Ken, We started testing soft-capping last night. This morning I looked at the RMF CPU report. I noticed that one of the LPARs was capped 4.6% of the night (8 hours). We have 2 z890 boxes running in parallel sysplex and the soft-capping only occured in one box. The other one was not soft-capped the whole night. Meaning (I believe) that in total we were not short on capacity, because WLM could route work to the LPAR running un-capped in the 2nd box. I would imagine that WLM takes this under consideration, but I am still unclear on this issue. Other things I noticed were that for long periods of time our actual capacity was much higher than the defined capacity (30-40 MSUs over). Also, even at times we were soft-capped, the 4 hour MSU average was higher (by about 5 MSUs) than the defined capacity and went down to (1-2 MSUs) below the defined capacity over a period of 1 hour and 45 minutes. Gil.
On 7/19/05, Porowski, Ken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Going to be turning on my new z990 this weekend (figures - now I hear IBM > is about to announce some new boxes soon). Classically we have hard capped > our 5 LPARs (contractual restrictions) but to me it seems that using > 'defined capacity' would be beneficial. > > Only 'problem' I have is that it is theoretically possible to exceed the > 'defined capacity' and have a 'soft cap' kick in which could hurt my > applications. > > I am assuming ... > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
