OnDemand User Group
Support Forums => z/OS Server => Topic started by: LizetteKoehler on June 10, 2019, 02:09:20 PM
-
I am currently 9.5 and looking to upgrade to 10.1 (or current version of 10)
I remember hearing that some things for migration to 10.1 would need to be done in 64bit mode. That COBOL would not work - a rewrite in something like C/C++ or JAVA or other would need to be done
For those that have converted to 10.1 - was there anything that needed to be changed for 64Bit mod? Or could you run with what you had under 9.5?
We are still a new shop to CMOD and just looking for guidance.
Lizette
-
This is strictly on z/OS V2.3 system
Thanks
-
So far I have not needed to do anything in 64bit. However, our banner exit for ODF is a problem and I haven't had a chance to dig deep to find out why but it messes up ODF and uses 35% more CPU. I will update if I do stumble across anything that does require 64 bit.
Cheers
-
Take a look at the 10.1 readme.
In there is a section: "4. AMODE 64 and exits"
Inventory your exits and see which category (31 bit okay or not okay) your exits fall under.
Indeed there is no 64 bit COBOL yet.
Then come back here and see what experience others have had with the specific exits that might cause an issue.
Ed
-
If you've got V10.1 up, don't forget to use the 64 bit arsusec rolled out via APAR PI98845.
****************************************************************
* USERS AFFECTED: All Content Manager OnDemand for z/OS *
* 10.1 using arsusec *
****************************************************************
* PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: Provide an AMODE 64 sample arsusec *
****************************************************************
* RECOMMENDATION: *
****************************************************************
With CMOD 10.1, the ARSSOCKD server runs as a 64-bit
application. In order to support existing AMODE 31 exits, glue
code is provided at the cost of additional overhead. In order
to eliminate that cost for the arsusec exit, a sample AMODE 64
arsusec assembler exit is provided.
Ed
-
We are using the arsusec out of the box with ARSUSECX. Do you think that would be the root cause of ODF running slow when we throw out 1400 distributions at once?
-
We are using the arsusec out of the box with ARSUSECX. Do you think that would be the root cause of ODF running slow when we throw out 1400 distributions at once?
I'm not aware of any benchmarks.
However, dev wouldn't have done this first if they didn't think it was valuable.
I always say if someone offers a free performance boost, take it.
Ed