Re: VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager

2009-11-03 Thread Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)
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

Re: VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager

2009-11-03 Thread Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)
Thanks yeah I saw that. Thanks Alan!

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 Alan Altmark
Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 4:39 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager

On Monday, 11/02/2009 at 02:15 EST, Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR) 
terry.mar...@cms.hhs.gov wrote:
 BTW, I am not using DIRMAINT or anything like that to administer the
 Directory I am using DIRECTXA is that considered IBM VM DIRECTOR?

No, DIRECTXA and IBM Systems Director (IBM Director) are two different

things.  IBM Director is a GUI-based multiplatform management
application 
that lives outside of z/VM, but can communicate with it to perform some 
basic systems programming tasks.

Alan Altmark
z/VM Development
IBM Endicott


Re: VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager

2009-11-02 Thread Bill Munson
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

Re: VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager

2009-11-02 Thread Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)
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

Re: VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager

2009-11-02 Thread Bill Munson
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

Re: VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager

2009-11-02 Thread Alan Altmark
On Monday, 11/02/2009 at 02:15 EST, Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR) 
terry.mar...@cms.hhs.gov wrote:
 BTW, I am not using DIRMAINT or anything like that to administer the
 Directory I am using DIRECTXA is that considered IBM VM DIRECTOR?

No, DIRECTXA and IBM Systems Director (IBM Director) are two different 
things.  IBM Director is a GUI-based multiplatform management application 
that lives outside of z/VM, but can communicate with it to perform some 
basic systems programming tasks.

Alan Altmark
z/VM Development
IBM Endicott


Re: VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager

2009-10-31 Thread Rob van der Heij
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 1:33 AM, Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)
terry.mar...@cms.hhs.gov wrote:

 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?

The MONDCSS size really does not matter. It must be configured large
enough to hold full sample configuration data so that you can make
sense of the sample data. When the MONDCSS is large enough, the
default partitioning will leave enough data for sample configuration.
Otherwise you must specify the startup parameters. Once that is done,
it should be good enough for all.

When the amount of monitor event records is high (seeks enabled, or
many virtual machines dropping from queue often) it may be a challenge
for a virtual machine to consume the event buffers before they expire.
With multiple virtual machines processing the same monitor data, you
have more work to be done in a timely manner. If you can't keep up
with event buffers, the bottleneck is normally the number of
outstanding IUCV msgs rather than the available pages in MONDCSS. This
is addressed with the parameters for the monitor rather than the size
of the DCSS.

If I were looking at VMRM, I would also investigate what happens when
the system is so constrained that VMRM does not get the resources to
process the sample in time (that happens sometimes when CP has paged
out the MONDCSS). It would be interesting to see if VMRM at that time
can undo the settings it did before that got z/VM in the thrashing
situation...

Rob
-- 
Rob van der Heij
Velocity Software
http://www.velocitysoftware.com/


Re: VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager

2009-10-31 Thread Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)
Thanks Rob, In Velocity do you interact at all with VMRM in terms of seeing the 
settings in the CONFIG file and such?
 
Terry Martin
Lockheed Martin
CITIC Contract
z/OS Operating System Support/Performance and Tuning
(443) 348-4196 
 



From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Rob van der Heij
Sent: Sat 10/31/2009 6:01 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager



On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 1:33 AM, Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)
terry.mar...@cms.hhs.gov wrote:

 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?

The MONDCSS size really does not matter. It must be configured large
enough to hold full sample configuration data so that you can make
sense of the sample data. When the MONDCSS is large enough, the
default partitioning will leave enough data for sample configuration.
Otherwise you must specify the startup parameters. Once that is done,
it should be good enough for all.

When the amount of monitor event records is high (seeks enabled, or
many virtual machines dropping from queue often) it may be a challenge
for a virtual machine to consume the event buffers before they expire.
With multiple virtual machines processing the same monitor data, you
have more work to be done in a timely manner. If you can't keep up
with event buffers, the bottleneck is normally the number of
outstanding IUCV msgs rather than the available pages in MONDCSS. This
is addressed with the parameters for the monitor rather than the size
of the DCSS.

If I were looking at VMRM, I would also investigate what happens when
the system is so constrained that VMRM does not get the resources to
process the sample in time (that happens sometimes when CP has paged
out the MONDCSS). It would be interesting to see if VMRM at that time
can undo the settings it did before that got z/VM in the thrashing
situation...

Rob
--
Rob van der Heij
Velocity Software
http://www.velocitysoftware.com/





Re: VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager

2009-10-31 Thread Rob van der Heij
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:41 PM, Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)
terry.mar...@cms.hhs.gov wrote:
 Thanks Rob, In Velocity do you interact at all with VMRM in terms of seeing
 the settings in the CONFIG file and such?

There's no interaction other than that both receive the same monitor
data from CP. When ESALPS starts the monitor and does not complain
about it, then it should be good for others like VMRM as well. Just
make sure you start them a minute after ESASERVE

Rob
-- 
Rob van der Heij
Velocity Software
http://www.velocitysoftware.com/


Re: VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager

2009-10-30 Thread Barton Robinson

Terry, I would ask if you use it AND HAVE VALIDATED RESULTS?
I've seen several sites install it during early days when there was no 
contention. So no problems means it is working? But when there is 
contention, the question is does it help when there is contention, or 
does it force servers to abend


Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR) wrote:

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 mailto:terry.mar...@cms.hhs.gov//

 


//WFH on Tuesdays and Fridays//

 



Re: VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager

2009-10-30 Thread Ed Neidhardt
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

   


Re: VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager

2009-10-30 Thread Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)
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 mailto: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)
mailto:terry.mar...@cms.hhs.gov  

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

 



Re: VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager

2009-10-30 Thread Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)
Ed, 

 

I forgot to ask if you are running a performance monitor and if so did
VMRM and the monitor play nicely together in terms of the MONDCSS? In
other words did you have to adjust either the VMRM or the monitor in
terms of the MONDCSS?

 

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 mailto:terry.mar...@cms.hhs.gov 

 

WFH Tuesdays and Fridays



From: Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR) 
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 8:33 PM
To: 'Ed Neidhardt'; IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
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 mailto: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)
mailto:terry.mar...@cms.hhs.gov  

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

VMRMSVM - z/VM Resource Manager

2009-10-29 Thread Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)
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