<snip> Our CPC (2094-S18-708) now has 8 Physical CP and has 1 production LPAR, 2 maintenance LPARs, 2 ICF LPARs and 2 test LPARs running at the moment. Currently, all LPARs are equipped with shared CPs and have weight values assigned. The details are as follows.
production LPAR 1 initial LCP 8 reserved LCP 10 weight 40 </snip> Are you saying that all LPARs have 8 active(shared)/10 reserved LP's assigned? If so, this is a bad thing to do! PR/SM overhead is excessive (only the active LP's affect the overhead). The logical/physical ratio should (ROT) not exceed 2 to 1. I have pushed this to 3 to 1 with some very low activity test LPARs where performance was not critical. <snip> We have referred to the z9 PR/SM planning guide. It's saying we just need to create new image profiles and deactivate/activate test LPARs. Then the changes will be available. </snip> True, as far as it goes. It ignores the changed LP/CP ratios after activation. The good news is to regain the former performance, just a reactivation of the original profiles for the test lpars is required. <snip> Now, we plan to assign each test LPARs with 3 dedicated CPs due to some test requirements. That is to say, the 2 test LPARs will cost 6 physical CPs in total. Meanwhile, however, does this operation have any impact on other LPARs running in the same CPC? For example, do we need to deactive the production LPAR and change its image profile. Because there will be only 2 PCPs available for it, however, it has 8 LCPs configured. </snip> No. IBM does not prevent you from defining more LP's than CP's. However the overhead becomes excessive when the LP/CP ratio exceeds (2 to 3) to 1. Just my $0.02. YMMV, ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
