On 6 Apr 2015 14:27:21 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: >IMHO, You are not clueless, just unlucky to have to support applications >developers and application management as unprofessional as those you seem to >have. > >I have never heard of nor worked for any organization that would tolerate even >for a minute an application group or application management that implemented a >production change that brought down a production CICS region. At any >organization which has employed me, that would be grounds for at least a >severe reprimand, and likely a performance-review-related probationary period >with negative consequences for subsequent salary raises, and for an egregious >or repeated occurrence immediate promotion to the pavement.
In this environment, I would suggest that the problems may also include as yet unrecognized wrong results. I would want to know how this got into production because these problems should have shown up in test. Someone who is good at application debugging and understands the performance issues should be assigned to getting this under control. The scenario described scares me from a business point of view. If your organization doesn't employ someone with the appropriate skills (a major shortcoming if it is of any size), I could consult since my background is COBOL and assembler programming with a focus on debugging and performance improvement. Presumably they could get someone cheaper since I'm in Nova Scotia, Canada but it would be a fun assignment and I would want to do knowledge transfer since I like living where I am. Clark Morris > >The refusal to investigate or respond positively to your performance >recommendations is probably an unfortunate corollary of the first problem. I >seriously doubt that the application management actually knows that it would >be cheaper to upgrade the mainframe, but (bowing to Tim Sipple's later posts) >even if they have done the homework it is IMHO an unprofessional response >unless the time for an upgrade is already on the near horizon or a large >increase in business volume is going to result from the recent application >change. In either case they should have said so. > >In any case you have my sincere condolences. > >Peter > >-----Original Message----- >From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On >Behalf Of esst...@juno.com >Sent: Saturday, April 04, 2015 4:12 PM >To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >Subject: A New Perfromance Model ? > >Hi > >Im not a performance analyst, Im a CICS & MQ Sys-Prog. >I dont understand this new "paradyne". > >Some Back ground >March 1 Our Development Team introducd some new functionality. >The following week we were plagued with multiple 0C4 and 0C7 - ASRA Abends, >Storage Violations, and one CICS Task abended in a loss of our main production >CICS Region. > >March 7 a secnd wave of application changes were deployed. >All Of the Abends with the Exception of The Storage Vioation seem to have >evaporated, as they no-longer exists. However we are now see a sihnificant >Increase of I/O, Almost double in >CPU consumption by many tasks, and an Increase in Storage Occupancy for these >transaction. > >Some Transaction Storage incresaed by 6+ Meg. > >Working with our Capacity Planning and Performance person and reviewing CMF >data, RMF Reports, running Traces, and real time Monitors we have identified >the 7 buggest cuprits. (STROBE is a Great Product) >. >We provided our findings and analysis to our Management and Mainframe >development management with much reluctance. >. >. > >Heres what I dont understand >Our development management are telling is (Systems & Operations) that it is >"cheaper to Upgrade the mainfame than to have the application programmers >review their code for performance oppurtunities". >. >. >Are You F...ing kidding me. >. >. >In todays era is this true, because I havent heard of it ? >. >The Systems teams spent three weeks trying to compensate and adjust our >performance configuration (LPAR Weights, CICS File Adjustments etc.) to >accomodate the additional CPU that was introduced. >. >I have not seen any documents produced stating that it would be cheaper to >Upgrade to a larger machine. What about the License costs for all our products >? >. >. >If a Machine costs 8 Million, are you telling me 10 good COBOL CICS & MQ >appliaction programmers could not make some improvement >for less than 8-Mil ? >. >One of My application developers explained to me that they were getting a >ASRA/0C4 Abend. >So to correct it they increased 3 tables from 33 entries (3Meg) to 99 entries >(9Meg). >. >Did I miss a performance lecture at SHARE ? >. >Can someone explain and rationalize for this new paradyne ? >. >"cheaper to Upgrade the mainfame than to have the application programmers >review their code for performance oppurtunities". > >. >Im clueless . ?? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
