Re: CPU Utilization

[saurabh khandelwal]

Hello,

I am able to get RMF3B messages on on my syslog. But I unable to find the
way to get these message like below when DASD activity rate goes above
limit on console.

Can you please suggest way of achieving this task .


+RMF100I 3B: Processing WFEX Report...
+RMF100I 3B: Name Reason Critical val.
+RMF100I 3B: --
+RMF102I 3B: *STOR ONLXF < 16K 0 frames
+RMF102I 3B: OSPCAT DAR > 5 9.000 /sec
+RMF102I 3B: OSPRES DAR > 5 7.300 /sec

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[Jesse 1 Robinson]

Many years ago when CMOS machines (9672) first came on the scene, individual 
CPs were a lot slower--by 3x--than the bipolar CPs they were replacing. Not a 
big issue for transactional processes like CICS, but batch suffered because of 
long standing jobs that suddenly were getting S322 abends doing the same amount 
of work as before. 

Rather than force JCL changes for hundreds of existing jobs, we added code in 
IEFUTL to extend the time for two additional intervals of whatever TIME= value 
was in effect. We kept track of extensions via some flags and issued a message 
each time the limit was extended. 

Eventually of course CMOS speeds caught up with bipolar and exceeded it. Not 
surprisingly, our IEFUTL still grants extensions. If it ain't actually broke...

.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler 
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW
robin...@sce.com


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Joel C. Ewing
Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2018 10:07 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: CPU Utilization

When total CPU time used by the address space is the issue, that can be handled 
using an IEFUTL exit, setting a default JOB TIME parameter by job class in 
JES2, and overriding that with TIME parameters on the JOB and EXEC statements 
as appropriate.  The IEFUTL exit can be written to either cancel the job when 
the limit is exceeded, or ask the operator whether he wants to extend the CPU 
TIME limit or cancel the job, and differentiate based on Job class, etc.   I 
suspect you could probably write the IEFUTL exit to auto extend the limit for 
an STC address space, but put out a console message so the Operator would know 
it was happening, and he could then manually cancel the address space if the 
behavior and CPU extension was unreasonable.
    Joel C. Ewing
.
On 07/04/2018 12:31 AM, saurabh khandelwal wrote:
> I would like operator console to be notified when any address space or  
> Job taking more CPU for longer then any time we specify
>
> On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 8:27 AM, retired mainframer 
> > wrote:
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On 
>>> Behalf Of Peter Hunkeler
>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2018 10:10 PM
>>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>>> Subject: AW: Re: CPU Utilization
>>>
>>>> No, IEFUTL is called INSIDE an Address Space as often as specified 
>>>> in
>> SMFPRMxx in
>>> statement JWT.
>>>
>>>
>>>  and it would also be called when the CPU time used exceeds the 
>>> time
>> limit of the job or
>>> step (TIME= parameter). But this means also that the exit is most 
>>> never
>> called.
>>
>> But if you specify the desired time on the job statement (the OP said 
>> 30 min?), IEFUTL would get called and could take the desired action 
>> (extend for another 30 after generating some console message?).

-- 
Joel C. Ewing,Bentonville, AR   jcew...@acm.org 


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[Joel C. Ewing]

When total CPU time used by the address space is the issue, that can be
handled using an IEFUTL exit, setting a default JOB TIME parameter by
job class in JES2, and overriding that with TIME parameters on the JOB
and EXEC statements as appropriate.  The IEFUTL exit can be written to
either cancel the job when the limit is exceeded, or ask the operator
whether he wants to extend the CPU TIME limit or cancel the job, and
differentiate based on Job class, etc.   I suspect you could probably
write the IEFUTL exit to auto extend the limit for an STC address space,
but put out a console message so the Operator would know it was
happening, and he could then manually cancel the address space if the
behavior and CPU extension was unreasonable.
    Joel C. Ewing
.
On 07/04/2018 12:31 AM, saurabh khandelwal wrote:
> I would like operator console to be notified when any address space or  Job
> taking more CPU for longer then any time we specify
>
> On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 8:27 AM, retired mainframer > wrote:
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf
>>> Of Peter Hunkeler
>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2018 10:10 PM
>>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>>> Subject: AW: Re: CPU Utilization
>>>
>>>> No, IEFUTL is called INSIDE an Address Space as often as specified in
>> SMFPRMxx in
>>> statement JWT.
>>>
>>>
>>>  and it would also be called when the CPU time used exceeds the time
>> limit of the job or
>>> step (TIME= parameter). But this means also that the exit is most never
>> called.
>>
>> But if you specify the desired time on the job statement (the OP said 30
>> min?), IEFUTL would get called and could take the desired action (extend
>> for
>> another 30 after generating some console message?).
>>
>> --
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

-- 
Joel C. Ewing,Bentonville, AR   jcew...@acm.org 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: AW: Re: CPU Utilization

[Joel C. Ewing]

On 07/04/2018 06:46 AM, Peter Hunkeler wrote:
>> But if you specify the desired time on the job statement (the OP said 30 
> min?), IEFUTL would get called and could take the desired action (extend for 
> another 30 after generating some console message?). 
>
>
>
>
> I stand corrected. I had in mind he wanted an alert when some address space 
> consumes more that a certain amount of CPU *percent*in an interval, not time. 
>
>
> --
> Peter Hunkeler
>
>
>
>
I think  the original poster really needs to consider what his objective
is.   By itself, percentage of CPU used in real time is not a reliable
indicator of a problem with a job. A perfectly tuned complex job on a
lightly loaded system may consume a high percentage of a physical CPU
for an extended time, but this is goodness if it completes in that much
less real time and it shouldn't be penalized for being well-tuned.   A
job in an infinite loop on a heavily-loaded system may not show up with
as high of CPU utilization, but can soak up enough remaing CPU resource
to raise your 4-hour MSU average and either raise software charges or
result in LPAR capping which could then cause performance issues.  

The least expensive solution is to set "reasonable" (for your
installation) default CPU TIME limits on job classes and in cases where
the default TIME is inadequate use reasonable TIME limits on JOB  and/or
EXEC cards to catch job steps that are using much more total CPU time
than is expected.  You can write your IEFUTL exit to be sensitive to
production job classes and allow the Operator to choose to extend the
CPU time for production jobs that appear to be doing useful work, unless
the total time is completely out of line with historical usage by the
job step.
    Joel C Ewing

-- 
Joel C. Ewing,Bentonville, AR   jcew...@acm.org 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[Roger Lowe]

On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 03:24:00 -0500, Vince Getgood  wrote:

>Saurabh,
>How much is your management willing to spend on achieving this requirement?
>
>From the few posts that I've seen, I'd suggest no-one here does this now, or 
>has ever done it.  If a company wants to monitor it's mainframe resource usage 
>dynamically, it buys and impliments a product. (BMC Mainview, ASG TMON, IBM's 
>Omegamon etc). 
>
>You're basically asking us to help you write something that will replace one 
>of the above - I'd suggest that's not going to happen - at least not for free!
>
>Also, consider how much resource a home-grown resource monitor would use?   
>Who monitors the monitor?
>
Again, if you have RMF at your site, you could something similar to what we 
have done using RMFM3B to write out to syslog/operlog what our Group Capacity 
usage are for our various environments. An example:
 +RMF300I 3B: Processing CPC Report...

 +MVS1 - RMF301I: 4H Average: 2
 +MVS1 - RMF302I: 4H Max: 3
 +MVS1 - RMF303I: WLM Capping %:  0.0  
 +MVS1 - RMF304I: Group Name: GRPDEVT  
 +MVS1 - RMF305I: Group Limit: 9  
 +MVS1 - RMF306I: Time until Capping: 195 minutes  
.
Using the above info, you could certainly then setup whatever automation 
package you have to trap on the relevant fields
.
Have a look in your *.SERBCLS dataset (members ERBM3B and ERBR3CPC) and that 
will give you a good starting point to set something up to fit your 
requirements. As Vince said, you are basically asking/wanting someone else to 
do the leg work for you for free and that ain't going to happen any time soon! 

Just to provide you with another source of RMF related info/goodies - 
https://github.com/IBM/IBM-Z-zOS/tree/master/zOS-RMF

Roger 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

AW: Re: CPU Utilization

[Peter Hunkeler]

>But if you specify the desired time on the job statement (the OP said 30
min?), IEFUTL would get called and could take the desired action (extend for
another 30 after generating some console message?).




I stand corrected. I had in mind he wanted an alert when some address space 
consumes more that a certain amount of CPU *percent*in an interval, not time.


--
Peter Hunkeler



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[Vince Getgood]

Saurabh,
How much is your management willing to spend on achieving this requirement?

From the few posts that I've seen, I'd suggest no-one here does this now, or 
has ever done it.  If a company wants to monitor it's mainframe resource usage 
dynamically, it buys and impliments a product. (BMC Mainview, ASG TMON, IBM's 
Omegamon etc). 

You're basically asking us to help you write something that will replace one of 
the above - I'd suggest that's not going to happen - at least not for free!

Also, consider how much resource a home-grown resource monitor would use?   Who 
monitors the monitor?

You need to go back to your management and explain that, with the tools 
available to you, what they are trying to achieve is not possible without a 
significant investment in time and money.

I'm available (for a fee!) to explain the real world to your management.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[saurabh khandelwal]

I would like operator console to be notified when any address space or  Job
taking more CPU for longer then any time we specify

On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 8:27 AM, retired mainframer  wrote:

> > -Original Message-
> > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf
> > Of Peter Hunkeler
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2018 10:10 PM
> > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> > Subject: AW: Re: CPU Utilization
> >
> > >No, IEFUTL is called INSIDE an Address Space as often as specified in
> SMFPRMxx in
> > statement JWT.
> >
> >
> >  and it would also be called when the CPU time used exceeds the time
> limit of the job or
> > step (TIME= parameter). But this means also that the exit is most never
> called.
>
> But if you specify the desired time on the job statement (the OP said 30
> min?), IEFUTL would get called and could take the desired action (extend
> for
> another 30 after generating some console message?).
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[retired mainframer]

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf
> Of Peter Hunkeler
> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2018 10:10 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: AW: Re: CPU Utilization
> 
> >No, IEFUTL is called INSIDE an Address Space as often as specified in
SMFPRMxx in
> statement JWT.
> 
> 
>  and it would also be called when the CPU time used exceeds the time
limit of the job or
> step (TIME= parameter). But this means also that the exit is most never
called.

But if you specify the desired time on the job statement (the OP said 30
min?), IEFUTL would get called and could take the desired action (extend for
another 30 after generating some console message?).

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[saurabh khandelwal]

Thanks for reply. We don't have  BMC Mainview or IBM Omegamon or any third
party product except  Netview from ibm.

I read about RMFM3B from rmf user guide also but not much help to setup
this  for CPU usage . Can anybody help me to achieve this task .



On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 10:22 PM, Feller, Paul 
wrote:

> If you have BMC Mainview or IBM Omegamon (or some other monitoring
> software) consider looking at those to monitor and alert you about CPU
> usage.  Among other things that is part of what they are created for.
>
> Thanks..
>
> Paul Feller
> AGT Mainframe Technical Support
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of saurabh khandelwal
> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2018 6:42 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: CPU Utilization
>
> Hello Group,
>
> We have requirement to trigger alert to operator console, once CPU
> utilization for any address space or any Job or any running STC  reach to
> certain pre defined number. Like any job or address space or STC consuming
> CPU for more then 30 min etc , operator should get alter on his console.
>
>
> Is there any way to implement this process using rexx, netview or any
> other way .
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email
> to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

AW: Re: CPU Utilization

[Peter Hunkeler]

>No, IEFUTL is called INSIDE an Address Space as often as specified in SMFPRMxx 
>in statement JWT.


 and it would also be called when the CPU time used exceeds the time limit 
of the job or step (TIME= parameter). But this means also that the exit is most 
never called.


And since we're at JWT: I only recently learnt that z/OS V2.1 introduced two 
new SMFPRMxx parameters called TWT and SWT. So, we can now manage continuous 
wait time differently for TSO users, STCs and all the rest, i.e. batch jobs, 
OMVS process address spaces (I'm just guessing that the latter are handled by 
JWT).

--
Peter Hunkeler

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[Feller, Paul]

If you have BMC Mainview or IBM Omegamon (or some other monitoring software) 
consider looking at those to monitor and alert you about CPU usage.  Among 
other things that is part of what they are created for.

Thanks..

Paul Feller
AGT Mainframe Technical Support

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of saurabh khandelwal
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2018 6:42 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: CPU Utilization

Hello Group,

We have requirement to trigger alert to operator console, once CPU utilization 
for any address space or any Job or any running STC  reach to certain pre 
defined number. Like any job or address space or STC consuming CPU for more 
then 30 min etc , operator should get alter on his console.


Is there any way to implement this process using rexx, netview or any other way 
.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[Peter Ten Eyck]

This sounds like something that could be done with a product like BMC Mainview 
for z/OS or ASG TMON for z/OS (or other). I think alerts can be set for CPU 
usage in these products.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[Scott Barry]

On Tue, 3 Jul 2018 14:42:21 +0300, saurabh khandelwal 
 wrote:

>Hello Group,
>
>We have requirement to trigger alert to operator console, once CPU
>utilization for any address space or any Job or any running STC  reach to
>certain pre defined number. Like any job or address space or STC consuming
>CPU for more then 30 min etc , operator should get alter on his console.
>
>
>Is there any way to implement this process using rexx, netview or any other
>way .
>

Consider REXX EXEC approach, possibly -- sleep/wake-up, invoke SDSF DA command, 
parse/interrogate results, take action accordingly, iterate.

Scott Barry
SBBWorks, Inc.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[Elardus Engelbrecht]

saurabh khandelwal wrote:

>Can IEFUTL exit also provide live CPU usage detail by every job, stc, address 
>space, omvs etc and send alert to operator console, if any set limit for CPU 
>is exceeded .

No, IEFUTL is called INSIDE an Address Space as often as specified in SMFPRMxx 
in statement JWT [depending on further selection by exit].

Anyways, you can perhaps code your own IEFUTL to extract the stats from all 
'live address space' and their resource usage. I will not recommend that 
approach. Reason is that you want to avoid excessive overhead when IEFUTL is 
triggered by a time-out event.

Use, as recommended, RMF and its friends.

Groete / Greetings
Elardus Engelbrecht

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[saurabh khandelwal]

I read about  RMFM3B  from below white paper

http://www-03.ibm.com/support/techdocs/atsmastr.nsf/c6192fb3a432612485256d970082de57/399938068ea32df786256e2a005e8c8e/$FILE/RMF_WTO_2010.pdf

but i am not sure, how to implement this for checking live cpu usage for
every stc, jes job , omvs etc and send notification to operator console
once threshold value exceed to avoid issue


Is there anybody has implemented this facility.



On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 4:07 PM, Roger Lowe  wrote:

> On Tue, 3 Jul 2018 14:42:21 +0300, saurabh khandelwal <
> venkatkulkarn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Hello Group,
> >
> >We have requirement to trigger alert to operator console, once CPU
> >utilization for any address space or any Job or any running STC  reach to
> >certain pre defined number. Like any job or address space or STC consuming
> >CPU for more then 30 min etc , operator should get alter on his console.
> >
> >
> >Is there any way to implement this process using rexx, netview or any
> other
> >way .
> >
> If you have RMF installed, you could look at using RMFM3B and zEvent which
> could do what you are after 
>
> Roger
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[saurabh khandelwal]

Hello,

Thanks for reply.  Can IEFUTL exit also provide live CPU usage detail by
every job, stc, address space, omvs etc and send alert to operator console,
if any set limit for CPU is exceeded .



On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 6:53 PM, retired mainframer  wrote:

> You might look at IEFUTL in the MVS Installation Exits manual to see if it
> can do what you want.
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf
> > Of saurabh khandelwal
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2018 4:42 AM
> > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> > Subject: CPU Utilization
> >
> > Hello Group,
> >
> > We have requirement to trigger alert to operator console, once CPU
> > utilization for any address space or any Job or any running STC  reach to
> > certain pre defined number. Like any job or address space or STC
> consuming
> > CPU for more then 30 min etc , operator should get alter on his console.
> >
> >
> > Is there any way to implement this process using rexx, netview or any
> other
> > way .
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[retired mainframer]

You might look at IEFUTL in the MVS Installation Exits manual to see if it can 
do what you want.

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf
> Of saurabh khandelwal
> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2018 4:42 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: CPU Utilization
> 
> Hello Group,
> 
> We have requirement to trigger alert to operator console, once CPU
> utilization for any address space or any Job or any running STC  reach to
> certain pre defined number. Like any job or address space or STC consuming
> CPU for more then 30 min etc , operator should get alter on his console.
> 
> 
> Is there any way to implement this process using rexx, netview or any other
> way .

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[Roger Lowe]

On Tue, 3 Jul 2018 14:42:21 +0300, saurabh khandelwal 
 wrote:

>Hello Group,
>
>We have requirement to trigger alert to operator console, once CPU
>utilization for any address space or any Job or any running STC  reach to
>certain pre defined number. Like any job or address space or STC consuming
>CPU for more then 30 min etc , operator should get alter on his console.
>
>
>Is there any way to implement this process using rexx, netview or any other
>way .
>
If you have RMF installed, you could look at using RMFM3B and zEvent which 
could do what you are after 

Roger

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

CPU Utilization

[saurabh khandelwal]

Hello Group,

We have requirement to trigger alert to operator console, once CPU
utilization for any address space or any Job or any running STC  reach to
certain pre defined number. Like any job or address space or STC consuming
CPU for more then 30 min etc , operator should get alter on his console.


Is there any way to implement this process using rexx, netview or any other
way .

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: large VSAM LSR buffering vs. CPU utilization

[Edward Gould]

> On May 25, 2017, at 3:28 PM, Martin Packer  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Back in the late 1980's there was a "coffee table book" on Data In Memory,
> with a bunch of studies in. VSAM LSR was one of them. It was one of the
> cases where CPU was SAVED across the range.
> 
> Pure speculation but I doubt that became untrue subsequently.
> 
> Cheers, Martin
SNIP—

Martin,

Just as a follow on and a bit of trivia. When IBM came out with SAMe.
We installed it ASAP. We had run many traces and SMF looking too see what would 
happen when you increased the number of buffers.
After the SAMe installation we saw runtimes dramatically reduced by as much as 
50 percent. The SRB time rose an imperceptibly.
This was due to SAMe changing the default buffers in QSAM  from 2 to (7 or 8) 
its been a long time.
We did not see any additional real storage creep either.
IF memory serves me correctly. Before SAMe came out our SE had done a study and 
got a orange book published as a result.
My memory says that SAMe costed $52 a month and was well worth it.
Yes there were some bugs that resulted but all in all a damn good piece of 
software.

Ed
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: large VSAM LSR buffering vs. CPU utilization

[Martin Packer]

Back in the late 1980's there was a "coffee table book" on Data In Memory,
with a bunch of studies in. VSAM LSR was one of them. It was one of the
cases where CPU was SAVED across the range.

Pure speculation but I doubt that became untrue subsequently.

Cheers, Martin

Sent from my iPad

> On 24 May 2017, at 14:07, Feller, Paul <paul.fel...@transamerica.com>
wrote:
>
> Most of the time I suggest throwing VSAM (and non-VSAM) buffers at jobs
when the business users are complaining about run time and don't have time
for app tuning.  They are happy to accept a little extra CPU for a decrease
in run time.
>
> Thanks..
>
> Paul Feller
> AGT Mainframe Technical Support
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of John McKown
> Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 07:59
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: large VSAM LSR buffering vs. CPU utilization
>
> A post on another forum has gotten me to wondering about the size &
number
> of buffers in a VSAM LSR pool versus the CPU utilization needed to manage
> them. Around here the idea has always been "the more buffers the better"
> and no analysis has ever been done. But in today's I/O environment, I
> wondering if this is unconditionally true. Given the advances in CPU and
> its outpacing of the speed of even the fastest I/O (not that my shop is
in
> this situation), I'm wondering if this simplistic rule is still true.
I.e.
> Is "throw more buffers at an I/O intensive workload" still true.
>
> --
> Windows. A funny name for a operating system that doesn't let you see
> anything.
>
> Maranatha! <><
> John McKown
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAINUnless 
> stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: large VSAM LSR buffering vs. CPU utilization

[Feller, Paul]

Most of the time I suggest throwing VSAM (and non-VSAM) buffers at jobs when 
the business users are complaining about run time and don't have time for app 
tuning.  They are happy to accept a little extra CPU for a decrease in run time.

Thanks..

Paul Feller
AGT Mainframe Technical Support

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of John McKown
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 07:59
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: large VSAM LSR buffering vs. CPU utilization

A post on another forum has gotten me to wondering about the size & number
of buffers in a VSAM LSR pool versus the CPU utilization needed to manage
them. Around here the idea has always been "the more buffers the better"
and no analysis has ever been done. But in today's I/O environment, I
wondering if this is unconditionally true. Given the advances in CPU and
its outpacing of the speed of even the fastest I/O (not that my shop is in
this situation), I'm wondering if this simplistic rule is still true. I.e.
Is "throw more buffers at an I/O intensive workload" still true.

-- 
Windows. A funny name for a operating system that doesn't let you see
anything.

Maranatha! <><
John McKown

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

large VSAM LSR buffering vs. CPU utilization

[John McKown]

A post on another forum has gotten me to wondering about the size & number
of buffers in a VSAM LSR pool versus the CPU utilization needed to manage
them. Around here the idea has always been "the more buffers the better"
and no analysis has ever been done. But in today's I/O environment, I
wondering if this is unconditionally true. Given the advances in CPU and
its outpacing of the speed of even the fastest I/O (not that my shop is in
this situation), I'm wondering if this simplistic rule is still true. I.e.
Is "throw more buffers at an I/O intensive workload" still true.

-- 
Windows. A funny name for a operating system that doesn't let you see
anything.

Maranatha! <><
John McKown

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Performance question - handling of max CPU % utilization

[Elardus Engelbrecht]

Shane Ginnane wrote:

Don't.

I bloody wish I could do that.


Simple as that - I am constantly trying to disavow people of the notion of 
one number per day. 

Agreed! One number does not tell the story truthfully.


Don't use the LPAR MVS busy numbers. Period. Go to the Partition Data Report 
and give those numbers to your boss. Nice graph, simple  stacked area graph 
with the CEC capacity as a big black line at the top.

As Allan Staller and Barbara Nitz both kindly said, I should look at the CEC 
and PR/SM data as RMF samples it. I will use LPAR averages, but to show how 
really busy the CEC is, I will use other measures.

But it helps that I handle each CEC separately, I do not combine any data in 
one big set of data, simply because the different CEC have different type of 
workload.


The RMF Spreadsheet reporter probably does, 

Indeed, as others said, this is the tool I should look at it. I also 
experimented with that RMF portal in the weekend which is already proving very 
useful for my purpose.

Many thanks to all for your kind replies! Much appreciated! 

Groete / Greetings
Elardus Engelbrecht

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Performance question - handling of max CPU % utilization

[Martin Packer]

Agree with the stacked graph of LPARs. But one plea: Do it by processor 
pool for (at least) GCPs and zIIPs. (IFLs might be meaningful, ICFs less 
likely, zAAPs possibly.)

Which takes us away from one number. :-)

Cheers, Martin

Martin Packer,
zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator,
Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM

+44-7802-245-584

email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com

Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker
Blog: 
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker



From:   Elardus Engelbrecht elardus.engelbre...@sita.co.za
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date:   11/05/2015 07:28
Subject:Re: Performance question - handling of max CPU % 
utilization
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU



Shane Ginnane wrote:

Don't.

I bloody wish I could do that.


Simple as that - I am constantly trying to disavow people of the notion 
of one number per day. 

Agreed! One number does not tell the story truthfully.


Don't use the LPAR MVS busy numbers. Period. Go to the Partition Data 
Report and give those numbers to your boss. Nice graph, simple  stacked 
area graph with the CEC capacity as a big black line at the top.

As Allan Staller and Barbara Nitz both kindly said, I should look at the 
CEC and PR/SM data as RMF samples it. I will use LPAR averages, but to 
show how really busy the CEC is, I will use other measures.

But it helps that I handle each CEC separately, I do not combine any data 
in one big set of data, simply because the different CEC have different 
type of workload.


The RMF Spreadsheet reporter probably does, 

Indeed, as others said, this is the tool I should look at it. I also 
experimented with that RMF portal in the weekend which is already proving 
very useful for my purpose.

Many thanks to all for your kind replies! Much appreciated! 

Groete / Greetings
Elardus Engelbrecht

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN



Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Performance question - handling of max CPU % utilization

[Elardus Engelbrecht]

Martin Packer wrote:

Agree with the stacked graph of LPARs. But one plea: Do it by processor pool 
for (at least) GCPs and zIIPs. (IFLs might be meaningful, ICFs less likely, 
zAAPs possibly.)

Agreed! That I already does. Anyways, according to my local IBMer, the zIIP CPU 
is shared by the DB2 LPARs. No sense trying to mix and match all CPU usage in 
one stupid magic number. No ICF and zAAPs for now.

Which takes us away from one number. :-)

It remind me of this little motto: Take only ONE beer or coffee. It is the size 
of the mug that matters. ;-D

Groete / Greetings
Elardus Engelbrecht

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Performance question - handling of max CPU % utilization

[Elardus Engelbrecht]

Hi to all,

It is part of my duties to show to management z/OS performance daily and 
monthly based on SMF RMF records.

CPU% utilization averages, memory usage, MSU, I/O rates, transaction rates, 
etc. are usually easy to present and explain. You get Averages, 90th 
percentile, absolute maximum/minimum, etc. as measurement criterias.

My problem is: I wish to show that our machines are heavily loaded or maximum 
loaded. 

My problem is that the different LPARs have their absolute maximum CPU% 
utilization at different hourly and 30 minute intervals. So LPAR 1 has 100% CPU 
utilization at 09:00, but LPAR 2 has 95% CPU utilization at say 13:00. If I 
combine these values for the day, they're sometimes over 100% which is 
undesirable or difficult to explain.

Sometimes I see those max CPU% drifts very far far away from the usual average 
CPU% utilization on one or more LPARs at a given interval, but not always at 
the same time.

Question: how do you performance guys and gals present those maximums? Or how 
do you prove that machines are heavily used? Do you use averages of those 
maximum CPU% utilization or what do you use? Do you combine all the LPARs and 
then work out the max? Any trending or statistical analysis methods to consider?

I'm using RMF and a commercial product (no SAS) to process those SMF RMF 
records daily and monthly. z/OS v1.13.

Many thanks in advance.

Groete / Greetings
Elardus Engelbrecht

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Performance question - handling of max CPU % utilization

[Shane Ginnane]

On Thu, 7 May 2015 06:51:42 -0500, Elardus Engelbrecht wrote:

If I combine these values for the day, they're sometimes over 100% which is 
undesirable or difficult to explain.

Don't.
Simple as that - I am constantly trying to disavow people of the notion of one 
number per day. RMF is a sampler - you get averaged numbers. (Re-)averaging 
those over a period like a day renders them effectively meaningless. And that's 
if you're using the correct metric(s).
Don't use the LPAR MVS busy numbers. Period. Go to the Partition Data Report 
and give those numbers to your boss. Nice graph, simple  stacked area graph 
with the CEC capacity as a big black line at the top.
Easy to see (lack of) white space available.

If your software doesn't give you this, get rid of it. The RMF Spreadsheet 
reporter probably does, but it's been too long since I managed to coerce it to 
behave. Or you can simply export the numbers to LibreOffice Calc and graph it 
yourself.

Shane ...

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Performance question - handling of max CPU % utilization

[nitz-...@gmx.net]

 Question: how do you performance guys and gals present those maximums? Or how 
 do you prove that machines are heavily used? Do you use averages of those 
 maximum CPU% utilization or what do you use? Do you combine all the LPARs and 
 then work out the max? Any trending or statistical analysis methods to 
 consider?

I used to use SMF type70 records (PR/SM data) and compiled grafics (SAS, MXG) 
that show what each lpar used in each interval. Being 'flatlined' at the top of 
the box certainly showed that the machine was overloaded, despite the actual 
lpars still showing room. They could not get it because the physical processors 
were busy elsewhere. I had a separate grafic for ZIIPs, as they had a different 
100% - they were much faster than our GCPs.

Barbara

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Performance question - handling of max CPU % utilization

[Staller, Allan]

The RMF CPU report should show this information (for each CEC) both at the 
aggregate level and broken out by LPAR.

You might also look at the RMF Spreadsheet Reporter. More info here :
http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/z/os/zos/features/rmf/ 
and
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/epubs/pdf/erb2ug01.pdf

One way to aggregate multiple CECs is to total all processors and normalize 
to 100% for the manglers

HTH, 

snip
It is part of my duties to show to management z/OS performance daily and 
monthly based on SMF RMF records.

CPU% utilization averages, memory usage, MSU, I/O rates, transaction rates, 
etc. are usually easy to present and explain. You get Averages, 90th 
percentile, absolute maximum/minimum, etc. as measurement criterias.

My problem is: I wish to show that our machines are heavily loaded or maximum 
loaded. 

My problem is that the different LPARs have their absolute maximum CPU% 
utilization at different hourly and 30 minute intervals. So LPAR 1 has 100% CPU 
utilization at 09:00, but LPAR 2 has 95% CPU utilization at say 13:00. If I 
combine these values for the day, they're sometimes over 100% which is 
undesirable or difficult to explain.

Sometimes I see those max CPU% drifts very far far away from the usual average 
CPU% utilization on one or more LPARs at a given interval, but not always at 
the same time.

Question: how do you performance guys and gals present those maximums? Or how 
do you prove that machines are heavily used? Do you use averages of those 
maximum CPU% utilization or what do you use? Do you combine all the LPARs and 
then work out the max? Any trending or statistical analysis methods to consider?

I'm using RMF and a commercial product (no SAS) to process those SMF RMF 
records daily and monthly. z/OS v1.13.
/snip


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Watch the wrap! (Was: CPU Utilization)

[Chris Mason]

Allan and anyone quoting an IBM manual URL

I was prompted to include this post in IBM-MAIN based on a thread I have been 
checking in the IBMTCP-L list. I have used a recent example from IBM-MAIN.

If you discard all the unnecessary verbiage following - and including - the 
question mark, ?, you will save your finger-ends from the pointless pounding 
of the warning. Also, if you are simply going to provide the Table of 
Contents for the manual, there is no need for the text /CCONTENTS/.

http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/ERBZPM90

works just as well as

http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/ERBZPM90/CCONTENTS?SHELF=erbzbkb0DN=SC33-7992-10DT=20100712181154

Chris Mason

On Wed, 7 Nov 2012 14:41:56 +, Staller, Allan allan.stal...@kbmg.com 
wrote:

snip
Also trying to figure out any batch loads that are of not high priority to run 
over a non-peak hours which might help a bit to it, 
/snip
This is a techno-political question which only the customer can answer

snip
Any expert advice on the other ways that i can consider to help would be 
highly appreciated
/snip
You might want to review the RMF Performance Management Guide found here:

http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/ERBZPM90/CCONTENTS?SHELF=erbzbkb0DN=SC33-7992-10DT=20100712181154

(watch the wrap). 

Google is your friend. If the RMF PM Guide indicates a problem with (for 
example, RACF), google for RACF Performance (either on the IBM website or WWW).
Last but not least, the IBM TECHDOCS website has lots of good info.

http://www-03.ibm.com/support/techdocs/atsmastr.nsf/Web/Technotes

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[Shane Ginnane]

Workload Manager is your friend.

Hmmm - *IF* you understand the (history of the) workload, the SLAs, the 
expectations of the customer, the politics,  ...
And WLM itself of course.

Take it from me, it is bloody difficult to walk into a site and make sensible 
determinations that will be accepted.

As usual, Barbara has basically covered things.

Shane ...

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[RCG]

Thanks a lot for everyone and appreciate your time and help, I
will consider the recommendations given as i move on, Thanks again!

On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 11:00 AM, nitz-...@gmx.net nitz-...@gmx.net wrote:

  Not sure how Workload Manager is being used or configured at your shop.

 From the original description, I am assuming that that installation runs
 more than one lpar on the box, most probably with lpar weights that reflect
 importance of the lpars. If the OP happens to work on an lpar that is not a
 loved one in terms of lpar weight, then almost no amount of WLM tuning will
 get that lpar service if another lpar is using that service. What's more,
 an execution velocity goal that is achievable on a loved lpar won't be on
 an unloved one for the exact same job with the exact same data.

 If the *box* (all physical cps) is running at 100% cpu (as they are in
 many smaller shops), then you need to drastically reduce the number of WLM
 service classes/service class periods, at least in the unloved lpars. Get
 down to less than 10 service classes, preferably only one per importance.
 Be prepared to have a fight with just about everyone because they all think
 they're more important than the rest of the world and they all want to be
 at least importance1, better in sysstc. Traditionally, everything will
 cluster in sysstc and importance 1 service classes, with almost nothing in
 importance 4 and 5.

 Barbara Nitz

 --
 For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
 send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[mf db]

Probably your mainframe capacity enginneer should have this in his Mind.(It
really requires a professional approach)

Peter.

On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 3:45 PM, RCG rkcgowda1...@gmail.com wrote:

 Thanks a lot for everyone and appreciate your time and help, I
 will consider the recommendations given as i move on, Thanks again!

 On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 11:00 AM, nitz-...@gmx.net nitz-...@gmx.net
 wrote:

   Not sure how Workload Manager is being used or configured at your shop.
 
  From the original description, I am assuming that that installation runs
  more than one lpar on the box, most probably with lpar weights that
 reflect
  importance of the lpars. If the OP happens to work on an lpar that is
 not a
  loved one in terms of lpar weight, then almost no amount of WLM tuning
 will
  get that lpar service if another lpar is using that service. What's more,
  an execution velocity goal that is achievable on a loved lpar won't be on
  an unloved one for the exact same job with the exact same data.
 
  If the *box* (all physical cps) is running at 100% cpu (as they are in
  many smaller shops), then you need to drastically reduce the number of
 WLM
  service classes/service class periods, at least in the unloved lpars. Get
  down to less than 10 service classes, preferably only one per importance.
  Be prepared to have a fight with just about everyone because they all
 think
  they're more important than the rest of the world and they all want to be
  at least importance1, better in sysstc. Traditionally, everything will
  cluster in sysstc and importance 1 service classes, with almost nothing
 in
  importance 4 and 5.
 
  Barbara Nitz
 
  --
  For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
  send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
 

 --
 For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
 send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[Ed Finnell]

Yeah, then sometimes you need outside help to make things better.  Perf. 
Assoc, Watsonwalker.com, even IBM has tuning services. They are for a fee.  It 
might mean spending thousands to save millions in software/hardware  
upgrades.
 
 
In a message dated 11/8/2012 3:01:45 A.M. Central Standard Time,  
ibm-m...@tpg.com.au writes:

Take it  from me, it is bloody difficult to walk into a site and make 
sensible  determinations that will be accepted.

As usual, Barbara has basically  covered things.



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[Scott Ford]

Some manglers feel us techies, experienced ones, are a dime a dozen

Scott ford
www.identityforge.com

Tell me and I'll forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and I'll 
understand. - Chinese Proverb


On Nov 7, 2012, at 10:46 PM, Ted MacNEIL eamacn...@yahoo.ca wrote:

 I don't contribute to this list very much, but I feel I should in this case.
 
 Performance/Capacity Management is not learned overnight. Nor is it a subject 
 where a couple of nuggets on a list serve will solve your problems.
 
 Is SMP/E learned overnight?
 Is being a DBA?
 COBOL programmer?
 RACF admin?
 
 It's a profession and requires a professional!
 
 --Original Message--
 From: RCG
 Sender: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
 ReplyTo: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
 Subject: CPU Utilization
 Sent: 7 Nov 2012 09:30
 
 Dear Group,
 
 In one of the shop that I work, I have CPU constraint where the utilization
 is @ 100% most of the times and that is impacting much of the services
 which is obvious, I am not a Performance / Capacity expert nor thats my day
 to day work, Though I am still looking for the ways where we can better the
 utilization and atleast reduce the impact, additional CPU would definitely
 resolve that, But that is not something the customer is interested with, I
 am doing some reading to help tune the performance, Also trying to figure
 out any batch loads that are of not high priority to run over a non-peak
 hours which might help a bit to it, Any expert advice on the other ways
 that i can consider to help would be highly appreciated, Thanks much in
 advance !
 
 Regards,
 
 --
 For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
 send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
 
 -
 Ted MacNEIL
 eamacn...@yahoo.ca
 Twitter: @TedMacNEIL
 
 --
 For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
 send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[Staller, Allan]

snip
Also trying to figure out any batch loads that are of not high priority to run 
over a non-peak hours which might help a bit to it, 
/snip
This is a techno-political question which only the customer can answer

snip
Any expert advice on the other ways that i can consider to help would be highly 
appreciated
/snip
You might want to review the RMF Performance Management Guide found here:

http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/ERBZPM90/CCONTENTS?SHELF=erbzbkb0DN=SC33-7992-10DT=20100712181154

(watch the wrap). 

Google is your friend. If the RMF PM Guide indicates a problem with (for 
example, RACF), google for RACF Performance (either on the IBM website or WWW).
Last but not least, the IBM TECHDOCS website has lots of good info.

http://www-03.ibm.com/support/techdocs/atsmastr.nsf/Web/Technotes

HTH,

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[Blaicher, Christopher Y.]

Running 100% is not bad.  What is bad is missing SLA's.  So if you are not 
missing SLA's, you don't have an immediate problem.  If your shop is like most 
shops, the work load is growing and that can lead to missing SLA's in the 
future.

I would do the following:
1) Look for 'hot spots', first at the line of business level, then at the 
sub-system level (CICS, DB2, etc), then at the program and transaction level.
2) Make improvements where you can.
3) Do they have any ZIIP engines?  If they have any, how are they being 
utilized?  Can you do more with them?  Adding GP engines is expensive in two 
ways. The processor cost AND the increase in software costs.  Adding a ZIIP has 
no effect on the software costs, mostly.
4) go back to step 1 and do it again.

When I did performance monitoring at a very large company we just kept doing 
steps 1, 2 and 4.  We didn't have ZIIP's at that time.  Find the top ten users 
of resources and focus in on them.  As you make improvements, some will drop 
off and new ones will rise to the top, which is why step 4 is important.

Chris Blaicher
Senior Software Engineer, Software Services
Syncsort Incorporated
50 Tice Boulevard, Woodcliff Lake, NJ 07677
P: 201-930-8260  |  M: 512-627-3803
E: cblaic...@syncsort.com


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of RCG
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 8:30 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: CPU Utilization

Dear Group,

In one of the shop that I work, I have CPU constraint where the utilization is 
@ 100% most of the times and that is impacting much of the services which is 
obvious, I am not a Performance / Capacity expert nor thats my day to day work, 
Though I am still looking for the ways where we can better the utilization and 
atleast reduce the impact, additional CPU would definitely resolve that, But 
that is not something the customer is interested with, I am doing some reading 
to help tune the performance, Also trying to figure out any batch loads that 
are of not high priority to run over a non-peak hours which might help a bit to 
it, Any expert advice on the other ways that i can consider to help would be 
highly appreciated, Thanks much in advance !

Regards,

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN



ATTENTION: -

The information contained in this message (including any files transmitted with 
this message) may contain proprietary, trade secret or other  confidential 
and/or legally privileged information. Any pricing information contained in 
this message or in any files transmitted with this message is always 
confidential and cannot be shared with any third parties without prior written 
approval from Syncsort. This message is intended to be read only by the 
individual or entity to whom it is addressed or by their designee. If the 
reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are on notice that 
any use, disclosure, copying or distribution of this message, in any form, is 
strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please 
immediately notify the sender and/or Syncsort and destroy all copies of this 
message in your possession, custody or control.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[RCG]

Appreciate the prompt response and help Chris  Allan, I will consider the
advises given and look to see those areas of improvement, Thanks again!

Regards,
RKC

On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Blaicher, Christopher Y. 
cblaic...@syncsort.com wrote:

 Running 100% is not bad.  What is bad is missing SLA's.  So if you are not
 missing SLA's, you don't have an immediate problem.  If your shop is like
 most shops, the work load is growing and that can lead to missing SLA's in
 the future.

 I would do the following:
 1) Look for 'hot spots', first at the line of business level, then at the
 sub-system level (CICS, DB2, etc), then at the program and transaction
 level.
 2) Make improvements where you can.
 3) Do they have any ZIIP engines?  If they have any, how are they being
 utilized?  Can you do more with them?  Adding GP engines is expensive in
 two ways. The processor cost AND the increase in software costs.  Adding a
 ZIIP has no effect on the software costs, mostly.
 4) go back to step 1 and do it again.

 When I did performance monitoring at a very large company we just kept
 doing steps 1, 2 and 4.  We didn't have ZIIP's at that time.  Find the top
 ten users of resources and focus in on them.  As you make improvements,
 some will drop off and new ones will rise to the top, which is why step 4
 is important.

 Chris Blaicher
 Senior Software Engineer, Software Services
 Syncsort Incorporated
 50 Tice Boulevard, Woodcliff Lake, NJ 07677
 P: 201-930-8260  |  M: 512-627-3803
 E: cblaic...@syncsort.com


 -Original Message-
 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
 Behalf Of RCG
 Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 8:30 AM
 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
 Subject: CPU Utilization

 Dear Group,

 In one of the shop that I work, I have CPU constraint where the
 utilization is @ 100% most of the times and that is impacting much of the
 services which is obvious, I am not a Performance / Capacity expert nor
 thats my day to day work, Though I am still looking for the ways where we
 can better the utilization and atleast reduce the impact, additional CPU
 would definitely resolve that, But that is not something the customer is
 interested with, I am doing some reading to help tune the performance, Also
 trying to figure out any batch loads that are of not high priority to run
 over a non-peak hours which might help a bit to it, Any expert advice on
 the other ways that i can consider to help would be highly appreciated,
 Thanks much in advance !

 Regards,

 --
 For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email
 to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN



 ATTENTION: -

 The information contained in this message (including any files transmitted
 with this message) may contain proprietary, trade secret or other
  confidential and/or legally privileged information. Any pricing
 information contained in this message or in any files transmitted with this
 message is always confidential and cannot be shared with any third parties
 without prior written approval from Syncsort. This message is intended to
 be read only by the individual or entity to whom it is addressed or by
 their designee. If the reader of this message is not the intended
 recipient, you are on notice that any use, disclosure, copying or
 distribution of this message, in any form, is strictly prohibited. If you
 have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender
 and/or Syncsort and destroy all copies of this message in your possession,
 custody or control.

 --
 For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
 send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[zMan]

Don't take this the wrong way, but performance analysis and tuning isn't
something you pick up in your spare time. You need to get a professional
involved. That's not me, so this isn't self-interested.


On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 10:04 AM, Blaicher, Christopher Y. 
cblaic...@syncsort.com wrote:

 Running 100% is not bad.  What is bad is missing SLA's.  So if you are not
 missing SLA's, you don't have an immediate problem.  If your shop is like
 most shops, the work load is growing and that can lead to missing SLA's in
 the future.

 I would do the following:
 1) Look for 'hot spots', first at the line of business level, then at the
 sub-system level (CICS, DB2, etc), then at the program and transaction
 level.
 2) Make improvements where you can.
 3) Do they have any ZIIP engines?  If they have any, how are they being
 utilized?  Can you do more with them?  Adding GP engines is expensive in
 two ways. The processor cost AND the increase in software costs.  Adding a
 ZIIP has no effect on the software costs, mostly.
 4) go back to step 1 and do it again.

 When I did performance monitoring at a very large company we just kept
 doing steps 1, 2 and 4.  We didn't have ZIIP's at that time.  Find the top
 ten users of resources and focus in on them.  As you make improvements,
 some will drop off and new ones will rise to the top, which is why step 4
 is important.

 Chris Blaicher
 Senior Software Engineer, Software Services
 Syncsort Incorporated
 50 Tice Boulevard, Woodcliff Lake, NJ 07677
 P: 201-930-8260  |  M: 512-627-3803
 E: cblaic...@syncsort.com


 -Original Message-
 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
 Behalf Of RCG
 Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 8:30 AM
 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
 Subject: CPU Utilization

 Dear Group,

 In one of the shop that I work, I have CPU constraint where the
 utilization is @ 100% most of the times and that is impacting much of the
 services which is obvious, I am not a Performance / Capacity expert nor
 thats my day to day work, Though I am still looking for the ways where we
 can better the utilization and atleast reduce the impact, additional CPU
 would definitely resolve that, But that is not something the customer is
 interested with, I am doing some reading to help tune the performance, Also
 trying to figure out any batch loads that are of not high priority to run
 over a non-peak hours which might help a bit to it, Any expert advice on
 the other ways that i can consider to help would be highly appreciated,
 Thanks much in advance !

 Regards,

 --
 For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email
 to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN



 ATTENTION: -

 The information contained in this message (including any files transmitted
 with this message) may contain proprietary, trade secret or other
  confidential and/or legally privileged information. Any pricing
 information contained in this message or in any files transmitted with this
 message is always confidential and cannot be shared with any third parties
 without prior written approval from Syncsort. This message is intended to
 be read only by the individual or entity to whom it is addressed or by
 their designee. If the reader of this message is not the intended
 recipient, you are on notice that any use, disclosure, copying or
 distribution of this message, in any form, is strictly prohibited. If you
 have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender
 and/or Syncsort and destroy all copies of this message in your possession,
 custody or control.

 --
 For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
 send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN




-- 
zMan -- I've got a mainframe and I'm not afraid to use it

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[Ron Hawkins]

Workload Manager is your friend.

Cram on this before attempting anything else. It is your primary tool to
accomplish your objectives, but you need to understand how the tool works.
If you don't know which end of the hammer to hold you'll never drive in the
nail.

If you don't have SAS and MXG, then get them. You will need something to
research, measure and validate your results. SAS for Windows workstation is
relatively cheap, and can easily handle tens of GB of SMF data. Don't
believe anyone that says you can do this efficiently with the RMF
spreadsheet reporter and a few CBT programs.

Ron



 -Original Message-
 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
 On Behalf Of RCG
 Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 6:30 AM
 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
 Subject: [IBM-MAIN] CPU Utilization
 
 Dear Group,
 
 In one of the shop that I work, I have CPU constraint where the
utilization is
 @ 100% most of the times and that is impacting much of the services which
is
 obvious, I am not a Performance / Capacity expert nor thats my day to day
 work, Though I am still looking for the ways where we can better the
 utilization and atleast reduce the impact, additional CPU would definitely
 resolve that, But that is not something the customer is interested with, I
am
 doing some reading to help tune the performance, Also trying to figure out
 any batch loads that are of not high priority to run over a non-peak hours
 which might help a bit to it, Any expert advice on the other ways that i
can
 consider to help would be highly appreciated, Thanks much in advance !
 
 Regards,
 
 --
 For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email
to
 lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[Dave Salt]

Is the mainframe used for production or development? If it's used for 
development then SimpList could help you free up some CPU cycles.

Developers spend much of their time moving from one ISPF panel or vendor 
product to another, and every command they enter to travel from one place to 
another causes a mainframe interrupt. They might also use 3.4 to access data 
sets, which means the mainframe is constantly being asked to perform catalog 
searches. Even simple things like changing the attributes of a data set 
requires a number of mainframe interrupts. With all of these things, having the 
CPU at 100% can cause developers to spend long periods of time staring at the 
clock. SimpList helps resolve this problem by providing a fully integrated 
workbench where many tasks can be performed with just one or two mouse clicks, 
thereby sending a minimum number of interrupts to the mainframe. This is a very 
inexpensive way to reduce CPU cycles as well as saving developers huge amounts 
of time.

Feel free to contact me off-line if you have any questions.
 
Dave Salt

SimpList(tm) - try it, you'll get it! 

http://www.mackinney.com/products/program-development/simplist.html  




 Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 10:04:08 -0500
 From: cblaic...@syncsort.com
 Subject: Re: CPU Utilization
 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
 
 Running 100% is not bad.  What is bad is missing SLA's.  So if you are not 
 missing SLA's, you don't have an immediate problem.  If your shop is like 
 most shops, the work load is growing and that can lead to missing SLA's in 
 the future.
 
 I would do the following:
 1) Look for 'hot spots', first at the line of business level, then at the 
 sub-system level (CICS, DB2, etc), then at the program and transaction level.
 2) Make improvements where you can.
 3) Do they have any ZIIP engines?  If they have any, how are they being 
 utilized?  Can you do more with them?  Adding GP engines is expensive in two 
 ways. The processor cost AND the increase in software costs.  Adding a ZIIP 
 has no effect on the software costs, mostly.
 4) go back to step 1 and do it again.
 
 When I did performance monitoring at a very large company we just kept doing 
 steps 1, 2 and 4.  We didn't have ZIIP's at that time.  Find the top ten 
 users of resources and focus in on them.  As you make improvements, some will 
 drop off and new ones will rise to the top, which is why step 4 is important.
 
 Chris Blaicher
 Senior Software Engineer, Software Services
 Syncsort Incorporated
 50 Tice Boulevard, Woodcliff Lake, NJ 07677
 P: 201-930-8260  |  M: 512-627-3803
 E: cblaic...@syncsort.com
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
 Behalf Of RCG
 Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 8:30 AM
 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
 Subject: CPU Utilization
 
 Dear Group,
 
 In one of the shop that I work, I have CPU constraint where the utilization 
 is @ 100% most of the times and that is impacting much of the services which 
 is obvious, I am not a Performance / Capacity expert nor thats my day to day 
 work, Though I am still looking for the ways where we can better the 
 utilization and atleast reduce the impact, additional CPU would definitely 
 resolve that, But that is not something the customer is interested with, I am 
 doing some reading to help tune the performance, Also trying to figure out 
 any batch loads that are of not high priority to run over a non-peak hours 
 which might help a bit to it, Any expert advice on the other ways that i can 
 consider to help would be highly appreciated, Thanks much in advance !
 
 Regards,
 
 --
 For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
 lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
 
 
 
 ATTENTION: -
 
 The information contained in this message (including any files transmitted 
 with this message) may contain proprietary, trade secret or other  
 confidential and/or legally privileged information. Any pricing information 
 contained in this message or in any files transmitted with this message is 
 always confidential and cannot be shared with any third parties without prior 
 written approval from Syncsort. This message is intended to be read only by 
 the individual or entity to whom it is addressed or by their designee. If the 
 reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are on notice that 
 any use, disclosure, copying or distribution of this message, in any form, is 
 strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please 
 immediately notify the sender and/or Syncsort and destroy all copies of this 
 message in your possession, custody or control.
 
 --
 For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
 send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[Adams Anne (DTI)]

As has been stated before, Capacity and Performance is not a casual thing that 
you can do over lunch. That being said, you can look at a few things. 100% is 
not a bad thing, modern mainframes are designed to run at 100%. The question is 
whether things are being delayed. If you have access to RMF data, you can look 
at the PI (performance index) of individual service classes over a certain 
interval. This is much easier if you have a tool other than RMF, but you have 
to use what you have. If the PIs are greater than 1.0, you're being delayed and 
that's where you're problem is residing. 

Not sure how Workload Manager is being used or configured at your shop. Check 
the coefficients value. Oddly enough, a fair number of shops take the default 
values (which are wrong) instead of the recommended (which should be the 
default, but they're not). 

Not sure what type of box you're using (i.e. z9, z10, etc). Is there a defined 
capacity set, and is that capacity set higher or lower than the initialization 
values? This can wreck all sorts of havoc when the system gets busy. 

Are your catalogs loaded into memory? 

Kind of difficult to determine where your problem might lie, because it 
literally could be anything. Adding processors may or may not help, and could 
actually make things worse. Depending on your box type, increasing the number 
of processors without increasing the number of MSUs (and thus changing your 
classification) will lower the number of MIPS each processor will execute per 
second. If you're running DB2 or think a zIIP might help, you can set 
PROJECTCPU to YES (in IEAOPT00) and find out. You can also check the values for 
the percentage of I/O interruptions to be processed through the test pending 
interrupt. It should be 10,30. Also ERV - then number of CPU service units and 
address space can absorb when it's possibly causing enqueue contentions. The 
default is 500, which might be too low for your shop. 

Good luck. 

Anne R. Adams
DTI, Systems Engineering
(302) 298 - 3196


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of RCG
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 9:30 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: CPU Utilization

Dear Group,

In one of the shop that I work, I have CPU constraint where the utilization is 
@ 100% most of the times and that is impacting much of the services which is 
obvious, I am not a Performance / Capacity expert nor thats my day to day work, 
Though I am still looking for the ways where we can better the utilization and 
atleast reduce the impact, additional CPU would definitely resolve that, But 
that is not something the customer is interested with, I am doing some reading 
to help tune the performance, Also trying to figure out any batch loads that 
are of not high priority to run over a non-peak hours which might help a bit to 
it, Any expert advice on the other ways that i can consider to help would be 
highly appreciated, Thanks much in advance !

Regards,

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[Ted MacNEIL]

I don't contribute to this list very much, but I feel I should in this case.

Performance/Capacity Management is not learned overnight. Nor is it a subject 
where a couple of nuggets on a list serve will solve your problems.

Is SMP/E learned overnight?
Is being a DBA?
COBOL programmer?
RACF admin?

It's a profession and requires a professional!

--Original Message--
From: RCG
Sender: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
ReplyTo: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
Subject: CPU Utilization
Sent: 7 Nov 2012 09:30

Dear Group,

In one of the shop that I work, I have CPU constraint where the utilization
is @ 100% most of the times and that is impacting much of the services
which is obvious, I am not a Performance / Capacity expert nor thats my day
to day work, Though I am still looking for the ways where we can better the
utilization and atleast reduce the impact, additional CPU would definitely
resolve that, But that is not something the customer is interested with, I
am doing some reading to help tune the performance, Also trying to figure
out any batch loads that are of not high priority to run over a non-peak
hours which might help a bit to it, Any expert advice on the other ways
that i can consider to help would be highly appreciated, Thanks much in
advance !

Regards,

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

-
Ted MacNEIL
eamacn...@yahoo.ca
Twitter: @TedMacNEIL

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Utilization

[nitz-...@gmx.net]

 Not sure how Workload Manager is being used or configured at your shop.

From the original description, I am assuming that that installation runs more 
than one lpar on the box, most probably with lpar weights that reflect 
importance of the lpars. If the OP happens to work on an lpar that is not a 
loved one in terms of lpar weight, then almost no amount of WLM tuning will 
get that lpar service if another lpar is using that service. What's more, an 
execution velocity goal that is achievable on a loved lpar won't be on an 
unloved one for the exact same job with the exact same data.

If the *box* (all physical cps) is running at 100% cpu (as they are in many 
smaller shops), then you need to drastically reduce the number of WLM service 
classes/service class periods, at least in the unloved lpars. Get down to less 
than 10 service classes, preferably only one per importance. Be prepared to 
have a fight with just about everyone because they all think they're more 
important than the rest of the world and they all want to be at least 
importance1, better in sysstc. Traditionally, everything will cluster in sysstc 
and importance 1 service classes, with almost nothing in importance 4 and 5.

Barbara Nitz

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN