Many years ago when CMOS machines (9672) first came on the scene, individual CPs were a lot slower--by 3x--than the bipolar CPs they were replacing. Not a big issue for transactional processes like CICS, but batch suffered because of long standing jobs that suddenly were getting S322 abends doing the same amount of work as before.
Rather than force JCL changes for hundreds of existing jobs, we added code in IEFUTL to extend the time for two additional intervals of whatever TIME= value was in effect. We kept track of extensions via some flags and issued a message each time the limit was extended. Eventually of course CMOS speeds caught up with bipolar and exceeded it. Not surprisingly, our IEFUTL still grants extensions. If it ain't actually broke... . . J.O.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 323-715-0595 Mobile 626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joel C. Ewing Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2018 10:07 AM To: [email protected] Subject: (External):Re: CPU Utilization When total CPU time used by the address space is the issue, that can be handled using an IEFUTL exit, setting a default JOB TIME parameter by job class in JES2, and overriding that with TIME parameters on the JOB and EXEC statements as appropriate. The IEFUTL exit can be written to either cancel the job when the limit is exceeded, or ask the operator whether he wants to extend the CPU TIME limit or cancel the job, and differentiate based on Job class, etc. I suspect you could probably write the IEFUTL exit to auto extend the limit for an STC address space, but put out a console message so the Operator would know it was happening, and he could then manually cancel the address space if the behavior and CPU extension was unreasonable. Joel C. Ewing . On 07/04/2018 12:31 AM, saurabh khandelwal wrote: > I would like operator console to be notified when any address space or > Job taking more CPU for longer then any time we specify > > On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 8:27 AM, retired mainframer > <[email protected] >> wrote: >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On >>> Behalf Of Peter Hunkeler >>> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2018 10:10 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: AW: Re: CPU Utilization >>> >>>> No, IEFUTL is called INSIDE an Address Space as often as specified >>>> in >> SMFPRMxx in >>> statement JWT. >>> >>> >>> .... and it would also be called when the CPU time used exceeds the >>> time >> limit of the job or >>> step (TIME= parameter). But this means also that the exit is most >>> never >> called. >> >> But if you specify the desired time on the job statement (the OP said >> 30 min?), IEFUTL would get called and could take the desired action >> (extend for another 30 after generating some console message?). -- Joel C. Ewing, Bentonville, AR [email protected] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
