No, not recently.
q cplevel z/VM Version 5 Release 2.0, service level 0601 (64-bit) Generated at 2006-02-13 11:45:25 EDT IPL at 2008-04-23 02:42:47 EDT Ready; Mike ________________________________ From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of McBride, Catherine Sent: April 23, 2008 1:57 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Using SET SHARE, performance problem Mike did you also upgrade VM recently? -----Original Message----- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Horlick, Michael Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 12:55 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Using SET SHARE, performance problem The VSE guests are usually 'Q0 PS', sometimes 'Q0 RUN'. Paging at 2/sec. Right now at 97% utilization. Thanks, Mike -----Original Message----- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Hammock Sent: April 23, 2008 1:49 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Using SET SHARE, performance problem Did you perhaps increase the size of the virtual machines when going to zVSE 4.1?? In any case, I'd check for an eligible list. (do #CP IND Q and look for any of your guests in E3). If any VSE guest is in E3, I'd suggest (carefully) adjusting the SRM STORBUFF setting to allow more overcommittment of real storage. Monitor your paging activity and page space usage carefully. Mike C. M. (Mike) Hammock Sr. Technical Support zFrame & IBM zSeries Solutions (404) 643-3258 [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Horlick, Michael" <michael.horlick@ To cgi.com> "[email protected]" Sent by: The IBM <[email protected]> z/VM Operating cc System <[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject ARK.EDU> Using SET SHARE, performnace problem 04/23/2008 01:38 PM Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ARK.EDU> Cross-posted to both VMESA-L and VSE-L mailing lists Greetings, We have just converted the last of our 5 VSE machines to z/VSE 4.1.0 (from VSE/ESA 2.6.1) and are experiencing performance issues. My peak times are 98-100% utilization and people are complaining about poor response times. I don't know whether it's because I am using CICS data tables more now or because of the additional CPU utilization for z/VSE. Anyways, one question I have is the usage of the SET SHARE. I have been using the 'SHARE ABSOLUTE' directory control statement for each of my VSE machines (giving say 38% to one machine, giving 29% to another,etc...) with maximum share nolimit. The problems seem to occur when batch jobs are run in these predominately CICS/TS systems. I was wondering if maybe a SET SHARE RELATIVE technique would be more effective and what you do in prioritizing virtual machines within the physical machine? Thanks, Mike __________________________________________________________ This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. To reply to our email administrator directly, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
