Thanks Scott, That's what I thought but couldn't find documented. Thank You, Dave O'Brien NIH Contractor ________________________________________ From: Scott Rowe [scott.r...@joann.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 1:46 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: Question concerning CMF reporting of CPU Delay
Assuming that CMF works the same as RMF, yes, the CPU delay % indicates the % of samples taken where the workload was waiting to use a LP. This calculation has no visibility to the physical CPs. On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 10:51 AM, O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C] < obrie...@mail.nih.gov> wrote: > Back to my original question, if LPARa has a weight of 30 and is 100% busy > but is only getting 50% physical then the CPU delay % should be 50%. However > CMF is reporting 2-3% which leads me to conclude that CMF is only computing > wait for Logical Processors within the LPAR. > > Thank You, > Dave O'Brien > NIH Contractor > ________________________________________ > From: Vernooij, CP - SPLXM [kees.verno...@klm.com] > Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 10:46 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu > Subject: Re: Question concerning CMF reporting of CPU Delay > > Similar calculation: the lpar uses 90% of its allocated resources, which > is 35-45% of the machine as being distributed by pr/sm based on weigths > and Lpar demands. > > I see this in our test lpars: they are 90-100% busy, yet use 10% of the > machine according to weights if demand by other Lpars is heavy. > > Kees. > > > "O'Brien, David W. [C] , NIH/CIT" <obrie...@mail.nih.gov> wrote in > message > news:<cd22aa1aee707d489d9250d13e3862a18593711...@nihmlbxcms02.nih.gov>.. > . > > Hi Kees, > > > > 3 physical CPs > > 2 Prod LPARs each with 3 LPs > > 1 Test LPAR with 2 LPs > > 1 Sandbox with 1 LP > > > > So we have 9 LPs competing for 3 CPs. Fortunately 3 of those LPs are > little used. > > The relative weights of the Prod LPARs are 45 and 30. > > The LPAR reporting the problem is the one with 30, no surprise there. > > The Test LPAR has a weight of 15 while the Sandbox has a weight of 10 > and seldom use their relative share. > > > > I have suggested that a 2:1 LP to CP ratio would be more efficient but > was told the faster CP make the 2:1 ratio obsolete. Makes no sense to me > but then I'm the DASD guy. Every problem is HSM until proven otherwise. > > > > Thank You, > > Dave O'Brien > > NIH Contractor > > ________________________________________ > > From: Vernooij, CP - SPLXM [kees.verno...@klm.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 10:18 AM > > To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu > > Subject: Re: Question concerning CMF reporting of CPU Delay > > > > "O'Brien, David W. [C] , NIH/CIT" <obrie...@mail.nih.gov> wrote in > > message > > > news:<cd22aa1aee707d489d9250d13e3862a18593711...@nihmlbxcms02.nih.gov>.. > > . > > > We had a situation where our M204 users reported a delay but CMF > shows > > the main delay as CPU but at a relatively low %. > > > > > > Question - Does CMF only report CPU delay for the Logical Processors > > in that particular LPAR? > > > The LPAR is question often shows CPU usage of 90+%, while the CMF > > LPARSTAR view shows a physical cpu% of 35-45%. > > > > > > Is it possible that the delay at the Physical processor is not > > reported, or reported in a different view? > > > > > > Thank You, > > > Dave O'Brien > > > NIH Contractor > > > > > > > How many logical processors does the Lpar have and how many physical > > processors does the machine have? If this ratio is 1:2, 90% lpar > > utilization means 45% machine utilization. > > > > Kees. > > ******************************************************** > > For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: > http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain > confidential and privileged material intended for the addressee only. If > you are not the addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail > or any attachment may be disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any > other action related to this e-mail or attachment is strictly > prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail by > error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and delete > this message. > > > > Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or > its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete > transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any > delay in receipt. > > Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal > Dutch Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with > registered number 33014286 > > ******************************************************** > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO > > Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO > > Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html > ******************************************************** > For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: > http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain > confidential and privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you > are not the addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any > attachment may be disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other > action related to this e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may > be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail by error, please notify the > sender immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message. > > Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its > employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission > of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt. > Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch > Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered > number 33014286 > ******************************************************** > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO > Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO > Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html > CONFIDENTIALITY/EMAIL NOTICE: The material in this transmission contains confidential and privileged information intended only for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, please be advised that you have received this material in error and that any forwarding, copying, printing, distribution, use or disclosure of the material is strictly prohibited. If you have received this material in error, please (i) do not read it, (ii) reply to the sender that you received the message in error, and (iii) erase or destroy the material. Emails are not secure and can be intercepted, amended, lost or destroyed, or contain viruses. You are deemed to have accepted these risks if you communicate with us by email. Thank you. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
