Archives of the TeradataForum

Message Posted: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 @ 18:45:39 GMT

	<Prev	Next>		<<First	<Prev	Next>	Last>>

Hello...

Sorry, I did not mean to imply re-establishing each priority scheduler setting when one or two changed was dangerous, or required a get-around or a fix. In re-reading my earlier email, I can see how it might have left that impression. And as Tom Stanek mentioned in an earlier reply on this thread, there may be some benefits in taking that approach if there is a desire to re-establish consistency of all settings, each time a performance period changes. I don't disagree with that.

But you are not required to re-issue each individual command in your change script, and doing so will incur some additional overhead at the time of change. This is slight, probably not noticeable to most people, but being sort of an efficiency nut myself, I thought it was worth mentioning. Is it an important area of concern if you are currently submitting all your schmon commands in your change scripts, and are comfortable continuing to do so? No.

Thanks, --Carrie

	<Prev	Next>		<<First	<Prev	Next>	Last>>