In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 08/29/2007
at 12:16 PM, Bill Wilkie [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Schmuel:
That's Shmuel!
The only explanation I got was that the application developer was
inserting a transaction pointer into a large linked list and
acquired the lock before searching the list to find
that it seemed an
improbable scenario. Be that as it may, it happened.
Bill
From: Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Each CPU usage
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 18:33:37 -0300
In [EMAIL
Ted:
I thougt it was SMF, I'll have to check. Perhaps it was logrec.
Bill
From: Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Each CPU usage
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 23:08:04 +
I would suggest that before
It was a custom application written for a very large customer. Someone else
mentioned that it seemed an improbable scenario. Be that as it may, it
happened.
The problem isn't simply with the scenario of acquiring a lock, but rather than
there was an apparent upgrade of 250% (regarding the
I think the debate of whether this story is plausible or not is better
taken offline. Or you can just agree to disagree. I think the important
point that everyone would agree on is that when you are reaching maximum
CPU capacity, it's always a good idea to gather data and understand what's
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Gerhard Adam
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 7:56 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Each CPU usage
SNIP
Since the conclusion was that they didn't even require a 4-way after the
problem
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thompson, Steve) writes:
Imagine, you have a 3081 at 100% and you upgraded to a 3084 (basically
you added the other 3081) and you are still at 100%. Or you have a 3033
and you went to a 470/V8. [I'm not saying these were the systems, just
using them as examples.]
3081 was
List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Each CPU usage
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 18:33:37 -0300
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 08/26/2007
at 10:34 PM, Bill Wilkie [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I would suggest that before you do the upgrade, check out SMF for
excessive spin records
Why
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 08/26/2007
at 10:34 PM, Bill Wilkie [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I would suggest that before you do the upgrade, check out SMF for
excessive spin records
Why would an application, or CICS, acquire a spin lock in the first
place?
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz,
I would suggest that before you do the upgrade, check out SMF for excessive
spin records
I've been working with SMF since 1981.
Please tell me the type that is spin.
-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!
--
For IBM-MAIN
While I understand that this scenario is not being suggested as the definitive
problem, I find the scenario itself highly implausible. While it is
certainly possible, I have a problem believing it. There are so many things
wrong here, that I can't even begin to contemplate the implications of
Bill Wilkie wrote:
..., check out SMF for excessive spin records and if you see any, rack down
the reasons first.
What SMF records or SMF record fields?
Tommy Tsui wrote:
We expect it will have improvment after upgraded to 2094-710 becuase each
CPU mips have increased from around 235 to
that is easy to recognize by looking ath SMF for excessive
spin records. Just a thought.
Bill
From: Tommy Tsui [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Each CPU usage
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 22:25:43 +0800
Hi all,
Our shop
Hi all,
Our shop planning to upgrade the CPU from 2064-2C9 to 2094-710, how can we
measure each CPU usage. In 2064-2C9 CICS almost use 100% on each
CPU..running CICS and some transaction time out. We expect it will have
improvment after upgraded to 2094-710 becuase each CPU mips have increased
that the system will be too busy, who will now do it whenever
they can.
As always, YMMV.
Tommy Tsui wrote:
Hi all,
Our shop planning to upgrade the CPU from 2064-2C9 to 2094-710, how can we
measure each CPU usage. In 2064-2C9 CICS almost use 100% on each
CPU..running CICS and some transaction
On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 22:25 +0800, Tommy Tsui wrote:
Our shop planning to upgrade the CPU from 2064-2C9 to 2094-710, how can we
measure each CPU usage. In 2064-2C9 CICS almost use 100% on each
CPU..running CICS and some transaction time out. We expect it will have
improvment after upgraded
16 matches
Mail list logo
