If your VM system is at 101% memory usage, and you are overcommitted by
about 14%, is it worthwhile to add
a vdisk to a linux for swap space, or better just to add main memory to the
linux?
MA (Looking for opinions, thoughts, rationalizations, whatever. :)
to add ZVM memory.
David Dean
Information Systems
*bcbstauthorized*
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mary Anne Matyaz
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 11:31 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Performance
29, 2008 11:31 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Performance question
If your VM system is at 101% memory usage, and you are overcommitted by
about 14%, is it worthwhile to add
a vdisk to a linux for swap space, or better just to add main memory to
the linux?
MA (Looking for opinions
: Performance question
Best practices is to use Vdisk for swap, and reduce linux virtual
machine sizes - not to
buy more REAL z/VM memory unless you really need it. 101% memory
useage means almost
nothing. It is not relevant to performance or capacity, and thus
shouldn't have business
decisions
I know I'm probably going to regret this, but, how can that be? I said VM
memory usage, right?
Not Linux
MA
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Barton Robinson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Best practices is to use Vdisk for swap, and reduce linux virtual machine
sizes - not to buy more REAL z/VM
@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Performance question
Best practices is to use Vdisk for swap, and reduce linux virtual
machine sizes - not to
buy more REAL z/VM memory unless you really need it. 101% memory
useage means almost
nothing. It is not relevant to performance or capacity, and thus
shouldn't
@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Performance question
It appears there's alot of cache usage. What's running on this machine?
--
Rich Smrcina
VM Assist, Inc.
Phone: 414-491-6001
Ans Service: 360-715-2467
rich.smrcina at vmassist.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/richsmrcina
Catch the WAVV! http
Dean, David (I/S) wrote:
My SLES 10.1 zLinux servers have been notorious for not making much
use of the swap space, even when we lower the main (virtualized) in
the USER DIRECTORY.
Linux uses extra memory for file cache buffers. When the kernel detects
memory is short, it just allocates
Information Systems
*bcbstauthorized*
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jack Woehr
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 12:55 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Performance question
Dean, David (I/S) wrote:
My
Dean, David (I/S) wrote:
Thanks to all for some really good input.
So the tuning legend that the Linux should just touch swap is
true? But if Linux is going to eat all for file caching, would it not
Always eventually swap?
Swap and file caching are two sides of the same thing. In
On Monday, 09/29/2008 at 01:41 EDT, Jack Woehr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Linux kernel for running on VM could be designed a little different from
Linux
kernel for PC in order to behave better with VM.
I'm not sure to what extent it actually is different.
This is not just a z/VM problem. For
z/VM Memory usage, what do you think it means? If a page of a virtual machine is in
storage, but has not been referenced in 10 minutes, is that part of your percent used?
Likely you don't know the answer and the source of your information doesn't either. So if
that's the case, what information
If the page has not been referenced in 10 minutes, but is not paged out, I
would expect it to be included in the 101%.
Try not to focus so much on the extraneous info and address the question, if
I am using a huge amount of memory, is it more helpful to use vdisk or guest
memory?
MA
On Mon, Sep
Alan Altmark wrote:
On Monday, 09/29/2008 at 01:41 EDT, Jack Woehr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Linux kernel for running on VM could be designed a little different from
Linux
kernel for PC in order to behave better with VM.
I'm not sure to what extent it actually is different.
Best practices is to use Vdisk for swap
Mary Anne Matyaz wrote:
If the page has not been referenced in 10 minutes, but is not paged out, I
would expect it to be included in the 101%.
Try not to focus so much on the extraneous info and address the question, if
I am using a huge amount of
: Performance Question
The REAL processors are running about 85% per (5 IFLs) and the virtual
processors for this Linux host are running an average of about 90% per (4
Logicals). There is no CPU queuing that I can tell. I am not running any of the
products you mentioned.
This may not be a bad
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Performance Question
I see messages like this from time to time on my VM Lpars that only run
guest operating systems and have little to no CMS users. I think it may
be because the VM scheduler can't really see what a transaction is
inside the GOS. I think
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know there are some performance folks out there (Velocity, IBM
(Omegamon)) any thoughts on this from you all?
The transaction as observed by CP relates to applications running in
CMS. It has no meaning
Hi
I am trying to get a handle on all of the z/VM tuning knobs if you will
and have a couple of questions:
I see the following during heavy processing on the particular Linux
host:
FCXPER315A Cl1 time slice 8.939 exceeds limit 1.000 (Q1=02 Qx=26)
I am using the default alert of
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR)
(CTR)
Sent: Wed 9/24/2008 3:42 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: [IBMVM] Performance Question
Hi
I am trying to get a handle on all of the z/VM tuning knobs if you will and
have
:03 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Performance Question
hard to say for certain. Not a number I look at that often. How busy are
the processors? Is there CPU queuing?
The scheduler tries to classify around 80% of work as class 1; so
fluctuations are rather common.
Are you per
Gentlemen,
You're comparing apples and bananas. EXECOMM and GLOBALV are two distinc
t
namespaces. Further, there is one GLOBALV set of variables, whereas each
REXX invocation has its own set of variables (and then there is PROCEDURE
EXPOSE).
j.
,
Richard Schuh
-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John P. Hartmann
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 8:24 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Rexx performance question
Gentlemen,
You're comparing apples and bananas
] On
Behalf Of John P. Hartmann
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 8:24 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Rexx performance question
Gentlemen,
You're comparing apples and bananas. EXECOMM and GLOBALV are two
distinc=
t
namespaces. Further, there is one GLOBALV set of variables, whereas
On 1/18/07, Kris Buelens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And, EXECCOMM must be used by GLOBALV GET and PUT. Hence there is some
relation performance wise.
Ooh... Sir Kris disagrees with the Piper... ;-)You have any old
passwords I can inherit?
Rob
I've lots of things to inherit. But, even now after this dangerous
adventure, I think I have some chances to survive.
When I rethink my will, I'll think to leave something for you Sir Rob,
Yours truly,
Sir Kris The Guide,
The proud owner of an almost uncountable -and still growing, number of
On 1/12/07, Peter Rothman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Besides a lot of 'steam lining' I thought I would be 'clever' and changed
the GLOBALVs to 'PIPE var VarName 1 | var VarName'.
The EXECCOMM interface is known to be slow. With GLOBALV you only use
it once to set the variable, with the Pipeline
The GLOBALV solution often also requires two calls to EXECCOMM:
GLOBALV PUT in the calling exec and GLOBALV GET in the callee
If the variables contain one word only, one can indeed save a call to
EXECCOM:
'GLOBALV SET V1' content 'V2' content
But, in such cases one can also pass the
We have an old REXX exec that I had to modify.
This is a rather simplistic description but it consists of 2 parts - 1 to
set up the environment(variables) and 2 to use the variables setup in 1.
Bottom I had problems modifying it so I re-wrote it.
The original used GLOBALV extensively - part 1
] Subject
ARK.EDU Re: Rexx performance question
01/12/2007 10
performance question
Tested that - also much slower than GLOBALV.
Kris Buelens
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
il.com
To
Sent by: The IBM IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
z/VM Operating
cc
System
[EMAIL PROTECTED
12, 2007 10:55
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Rexx performance question
Tested that - also much slower than GLOBALV.
Kris Buelens
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
il.com
To
Sent by: The IBM IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
z/VM
@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc:
Subject:Re: Rexx performance question
Using a file to store the variables a while, uggghhh...
File I/O remains terribly slow compared to memory access, even though you
might save some CPU (I don't know if you will save) the result may be code
than takes
Schuh
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Steve Gentry
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 10:02 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Rexx performance question
Why not define a vdisk for storing the variables
Buelens [EMAIL PROTECTED]*
Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
01/12/2007 11:38 AM
Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System
To:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc:
Subject:Re: Rexx performance question
Using a file to store
, 2007 1:44 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Rexx performance question
What is wrong with using GLOBALV? That can be memory-only as
indicated in the original post (it specified GET and PUT, not GETS,
GETP, PUTS or PUTP). There is no need to write
PROTECTED] *On
Behalf Of *Schuh, Richard
*Sent:* Friday, January 12, 2007 1:44 PM
*To:* IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
*Subject:* Re: Rexx performance question
What is wrong with using GLOBALV? That can be memory-only as indicated in
the original post (it specified GET and PUT, not GETS, GETP, PUTS or PUTP
Title: performance question
Good morning everyone.
I have a little performance question to pose this morning.
This is sort of related to the thread 'VTAM Cross Domain problem/question'.
We have an application that 'webifies' the look of some CICS screens.
The app runs on a wintell server
Huegel, Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom,
I'm not sure I completely follow the question. I am not aware
of any way to get just the cost of the SCEXIT from existing
data. You could at least bound it by looking at total costs in
the TCP/IP stack machine to understand what the costs may
be. One
Title: RE: performance question
Bill,
I wasn't concerned with just the SCEXIT itself, if I thought that was the issue I would rewrite it in assembler. I was interested in the whole DIAL/DROP path. From the time TCP/IP first saw the connection until VSE/VTAM saw the terminal and how much
Huegel, Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thank you, I better understand your problem. There is no trivial way
I know of to break this apart as you would like. My best suggestion is:
- isolate this processing to a TCP/IP stack that does this alone
- use either SCEXIT or cons logs to track rate of
Title: performance question
Tom,
although I couldn't open the stuff you tried to
provide in your append, the data
you sent me by separate mail gave me the required
information to tell what's wrong:
- Your RESET specifications are fine. This
isevidenced by the report headers
From 2006/04
Title: performance question
I
tried this in my $profile..
I get
this display.
My
report heading looks like this.
BUT my
reports still start at 12:00:00 and end at 23:59:00..
Any
ideas what I may have wrong???
Thank
you.
Tom
-Original Message-From: The IBM z/VM Operating
Title: performance question
Can anybody tell me how to get reports from
PERFKIT that start at 00:01:00 and go to 23:59:00 ? I have tried everything I can find and all my reports start at
12:01:00 and end at 23:59:00. What am I
missing?
The times when counters should be reset in PerfKit
Title: performance question
Can anybody tell me how to get reports from PERFKIT that start at 00:01:00 and go to 23:59:00 ?
I have tried everything I can find and all my reports start at 12:01:00 and end at 23:59:00.
What am I missing?
Thanks
09:19
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: VM Performance Question
I don't know for sure if it really helps, but I have been saying the
same thing for years.
Setting expanded storage is a good thing for an actively paging
system.
Also by reducing the amount of central storage, would cause
46 matches
Mail list logo
