If z/OSMF uses a lot of CPU when idle. You should increase the number of threads. See here I cut the CPU cost of doing nothing <https://colinpaice.blog/2021/06/27/i-cut-the-cpu-cost-of-doing-nothing/>. The default pool size is 100 - I found I needed 300 threads to avoid all the expanding and shrinking of the thread pool (create threads, lots of getmains... lots of freemains, delete threads: repeat). Ive suggested that z/OSMF development document/fix this. Colin
On Sat, 17 Jul 2021 at 21:29, Mike Hochee <mike.hoc...@aspg.com> wrote: > Thank you Ed, excellent suggestion. > > I too have felt the z/OSMF cpu cycles were exorbitant, but assuming you > have sufficient zIIP capacity and ZZ=YES, which now appears to be the > default, then high cycles might in reality be more of a perception problem > if a person is looking at a generalized cpu bucket (as I was) rather than > GP, zIIP, and zAAP contributions individually. > > Another item, in the context of z/OSMF resource utilization as part of the > ZOWE software stack is what I regarded as high EXCP counts when the system > is idling. Over a 30hr period this translated to approximately 300 > EXCPs/second from z/OSMF. I have heard from two sources that this may be > due to a rather primitive technique used by ZOWE to check for new work > requests - that of interrogating data sets for additions/changes. I would > think some flavor of wait-post would be far more efficient. Has anyone else > noticed this behavior or better yet, aware of a fix for it? > > Added Colin Paice's post to the end of this thread since it got dropped > and seemed quite relevant. > > Thanks much, > Mike > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of Ed Jaffe > Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2021 7:24 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Serverpac installs January 2022 and beyond > > Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization. > > On 7/17/2021 3:46 AM, Brian Westerman wrote: > > Asking a site that is able to function within their requirements and > existing SLA's to upgrade their box to more than 4x the existing size just > to run z/OSMF is just never going to be economically feasible. Even on > sites with larger machines, they may not have the extra capacity to provide > z/OSMF with what it needs to function properly. > > Since z/OSMF is a Java application, there is no need to upgrade the box at > all in the classic sense of increasing its MSU capacity. > > What you do instead is purchase/enable a single zIIP engine, share it > among all z/OS LPARs via the HMC, and set ZZ=YES (zAAP on zIIP) in IEASYSxx > on z/OS. > > Voila! z/OSMF runs like a champ and your software bill does not go up one > iota. In fact, it could go down slightly due to zIIP exploitation by other > CPU-hungry products. > -- > Phoenix Software International > Edward E. Jaffe > 831 Parkview Drive North > El Segundo, CA 90245 > https://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of Colin Paice > Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2021 8:43 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Serverpac installs January 2022 and beyond > > One issue is that z/OSMF is expensive in CPU. I noticed in the system > trace, that there are 500 storage requests (eg getmain/freemain) for each > http rest message coming in. Getting rid of these expensive requests would > reduce the costs. I think all of these come from below the Java level, > such as BPX* modules. > For example, write an SMF record from C requires a getmain .. write SMF > record - free main. > > Ive blogged > < > https://colinpaice.blog/2020/12/21/a-practical-guide-to-getting-z-osmf-working/ > > > on getting z/OSMF working including digital certificates. Unfortunately I > dont think they have designed it properly. Other products have the > "keystore" (keyring), containing just the private key for the server, and > the "trust store" (keyring) containing the public certificate needed to > validate any certificates sent to the server. This trust store can be used > by all products (Sysplex wide). z/OSMF just uses one, combined, > store(keying). This means I cant just reuse my existing certificate set > up, and so I have to have a dedicated keyring for each z/OSMF. This makes > the setup much harder, and makes administration hard. It is not much code > to fix it ( I implemented it in my Java server). > > I think that z/OSMF could be great for the younger generations to get up > to speed. But it needs to be improved to make it low cost and easy to > install and configure (as in get it into production, rather than just get > it started). > > Colin > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email > to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
