The following message is a courtesy copy of an article that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main as well.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason To) writes: > We have encountered some weird problem last week and discovered that > the total MVS CPU busy percentage reported by both RMF and TMON were > inaccurate. RMF and TMON reported MVS CPU percentage does not match > with the total CPU% usage by the jobs running in the system at least > in one LPAR, the other LPAR seems to be fine. For example the reported > total CPU% was 72% at an interval period but only 40% when we add up > all the CPU% of jobs, a disparity of 30%. From the WLM activity > report, by comparing it with the total APPL% used divided by the total > assigned CPs also produced result of 40+%. Hence, the MVS CPU > percentage should have been 40+%. Anyone out there have encountered > this problem before? Any reported fix to resolve this problem? Btw, we > are still at z/OS v1.4, running in the sysplex. can you say "capture" ratio? some past posts mentioning effect: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005m.html#16 CPU time and system load http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006v.html#19 Ranking of non-IBM mainframe builders? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007g.html#82 IBM to the PCM market http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007t.html#23 SMF Under VM really strange the first time you here it ... say the elapsed minus measured wait is much larger than the individually measured cpu useages (especially having vm background where it actually does capture nearly every cycle). the referenced "SMF Under VM" post includes some number of corporate MVS URLs that go into much more detail. old email http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006v.html#email800717 discussing moving workload from 168 to 4341s w/o taking into account capture ratio. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
