I pulled this up this morning to reply but Scott's reply is excellent.
I talk with clients, vendors and consultants often about trying to quantify
savings in workload license changes with four-hour rolling averages, and that
is a hard thing to do and harder to explain to management. You may red
Presumably what management really would like to know is how many dollars
(euros, whatever currency you're working in) was saved. How you go about
calculating that depends...
If you're under Tailored Fit Pricing with IBM your IBM software bill is based
on the CPU time you consume ove
On this topic... hypothetically, how much are you folks willing to pay for a
solution that's built on top of WPS/SAS + MXG + RMF + DFSORT + some BI tool.
In the BI tool, say you get:
1. combo chart/graph with stacked area chart of MSU Actual of each LPAR + line
graph of 4HRA
2. ability to query
Ah ok.
*IBM licensing team has entered the chat*
There's also that cloudcompiling.com thing.
Also, virtualzcomputing.com
Would be good to hear stories about either.
- KB
--- Original Message ---
On Tuesday, February 8th, 2022 at 11:10 AM, Mike Schwab
wrote:
> Something like a zPDT o
Something like a zPDT or MicroFocus environment then transfer the object code.
https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zdt/10.0.0?topic=overview
On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 4:25 AM kekronbekron
<02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
> Hey Mike,
>
> What do you mean by, "Possible to run compiler
Hey Mike,
What do you mean by, "Possible to run compiler on low cost program then
transfer PDSE members."
- KB
--- Original Message ---
On Tuesday, February 8th, 2022 at 12:29 AM, Mike Schwab
wrote:
> Varies by processor, specific model, and version of your operating
>
> system. Loo
Performance team and see what they
say.
Peter
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Horne, Jim
Sent: Monday, February 7, 2022 2:19 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: How to calculate MIPS or SU's from user CPU time
statistics?
I
ow to calculate MIPS or SU's from user CPU time statistics?
Varies by processor, specific model, and version of your operating system.
Look up the table on
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www-01.ibm.com/servers/resourcelink/lib03060.nsf/pages/lsprindex?OpenDocument__;!!Ebr-cpPeAnfNniQ8HSAI
I would recommend finding out which MIPS ratings your management wants/expects
(IBM, Gartner, Cheryl Watson, or whoever). Once you have their preferred MIPS
rating for your machine, just multiply your GCP %CPU Busy by that number and
report it. I would also recommend you ignore that number for
Varies by processor, specific model, and version of your operating
system. Look up the table on
https://www-01.ibm.com/servers/resourcelink/lib03060.nsf/pages/lsprindex?OpenDocument
Best suggestion is to recompile Cobol programs with 6.2.for faster
instructions on newer processors. Much higher
My immediate management is asking me how to convert measured user task CPU
seconds saved in a MIPS reduction project to a MIPS value for reporting to
executive management. Yes, we do know what MIPS means (Meaningless . . . ),
but this is what they believe executive management wants to hear.
Is
riginal Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Charles Mills
Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2019 2:02 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
Can you please clarify? Your first sentence seems to say that SVC 99 (or do you
mean Initia
The site is IBM Dallas; neither is installed.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Seymour J Metz
Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 12:16 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
> //SYSUT1 DD DSN=*.ALLOC.TEMPFILE
>
> .
> .
> 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
Mobile
626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW
robin...@sce.com
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Seymour J Metz
Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 8:45 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
Believe what you want
f Ron
Hawkins
Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2019 3:59 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
Charles et al.
Using the TCB time reported in IEF032 to measure and analyse the net CPU
cost of program execution is a bit like a detective investigating a crime
wi
t on behalf of CM
Poncelet
Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2019 6:52 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
FWIW I hesitate to believe that PASSED/DELETED implies that the temp
datasets were ever physically created on DASD - unless they were OPENed
for OUTP
_
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of CM
Poncelet
Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2019 9:45 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
I mentioned "temp datasets" because Charles' post referred to them as such:
On 08/08/2019 20:17, Ch
, August 9, 2019 12:08 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
Once upon a memorable time, a data set allocated in (say) an IEFRB14 step got a
DSCB created complete with whatever DCB attributes were specified in JCL.
However, the 'data' on disk had
On 2019-08-09 2:08 PM, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote:
Then MVS was changed to simulate an OPEN/CLOSE on a new allocation so that a
later read would get immediate EOF.
My flakey memory says that is only for SMS-managed data sets - or at
least that was the case when it was originally brought in.
Che
On Behalf Of CM
Poncelet
Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2019 6:46 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
I mentioned "temp datasets" because Charles' post referred to them as such:
On 08/08/2019 20:17, Charles Mills wrote:
>
I mentioned "temp datasets" because Charles' post referred to them as such:
On 08/08/2019 20:17, Charles Mills wrote:
> I see
>
> IEF285I SYS19218.T143507.RA000.xxx00114.R0105346 PASSED
> IEF285I SYS19218.T143507.RA000.xxx00114.R0105347 PASSED
> IEF285I SYS19218.T143507.RA000.xxx0
On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 23:52:25 +0100, CM Poncelet wrote:
>FWIW I hesitate to believe that PASSED/DELETED implies that the temp
>datasets were ever physically created on DASD - unless they were OPENed
>for OUTPUT in-between. I think the *physical* alloc happens only on an
>OPEN DCB with MACRF=(PM/L).
ion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of CM Poncelet
> Sent: Wednesday, August 7, 2019 12:34 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
>
> >From years ago, I *think* an I
Charles et al.
Using the TCB time reported in IEF032 to measure and analyse the net CPU
cost of program execution is a bit like a detective investigating a crime
without leaving the office.
As others have said, there is more than one bucket used to measure the CPU
time of a job or step. If you
: Wednesday, August 7, 2019 12:34 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
>From years ago, I *think* an IEFBR14 step with DISP=(,CATLG) [or
(,PASS)] does not physically allocate a dataset on a VOLSER but only
registers it in the usercat. Have you checked whether
Discussion List on behalf of
Paul Gilmartin <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, August 7, 2019 4:14 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 16:25:52 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>The Initiator does
List on behalf of
Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw
Sent: Wednesday, August 7, 2019 5:39 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
Which simply means that if UNIT and VOLUME are not supplied then it looks in
the catalog, where it detects a MIGRAT value if the data s
-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw
Sent: Wednesday, August 7, 2019 5:40 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
Which simply means that if UNIT and VOLUME are not supplied then it looks in
the catalog, where it detects a MIGRAT value if the data s
everyone is.’
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Paul Gilmartin
Sent: 07 August 2019 21:15
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 16:25:52 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>The Initiator d
On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 16:25:52 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>The Initiator does not check that the data set exists; ...
>
... and yet it checks for whether it's migrated.
-- gil
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access
Discussion List on behalf of
David Spiegel
Sent: Wednesday, August 7, 2019 1:04 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
That's true for DASD, but, not for Tape, IIRC.
On 2019-08-07 12:53, Seymour J Metz wrote:
> They say that the memory is the second
aa%7C1%7C0%7C637007936258345512&sdata=VvGKdsg2Spkk4Kq0WeVM3amVpcusMCi8yL%2BZEPkXYNw%3D&reserved=0
>
>
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
> CM Poncelet
> Sent: Wednesday, August 7, 2019 12:34 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>
metz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of CM
Poncelet
Sent: Wednesday, August 7, 2019 12:34 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
>From years ago, I *think* an IEFBR14 step with DISP=(,CATLG) [or
(,PAS
On 2019-08-07 6:36 PM, Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw wrote:
However, I think standard TSO ALLOCATE does perform that check
Yes, I was probably basing my opinion on my observations of the
behaviour of the ALLOCATE command.
Cheers,
Greg
---
FWIW I tried adding DISP=(,PASS) to all of the DDs and adding another (BR14
> also) step. No difference in the step CPU time -- still 0.00 seconds.
>
> Of course, one could play guessing games all day. Is the Initiator smart
> enough to know the whole job is one big no-op? I would
on.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw
Sent: Wednesday, August 7, 2019 4:35 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
Greg,
I think you'll find that whethe
: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Greg Price
Sent: 07 August 2019 03:00
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
On 2019-08-07 5:08 AM, Carmen Vitullo wrote:
> I suspect dynamic allocation may be doing more that the IEFBR14 possibly?
On 2019-08-07 5:08 AM, Carmen Vitullo wrote:
I suspect dynamic allocation may be doing more that the IEFBR14 possibly?
Well, DYNALLOC is certainly doing more that the job step initiation when
it comes to allocation.
Device allocation at step-start time is a largely CPU-bound affair with
the
For the SVC 99, the time as reported by the C library function clock(),
documented as
Approximates the processor time used by the program, since the beginning of an
implementation-defined time period that is related to the program invocation.
In other words, it is the CPU time used so far by
Charles Mills wrote:
>I am seeing a CPU time of about .0025 CPU seconds per allocation on a z196.
>The entire job lock, stock and barrel uses (according to IEF032I) .00 CPU
>seconds.
What type of CPU time?
SMF30CPT - TCB?
SMF30CPS - SRB?
SMF30ISB – SRB CPU time for initi
: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Charles Mills
Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2019 3:30 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
Thanks. I don't have MXG but I am super familiar with SMF concepts, reading the
SMF documentation, "decoding&qu
Got it. Thanks,
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Seymour J Metz
Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2019 3:34 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
Yes, allocations in your JCL
FWIW I tried adding DISP=(,PASS) to all of the DDs and adding another (BR14
also) step. No difference in the step CPU time -- still 0.00 seconds.
Of course, one could play guessing games all day. Is the Initiator smart enough
to know the whole job is one big no-op? I would guess not, but who
Yes, allocations in your JCL are done in the Initiator. The IEF032I message n
your job has CPU time for your jobstep. There may also be an IEF032I for the
Initiator, but the CPU time would be for all of the jobs that the Initiator had
handled before shutting down.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
I would have to dig before I can provide a detailed answer.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Charles Mills
Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2019 2:30 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
Thanks. I don't have MX
Thanks. I don't have MXG but I am super familiar with SMF concepts, reading the
SMF documentation, "decoding" SMF triplets and so forth. I see the following:
12 C SMF30ICU 4 binary Initiator CPU time under the task control block (TCB),
in hundredths
of a second. This field
SMF type 30's contain the start and end time of the allocation process for the
initiator.
I cannot specifically recall whether the CPU time for this process is broken
out into a specific bucket, or can be calculated.
I you have MXG, Barry Merrill has a lot of doc in this area.
-Ori
Vitullo
- Original Message -
From: "Charles Mills"
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2019 2:02:25 PM
Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
Can you please clarify? Your first sentence seems to say that SVC 99 (or do you
mean Initiator) CPU time
Can you please clarify? Your first sentence seems to say that SVC 99 (or do you
mean Initiator) CPU time is in the SMF 30? Can you be more specific?
Your last sentence seems to say the opposite? Or ... ?
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN
Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2019 12:38 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
The key word is "apparently". Unless you can track the CPU time used by the
Initiator, you have no way to know which is more efficient.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http:
: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 12:25:05 -0400, Charles Mills wrote:
>
>OTOH I have an IEFBR14 batch job on the same machine that allocates 15
>temporary datasets in JCL. The entire job lock, stock and barrel uses
>(according to IEF032I) .00 CPU seconds.
ay, August 6, 2019 12:45 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time cost of dynamic allocation
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 12:25:05 -0400, Charles Mills wrote:
>
>OTOH I have an IEFBR14 batch job on the same machine that allocates 15
>temporary datasets in JCL. The entire job lock, st
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 12:25:05 -0400, Charles Mills wrote:
>
>OTOH I have an IEFBR14 batch job on the same machine that allocates 15
>temporary datasets in JCL. The entire job lock, stock and barrel uses
>(according to IEF032I) .00 CPU seconds. Can anyone explain why JCL
>allocation is apparently muc
The key word is "apparently". Unless you can track the CPU time used by the
Initiator, you have no way to know which is more efficient.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf o
I have a batch program that does several SVC 99 allocations. They are fairly
vanilla temporary dataset allocations, or at least that is how I think of
them. I am seeing a CPU time of about .0025 CPU seconds per allocation on a
z196. Is this what others would expect, or does it seem high?
OTOH I
On the full speed box the delays will be real. On the faster
kneecapped box the delays will be counted as part of the kneecapping.
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 3:40 PM Edward Finnell
<000248cce9f3-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
> Is the overhead noticeable from a thruput standpoint?
>
> S
Is the overhead noticeable from a thruput standpoint?
Say we have a 100 MSU box and a 200 MSU box capped at 100 will same workloads
complete in close proximity?In a message dated 3/4/2019 9:36:11 PM Central
Standard Time, edja...@phoenixsoftware.com writes:
So a better analogy might be that eac
thanks Rob, a PM from Patrick helped me find the error of my ways !
Carmen Vitullo
- Original Message -
From: "Rob Scott"
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2019 11:09:54 AM
Subject: Re: CPU time and zIIP
Choose option 4 to show the fields and you g
t-and-shoot for more information.
Rob Scott
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Carmen Vitullo
Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2019 1:25 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time and zIIP
I don't see the same HELP as you Rob,
HELP or PF1 in DA panel g
a good
picture, somewhat historical, but I can get it.
Carmen Vitullo
- Original Message -
From: "Rob Scott"
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2019 4:39:14 AM
Subject: Re: CPU time and zIIP
Under the help section of the "DA" command,
cribing in detail where SDSF
sources the information and the calculations involved in showing the data, for
example :
CPU-Time and ECPU-Time columns: SDSF obtains the values for
these columns from RMF, as follows:
CPU-Time = ASCBEJST + ASCBSRBT + ASSBASST (source field R791TCPU)
ECPU-Time
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Carmen Vitullo
Sent: Monday, March 4, 2019 9:10 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time and zIIP
bad assumption on my part that SDSF
On 3/4/2019 5:39 AM, R.S. wrote:
W dniu 2019-03-03 o 17:07, Christopher Y. Blaicher pisze:
ZIIP and ZAAP processors always run at full speed, even when running
on a sub-capacity box.
One thing, among many, I don't know is how IBM implements
sub-capacity. Slow the clock speed? Skip cycles?
Al
3573?mt=2
Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu_65HaYgksbF6Q8SQ4oOvA
From: Jim Mulder
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date: 04/03/2019 15:39
Subject: Re: CPU time and zIIP
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List
There is no "dummy LPAR". Mil
Dummy LPAR or milicode waste the cycles - nevermind. My point was there
are some cycles lost, not longer (slower) cycles.
Regards
--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland
W dniu 2019-03-04 o 16:39, Jim Mulder pisze:
There is no "dummy LPAR". Millicode periodically executes
a loop to waste so
There is no "dummy LPAR". Millicode periodically executes
a loop to waste some time. The logical processor remains dispatched
to the physical processor while that is happening, so the wasted time is
included in the CPU Timer for the logical processor, and thus is charged
to the dispatched work
: "R.S."
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date: 04/03/2019 13:39
Subject:Re: CPU time and zIIP
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List
W dniu 2019-03-03 o 17:07, Christopher Y. Blaicher pisze:
ZIIP and ZAAP processors always run at full speed, even when running on
a sub-
:54 AM
Subject: Re: CPU time and zIIP
Carmen Vitullo
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Relson"
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Friday, March 1, 2019 7:15:51 AM
Subject: Re: CPU time and zIIP
I'm obviously still not understanding what you think is amiss.
ad
nnel/UCu_65HaYgksbF6Q8SQ4oOvA
From: "R.S."
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date: 04/03/2019 13:39
Subject: Re: CPU time and zIIP
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List
W dniu 2019-03-03 o 17:07, Christopher Y. Blaicher pisze:
> ZIIP and ZAAP processors always run at full speed,
W dniu 2019-03-03 o 17:07, Christopher Y. Blaicher pisze:
ZIIP and ZAAP processors always run at full speed, even when running on a
sub-capacity box.
One thing, among many, I don't know is how IBM implements sub-capacity. Slow
the clock speed? Skip cycles?
All processors, including subcapaci
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Saturday, March 2, 2019 10:20:36 AM
Subject: Re: CPU time and zIIP
>is that true for CPU percent also?
The original post and my answers were about SDSF. They did not show (to
the best of my eyesight) or discuss any percentage fields.
Are you now asking
One regular misconception about (cycle time), irrespective of the type of
processor the 'speed/cycle time' of ALL the processors is the SAME
I'd disagree a bit. I think that the "misconception" is of conflating
"speed" with "cycle time".
It is true that the machine cycle time for all of the
scussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Parwez
> Sent: Sunday, March 3, 2019 6:05 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: CPU time and zIIP
>
> One regular misconception about (cycle time), irrespective of the type of
> processor the 's
city CPs). Only CPs have the
sub-capacity settings.
Parwez Hamid
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Christopher Y. Blaicher
Sent: 03 March 2019 16:07
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time and zIIP
ZIIP and ZAAP processors always ru
: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Parwez
Sent: Sunday, March 3, 2019 6:05 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time and zIIP
One regular misconception about (cycle time), irrespective of the type of
processor the 'speed/cycle time&#
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date: 03/03/2019 15:03
Subject:Re: CPU time and zIIP
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List
>for maybe 20 years
Not quite 20 years, but getting there . zAAPs were introduced in
about 2004.
Peter Relson
z/OS Core Technology
>for maybe 20 years
Not quite 20 years, but getting there . zAAPs were introduced in
about 2004.
Peter Relson
z/OS Core Technology Design
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists.
N@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU time and zIIP
Especially since zIIPs are faster but cost lest, and CPs are slower.
One nice feature about reduced speed CPs is any delay waiting for
resources are not counted toward your reduced speed for a CP.
On Sat, Mar 2, 2019 at 2:49 PM Martin Packer wrote:
channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu_65HaYgksbF6Q8SQ4oOvA
>
>
>
> From: Peter Relson
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Date: 02/03/2019 16:21
> Subject:Re: CPU time and zIIP
> Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List
>
>
>
> >is
nnel/UCu_65HaYgksbF6Q8SQ4oOvA
From: Peter Relson
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date: 02/03/2019 16:21
Subject:Re: CPU time and zIIP
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List
>is that true for CPU percent also?
The original post and my answers were about SDSF. They did not show (to
the bes
>is that true for CPU percent also?
The original post and my answers were about SDSF. They did not show (to
the best of my eyesight) or discuss any percentage fields.
Are you now asking a question about a percentage shown in RMF? I don't
pretend to know anything about what RMF displays, but it
Carmen Vitullo
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Relson"
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Friday, March 1, 2019 7:15:51 AM
Subject: Re: CPU time and zIIP
I'm obviously still not understanding what you think is amiss.
adding up the Gcpu time and Ziip time, to s
I'm obviously still not understanding what you think is amiss.
for me I'd like to see SDSF's CPUtime to include all time, GCPU+IIP
We have already said that it does.
Peter Relson
z/OS Core Technology Design
--
For IBM-MAIN
on to zIIP processing time.
For example, here is a CICS region running a Java web service.
*CPU-Time ECPU-Time GCP-Time zIIP-Time zICP-Time zIIP-NTime*
* 164.42 166.28 90.89 30.21 3.42 71.29*
Here is a CICS transaction executing in the region to display various ASSB
fields.
C
No more assumptions on my part, so what tools would show the correct
time(s) for real time monitoring if not SDSF?
RMF? Omegamon? And now that you throw Java in the mix or USS spanned
tasks I don't think any real time monitor can account for all CPU time
GCPU and zIIPTIME
SDSF show
No more assumptions on my part, so what tools would show the correct time(s)
for real time monitoring if not SDSF ?
RMF?
Omegamon?
And now that you throw Java in the mix or USS spanned tasks I don't think any
real time monitor can account for all CPU time GCPU and zIIPTIME
I'm thi
"zIIP time", but
I can guess.
CPU time includes preemptable SRB time and non-preemptable SRB time.
GCPU time likely does not (the field I am thinking of does not).
zIIP time certainly does not include non-preemptable SRB time or any
preemptable SRB time other than for enclave SRBs an
great info, thanks for the link Brian
Carmen Vitullo
- Original Message -
From: "Brian Chapman"
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 10:14:08 AM
Subject: Re: CPU time and zIIP
Thanks Peter.
Here is the IBM document that I based my assumpti
Thanks Peter.
Here is the IBM document that I based my assumptions of the SDSF fields.
*CPU-Time*
Accumulated CPU time consumed by and on behalf of the address space, for
the current job step, in seconds. SDSF obtains this value from RMF, as
follows:
ASCBEJST + ASCBSRBT + ASSBASST (source
Rocket Software
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Peter Relson
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 2:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: CPU time and zIIP
If the comment is correct that the SDSF display is using ASCBEJST, then the
statement "ZI
#x27;s not adding
up since all other times, other than accumulated time is zero
Carmen Vitullo
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Relson"
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 8:20:00 AM
Subject: CPU time and zIIP
If the comment is correct that
If the comment is correct that the SDSF display is using ASCBEJST, then
the statement
"ZIIP is not reported as part of CPU."
is not correct with respect to that display.
ASCBEJST includes all time, whether standard CP or zIIP.
There are additional fields, such as ASSB_TIME_ON_CP, that do not incl
according to SDSF
ECPU% CPU usage consumed within the address space (RMF)
Carmen Vitullo
- Original Message -
From: "Brian Chapman"
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 12:52:35 PM
Subject: CPU time and zIIP
Hello,
I'm trying to und
time and zIIP
Hello,
I'm trying to understand the CPU and ECPU times displayed on SDSF and the
relation to zIIP processing time.
For example, here is a CICS region running a Java web service.
*CPU-Time ECPU-Time GCP-Time zIIP-Time zICP-Time zIIP-NTime*
* 164.42166.2890.89
Hello,
I'm trying to understand the CPU and ECPU times displayed on SDSF and the
relation to zIIP processing time.
For example, here is a CICS region running a Java web service.
*CPU-Time ECPU-Time GCP-Time zIIP-Time zICP-Time zIIP-NTime*
* 164.42166.2890.89 30.21
In <45fcfbbb8bc8eb4a9dfedc6fa2cc7fdf99a82...@sdkmbx02.emea.sas.com>,
on 10/15/2014
at 06:03 AM, Lindy Mayfield said:
>I honestly cannot remember why I did that, to divide by 38400,
Google for timer units, or check a 370-mode PoOps. I would hope that
IBM has stopped using them for new fields,
I found this in some of my old notes.
SMFCPU - The CPU time used in "timer units". Note: there are 38,400 timer
units in a second.
Maybe this helps?
This e-mail may contain Sprint proprietary information intended for the sole
use of the recipie
12 hours? IIRC86,400 sec = 24 hours
I needed to pull off some user SMF records, and so I used a small program that
I had written about 6 or so years ago. In it, I have a line of code like this:
SMFCPU = SMFCPU / 38400
I honestly cannot remember why I did that, to divide by 38400, but I mu
Lindy,
Can you be more specific about which field(s) it is that you are choosing
to divide by 38400?
It would not surprise me at all if the use of the term "timer units" is
(unfortunately) inconsistent, some referring to the 26usec value and
others referring to bit 63 of the TOD clock.
Peter
1 - 100 of 238 matches
Mail list logo
