Ok, thanks Bill. My goal is to use VMRM to control the resource usage
with goals similar to what I do on z/OS with WLM. 

Thank You,
 
Terry Martin
Lockheed Martin - Information Technology
z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning
Cell - 443 632-4191
Work - 410 786-0386
terry.mar...@cms.hhs.gov
 
WFH Tuesdays and Fridays

-----Original Message-----
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Bill Munson
Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 2:26 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager

Terry,

I am not using SFS or DIRMAINT here - 
I think that IBM VM Director is or was part of those products Tracy Dean

mentioned. 

I started up VMRMSVM to use CMM and the config file is on the 191 mdisk 
and I log on to make changes.
I also log on to maint and update the USER DIRECT on the 2cc mdisk and 
then use DIRECTXA 

I got help setting up VMRMSVM from that IBM web site at the link I sent 
you and a presentation from Chris Casey of IBM . 
 
good luck

Bill Munson 
Sr. z/VM Systems Programmer 
Brown Brothers Harriman & CO.
525 Washington Blvd. 
Jersey City, NJ 07310 
201-418-7588

President MVMUA
http://www2.marist.edu/~mvmua/
http://www.linkedin.com/in/BillMunson




"Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)" <terry.mar...@cms.hhs.gov> 
Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System <IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU>
11/02/2009 02:01 PM
Please respond to
The IBM z/VM Operating System <IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU>


To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager






HI Bill,

So the CONFIG file for VMRMSVM does not need to be on SFS even if you
want the ability to change the configuration dynamically?

BTW, I am not using DIRMAINT or anything like that to administer the
Directory I am using DIRECTXA is that considered IBM VM DIRECTOR? 

Thank You,
 
Terry Martin
Lockheed Martin - Information Technology
z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning
Cell - 443 632-4191
Work - 410 786-0386
terry.mar...@cms.hhs.gov
 
WFH Tuesdays and Fridays

-----Original Message-----
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Bill Munson
Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 11:09 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager

Terry,

Nobody has said this but VMRMSVM does not need SFS to run like DFSMS
does. 

But there is some documentation that says to use SFS if you are using
IBM 
VM Director. 
and the files needed are on Maint's 193 mdisk

http://www.vm.ibm.com/sysman/vmrm/vmrmcmm.html

Bill Munson 
Sr. z/VM Systems Programmer 
Brown Brothers Harriman & CO.
525 Washington Blvd. 
Jersey City, NJ 07310 
201-418-7588

President MVMUA
http://www2.marist.edu/~mvmua/
http://www.linkedin.com/in/BillMunson




"Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)" <terry.mar...@cms.hhs.gov> 
Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System <IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU>
10/30/2009 08:33 PM
Please respond to
The IBM z/VM Operating System <IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU>


To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager






Thanks Ed. I am not running SFS and I understand that VMRM requires the 
config file to be under SFS control is this correct?  Also the only
thing 
that came on the A disk for the VMRMSVM user was the PROFILE EXEC. I
read 
that there should be a sample config file as well as some other files on

the A disk also, is there another place theses file can be found? 
 
Thank You,
 
Terry Martin
Lockheed Martin - Information Technology
z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning
Cell - 443 632-4191
Work - 410 786-0386
terry.mar...@cms.hhs.gov
 
WFH Tuesdays and Fridays

From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On 
Behalf Of Ed Neidhardt
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 12:19 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager
 
Terry,
I've been using it for around 10 months now at one of my customers and
it 
appears to be doing the job. Their environment experiences huge CPU
spikes 
during it's month end processing (4-6 days of 95-100%, where normally
CPU 
is around 40%).  They are using Focus to produce a large number of
reports 
from databases with several million records in each. 
 
Before trying VMRMSVM the operators where busy adjusting relative shares

during month end to keep the VSE nightly batch cycle from running over, 
while also trying to keep the Focus machines processing to meet their 
deadline.  We tried various combinations of relative and absolute
shares, 
but were never able to get the right mix to meet everyone's deadlines.
The 
problems were: month end started on different days of the week (each day

has it's unique processing), the amount of data being processed varied
by 
hundred's of thousands records, and the mix of Focus runs would change 
(quarter end, year end, etc) 
 
Getting a larger z9 or using capacity on demand (on a monthly basis)
were 
too costly to do, especially with the much lower utilization during the 
rest of the month.
 
Using VMRMSVM to adjust the relative appears to help because both the
VSE 
and the Focus workloads are getting finished before their deadline.  The

operators are no longer allowed to adjust the relative shares and I'm
not 
getting calls in the night about VSE or Focus jobs being too slow. 
 
I don't profess to fully understand VMRMSVM, but here are some 
observations I've found while using this:
1) Put all your zVM machines under it's control (there are some
exceptions 
like VMRMSVM, PERFSVM, and there could be others in your case).  VMRMSVM

appears to do a better job balancing when it sees all the work not just
a 
small group of machines.
 
2) Place each of the heavy CPU machines in their own group. VMRM checks 
the CPU run/wait deltas proportion of  all the machines in a group. One 
heavy CPU machine in a group will cause the group to exceed it's goals. 
VMRM then starts adjusting the relative shares downward for all the 
machines in the group, particularly the heavy CPU machine.   With some
of 
the Focus runs going for 8 hours or more I saw some relative shares of 1

which was a bit of shock.  I found I needed to have 15-20 groups 
altogether with 10 of those being single machine groups
 
3) I used the option of being able to dynamically change configurations.
I 
did this to reduce the goals for the Focus processing during the nightly

VSE batch work. When the VSE work finishes, I raise the goals again.
 
4) It's been an iterative process  of setting goals and mixing (or 
separating) machines.
 
5) I don't normally see much, if any change in the relative share values

VMRM sets when the z9 is lightly loaded.
 
Ed Neidhardt
Mainline Information Systems, Inc.
770-321-0841 Office
ed.neidha...@mainline.com
 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR) 
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU 
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 8:06 PM
Subject: VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager
 
Hi,
 
I am looking at implementing VMRM. I was wondering if you use it and if
it 
is working as advertised?  I want to mainly use it for managing the 
priority of my different workloads running in z/Linux. I am familiar
with 
the goal concept from WLM on the z/OS side so I understand the principle

behind it but I just wanted to know from those who use it how it is 
working. Also any specifics on setting it up in terms of what to watch
out 
for etc?.
 
Thank You,
 
Terry Martin
Lockheed Martin - Information Technology
z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance and Tuning
Cell - 443 632-4191
Work - 410 786-0386
terry.mar...@cms.hhs.gov
 
WFH on Tuesdays and Fridays
 

*************************** IMPORTANT
NOTE***************************** The opinions expressed in this
message and/or any attachments are those of the author and not
necessarily those of Brown Brothers Harriman & Co., its
subsidiaries and affiliates ("BBH"). There is no guarantee that
this message is either private or confidential, and it may have
been altered by unauthorized sources without your or our knowledge.
Nothing in the message is capable or intended to create any legally
binding obligations on either party and it is not intended to
provide legal advice. BBH accepts no responsibility for loss or
damage from its use, including damage from virus.
************************************************************************


*************************** IMPORTANT
NOTE***************************** The opinions expressed in this
message and/or any attachments are those of the author and not
necessarily those of Brown Brothers Harriman & Co., its
subsidiaries and affiliates ("BBH"). There is no guarantee that
this message is either private or confidential, and it may have
been altered by unauthorized sources without your or our knowledge.
Nothing in the message is capable or intended to create any legally
binding obligations on either party and it is not intended to
provide legal advice. BBH accepts no responsibility for loss or
damage from its use, including damage from virus.
************************************************************************

Reply via email to