I believe its an enhanced version of inspect from omegamon z/os. It
monitors where the cpu is spending its time in the code by sampling the
restart psu for AS you are monitoring. It was created as a bet by an old
mate of mine, a few moons ago.

<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 3:05 AM Colin Paice <[email protected]> wrote:

> I used it about 10 years ago.  We only looked at hot hot spots. Small hot
> spots close to the background level, could change from day to day depending
> on other usage.  For example are the instructions/data cached in the local
> processor?  Changing the amount of optimization of the C code made a big
> difference.  Sometimes highly optimised code was slower than medium
> optimised, because it optimised the whole program, whereas the hot code was
> only about 5% of the total.  Of course upgrade the processor, and
> everything can change, bigger cache, bigger page size, TLB etc.
>
> I remember going to a customer to resolve a performance problem who was
> going live in under 2 weeks.  Using APA...
> 1)  The top usage in the top transaction was 80% in  "printf".   They still
> had debug code running.
> 2)  Rather than use a variable in a dynamic SQL statement  such as "select
> from table where user=:userid", they had "select from table where
> user='COLIN'", and "select from table where user='PAICE', so each of these
> statements were unique, and could not be cached.
> APA showed me these in the first hour (it made me look great). Once fixed,
> the CPU dropped from 4 engines down to 1 engine for the same workload.
> When I said they were going live in under 2 weeks; every one used the
> password "qw", and I could logon to the super user using qw!
>
> Colin
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 at 16:56, Phil Smith III <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Colin Paice wrote:
> >
> > >I dont think it matters which machine you run on, you just run for a
> > longer
> >
> > >time, and get more samples that way.
> >
> >
> >
> > There was, IIRC, also a maximum time for the sampling. What we wound up
> > with
> > was insufficient; as I noted, it was a while ago. Perhaps we missed
> > something.
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> >
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>


--

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to