system resources in our complex, we find that the majorname SYSZDFS0 IS excluded by IMS SVC type 2 (SVC-203) module, so some tasks which are using the IMS SVC module could not be run concurently and are waiting from each other. is there any way in which, IMS SVC-203 use SYSZDFS0 in share mode.? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
PeterHolland
Global Moderator
Joined: 27 Oct 2009
Posts: 2481
Location: Netherlands, Amstelveen
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hooman24
New User
Joined: 20 Sep 2012
Posts: 35
Location: US
|
|
|
|
| Thank you, PeterHolland. The link that you'd provided was helpful. However, I still don't know whether this kind of waiting on SYSZDFS0 resource is normal or not and is there any way to share it or not?! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nevilh
Active User
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Posts: 262
|
|
|
|
| I am having a little problem with your terminology. Are you saying that you have added SYSZDFS0 to the exclusion list in GRSNLxx and are having problems , or are you saying that you would like to convert the ENQ on SYSZDFS0 from exclusive to share? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hooman24
New User
Joined: 20 Sep 2012
Posts: 35
Location: US
|
|
|
|
| Thank you nevilh. I have added this resource(SYSZDFS0) to the Inclusion list of GRSRNLXX member of parmlib. So I want to treat this resource as a global resource, however, IMS SVC-203 module(IMS supervisor call type 2) exclude this reesource. When I issue the DISPLAY GRS,C command, the GRS contention on this resource is displayed. In fact I would like to convert SVC-203 module exlusive ENQ request on SYSZFS0 to shared request. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nevilh
Active User
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Posts: 262
|
|
|
|
Have you talked to IBM about this. The SVC is used for communication between address spaces and recovery. It is quite possible that if this not meant to be converted you could bring the system to a standstill.
I can find nowhere in either the GRS or IMS documentation that suggests this is a good idea. Think carefully before proceeding with this course of action, at least talk to IBM first. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Sample
Global Moderator
Joined: 06 Jun 2008
Posts: 8696
Location: Dubuque, Iowa, USA
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| so some tasks which are using the IMS SVC module could not be run concurently and are waiting from each other |
This is actually a good thing. There are times when you do NOT want concurrent processes (such as updating the data base) to prevent data corruption. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hooman24
New User
Joined: 20 Sep 2012
Posts: 35
Location: US
|
|
|
|
Thanks, nevilh. It seems we should talk to IBM since there is lack of documentation about SYSZDFS0 and its role.
Robert Sample, We just wonder why there is waiting state(EXCLUDE in GRS) during running some reporting jobs simultaneously when we are in batch mode(IMS is down).
All jobs have same EXEC card(on same PSB) but on different data(for example different date) :
//STEP EXEC PGM=DFSRC00,PARM='DLI,MBR1,PSB1,,,,,,,,,,,,n'
Maybe as you said IMS itself doesn't allow this kind of accessibility. however we don't see any waiting on database(all of them are SHR). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
