That sounds interesting...
I accept Tom's opinion that as long as the 4HRA is lower than the cap, some
interval could be ran above the cap.
However, in your scenario, if the 4HRA stabilze ABOVE the set defined
capacity, it should not be more than 4 intervals, because the 5th interval
will
be the
...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Cobe Xu
Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2010 5:00 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: CPU capping is not working for one Lpar only on CEC?
Hi list,
We aim to cap the only active LPAR on the CEC(26 MSU) to 24 MSU.
But, I'm a bit confuse when I checked the RMF CPU Activity
percentage error rate on this.
Terry Draper
zSeries Performance Consultant
w...@btopenworld.com
mobile: +66 811431287
--- On Wed, 3/11/10, Cobe Xu cob...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Cobe Xu cob...@gmail.com
Subject: CPU capping is not working for one Lpar only on CEC?
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Date
, 4 Nov 2010 11:09:33
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Reply-To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: CPU capping is not working for one Lpar only on CEC?
I am not sure what type of capping you are trying to use.
If you want to use hard capping then this will use the weights
That 3% is not unexpected. WLM works with PR/SM to implement the cap. WLM
does the math and PR/SM does the actually capping. If you read the PR/SM
planning guides (as Peter referenced) you'll see that PR/SM manages LPARs to +-
3 percent.
I believe that WLM does the calculation to account for
Response to what am I trying to do?, I'm working on a yearly performance
capacity review, and saw many many occasions that CPU overshoot the CAP line
about 3%. And I try to figure this out.
Thanks all, will check the PR/SM manual for the 1~3% saying.
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 11:49 PM, Al Sherkow
You might have more luck if you check for 3.6% rather than 3%. The 3.6% is
valid up through z/Enterprise (see Enforcement of processing weights in
any of the PR/SM Planning Guides).
Regards,
Don
**
Don Deese, Computer Management Sciences, Inc.
Voice: (804) 776-7109 Fax: (804) 776-7139
: Re: CPU capping is not working for one Lpar only on CEC?
Response to what am I trying to do?, I'm working on a yearly
performance
capacity review, and saw many many occasions that CPU overshoot the CAP
line
about 3%. And I try to figure this out.
Thanks all, will check the PR/SM manual for the 1~3
Besides, the software MSU figure is not the best thing to use for performance
and
capacity planning studies.
It was designed by IBM solely as a way to keep software costs down.
You still have to take MSU's into account.
Especially, in Capacity Planning.
It does no good to come up with a
Hi list,
We aim to cap the only active LPAR on the CEC(26 MSU) to 24 MSU.
But, I'm a bit confuse when I checked the RMF CPU Activity report as below,
which shows that with the interval, SYS2 was able to use up to 25 MSU.
(Highlighted)
So my questions are:
1. Is this because CPU capping
Kelman
Capacity Planning
Commerce Bank, Kansas City
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Cobe Xu
Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2010 5:00 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: CPU capping is not working for one Lpar only on CEC?
Hi
(26 MSU) to 24 MSU.
But, I'm a bit confuse when I checked the RMF CPU Activity report as below,
which shows that with the interval, SYS2 was able to use up to 25 MSU.
(Highlighted)
So my questions are:
1. Is this because CPU capping is not working for only one active LPAR on
the CEC? If it's
It is possible for the 4HRA of an LPAR to go above the defined capacity limit.
This
is because the limit goes on typically after four hours of your workload
getting
bigger and bigger. Eventually the 4HRA exceeds the defined capacity and the cap
goes on. As the four hour rolling average goes
Hi all,
I have following question on CPU hard capping
LPAR1 initial capping=No CPU weight 80 = 800mips
LPAR2 initial capping=Yes CPU weight 20 = 200mips
assume CPU has 1000mips
my question is, for LPAR2 the maximum CPU utilization is 200 mips with
hard capping but how about LPAR1? the
Subject: cpu capping question
Hi all,
I have following question on CPU hard capping
LPAR1 initial capping=No CPU weight 80 = 800mips
LPAR2 initial capping=Yes CPU weight 20 = 200mips
assume CPU has 1000mips
my question is, for LPAR2 the maximum CPU utilization is 200 mips with
hard capping
be considered to manage your machine.
HTH and good luck.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Tommy Tsui
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 8:59 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: cpu capping question
Hi all,
I have
, 2010 9:34 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: cpu capping question
Hi Merritt,
If LPAR1 (our production) is not capped but LPAR 2 (development) is
active (assume the weight=20% or 200 mips, it only utilize 100 mips at
night), Can LPAR1 utilize 900 mips at night ???
2010/2/10 Hal Merritt
Tommy --
Yes, LPAR 1 has access to the capacity that LPAR 2 is not using. The cap on
LPAR2 is a limit only on LPAR2's use of your capacity.
Al Sherkow, I/S Management Strategies, Ltd.
Consulting Expertise on Capacity Planning, Performance Tuning,
WLC, LPARs, IRD and LCS Software
Seminars on IBM
From: R.S. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
HARD capping is NOT disruptive. It does require neither LPAR deactivate, nor
IPL.
AFAIK soft capping *does* prevent CPC to exceed defined capacity. It allows
for *temporary* peaks,
but you pay for 4-hr rolling average.
Radoslaw,
you are right in both
or look at a powerful product to control your White Space MSU,s on website
www.zcostmanagement.com
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN
Hello list,
within the Trybuy agreement with IBM, we temporarily enhanced our z890 from
capacity setting 230 to 470. Needless to say that everybody within our
organization and the
customers, too, were impressed by the improved response time.
But time has come to get back to our original model,
Walter Marguccio wrote:
Hello list,
within the Trybuy agreement with IBM, we temporarily enhanced our z890 from
capacity setting 230 to 470. Needless to say that everybody within our
organization and the
customers, too, were impressed by the improved response time.
But time has come to get
within the Trybuy agreement with IBM, we temporarily enhanced our z890
from
capacity setting 230 to 470. Needless to say that everybody within our
organization and the
customers, too, were impressed by the improved response time.
Walter - I'm guessing its not too much of a stretch to think the
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 05:41:07 -0700, Walter Marguccio
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But time has come to get back to our original model, and I'm looking for a
way to make this
move as smoothly as possible. I'm thinking to gradually capping the CPs of
our PROD LPAR,
create a CF lpar , put it in
24 matches
Mail list logo
