Re: zIIP and zAAP Reporting - projection and otherwise

2006-12-08 Thread Shane
On Fri, 2006-12-08 at 09:10 +1000, I wrote: > ... if I take the > RMF data from such a system and run it through z/OS 1.7 RMF, I start to > see some (potentially) useful "zIIP eligible" numbers. And I should know better than to post from home without checking. Ignore the above. Shane ... --

Re: zIIP and zAAP Reporting - projection and otherwise

2006-12-07 Thread Shane
Walts article is (as usual) handy - I guess some of you also have 54-ways to play on. Not me ... Biggest inhibitor to exploitation is running a level of DB2 prior to V8 M - dunno about that. z/OS 1.4, z/990, DB2 V7 - I reckon I could bump into a few limitations with that lot. Interestingly, if

Re: zIIP and zAAP Reporting - projection and otherwise

2006-12-07 Thread Brian Peterson
Check out the following: http://www-03.ibm.com/support/techdocs/atsmastr.nsf/WebIndex/PRS2123 Brian On Thu, 7 Dec 2006 14:44:04 -0600, Aaron Walker wrote: >"If you have them you might also view metrics in AAPCP and IIPCP for >crossover work not dispatched on zAAP's or zIIP's." > >Could you elab

Re: zIIP and zAAP Reporting - projection and otherwise

2006-12-07 Thread Aaron Walker
"If you have them you might also view metrics in AAPCP and IIPCP for crossover work not dispatched on zAAP's or zIIP's." Could you elaborate on that, or point me to a resource? Thanks, Aaron On Thu, 7 Dec 2006 12:52:45 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >This would seem to imply JBB772S for z/OS

Re: zIIP and zAAP Reporting - projection and otherwise

2006-12-07 Thread Patrick . Falcone
t To IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU cc Subject Re: zIIP and zAAP Reporting - projection and otherwise Well, the output looks like 1.8 output, so either the customer is mistaken, or do the fixes/FMIDs for zAAP/zIIP projection significantly alter the RMF reporting (to zOS 1.8 presentation)? Aaron On Th

Re: zIIP and zAAP Reporting - projection and otherwise

2006-12-07 Thread Aaron Walker
Well, the output looks like 1.8 output, so either the customer is mistaken, or do the fixes/FMIDs for zAAP/zIIP projection significantly alter the RMF reporting (to zOS 1.8 presentation)? Aaron On Thu, 7 Dec 2006 09:23:48 -0600, Aaron Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I'm looking at some RMF

zIIP and zAAP Reporting - projection and otherwise

2006-12-07 Thread Aaron Walker
I'm looking at some RMF (Workload Activity) reporting from a zOS 1.7 system, and when I look at the CPU usage, I'm seeing entries under APPL% for CP, AAPCP, IIPCP, AAP, and IIP. I can't easily find any doc which pulls this together, so educate me - CP is regular processor, AAPCP and IIPCP are