>Well, I disagree with such definition. IMHO CPU busy is "pattern" of 
>NOPs (No OPeration) and "usable" instructions. 1% busy simply means that 
>99% of cycles were filled with NOP, and only 1% of cycles were other 
>instructione were executed.

You can disagree with it all you like, but a job that is dispatched on a CPU
is of no interest from a performance perspective.  What matters is how long
dispatchable work has to wait in the queue.

>> HOWEVER, this depends explicitly on the relative
>> dispatching priority of the work, so the 80% utilization would only be
>> relevant to the lowest priority work in the system.

>In fact dispatching priority denies you statement above or at least 
>distorts it.

No, because it means that any work at DP=255 will not be delayed by lower
priority work (beyond that work completing its dispatch interval).
Therefore it is completely erroneous to assume that work at that high
dispatching priority "sees" the overall utilization of the processor.  Its
dispatching priority ensures that only competitors at the same dispatching
priority are relevant in establishing delays.  A job at DP=245 will have to
compete with all units of work at higher dispatching priorities, and
therefore a higher utilization represents a higher probability of such lower
priority work being subject to queuing delays.

This is the basis by which workload manager takes actions in the first
place, to ensure that higher importance goals are assigned higher
dispatching priorities (if that's the primary delay) to ensure that their
goals are more readily met (regardless of the overall utilization of the
processor(s)).  The overall CPU utilization represents the ongoing demand,
while the relative utilization at each dispatching priority represents the
level of competition experienced by the workload.  

Adam

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Reply via email to