the settings have been as follows for 25 years:

CQ 152,200,1,2000,200
DQ 202,238,2000,2000,200
EQ 240,253,2000,2000,200

The only change has been to add 'oscillate'.  The queue value of 32k and
the workgroup enhancement have not changed the defaults, not have they
changed the way in which the TUNE commands and the queues work.  The
defaults are designed for a machine that is I/O bound and should not be
left alone on any machine that is having prioritization problems.  If a
machine is fast enough and has enough memory, just about any setting will
work.  But the TUNE settings must be altered for any machine experiencing
difficulties.

Randy Keefer



On Fri, 9 Mar 2001 11:46:39 -0800, John Clogg <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Not true!  The TUNE settings were revamped when MPE/XL came along, and
again
>when the dispatcher was tweaked at about release 2.0.  I also disagree with
>your contention that the default settings are "about as bad as they can
be".
>An expert can often adjust them for certain situations for a positive
>effect, but of settings that work in the widest variety of situations you
>can't do better.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: RJ Keefer [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 11:40 AM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: To decay or not to decay - that is the question.....
>
>
>I beg to differ.  The default settings were developed in 1973 on the Series
>II and have never been changed.  they were okay on that machine.  They were
>designed for a machine that was terribly I/O bound and constantly waiting
>for data from disk.  The machines today and rarely, if ever, I/O bound.
>They are almost always CPU or Memory starved.  The default TUNE settings
>are about as bad as they can be for today's machines.
>
>Randy Keefer
>
>On Fri, 9 Mar 2001 11:17:04 -0800, Gavin Scott <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>>Paul writes:
>>> We currently have out job queues set to decay but are considering
>>> modifying some/all to oscillate.
>>
>>If you have a string on a violin (or similar instrument) which is properly
>>tuned, then there are an infinite number of adjustments you can make, none
>>of which will be an improvement.
>>
>>Even if your string is determined to be out of tune, you may be stuck with
>>the fact that the rest of the orchestra has "tuned up" to match your
>>out-of-tune string, so "fixing" it may simply introduce a more troublesome
>>dissonance between the parts of the whole, and it may be better to stick
>>with what you have.
>>
>>By all means play with the :TUNE command if you like, but keep in mind
that
>>the default settings are what MPE is developed and tested against, and the
>>same is probably true for most applications that run on MPE.
>>
>>More than once have we solved all of a customers horrible performance
>>problems by doing nothing more than putting the :TUNE parameters back to
>>their defaults.
>>
>>Science tells us that there's no point in even speculating about things
>>which we cannot measure, and playing with the :TUNE command is difficult
>>because it is so very hard (in most cases) to determine just *what* the
>>results of a change are.  Unless you can scientifically measure the
effects
>>of each tweak with valid reproducible experiments, it's easy to convince
>>yourself that you've made things better when in fact they have actually
>>gotten worse overall.
>>
>>G.