Hi Mike, We are not using VMRM so I cannot comment.
We have multiple VSEs under VM and once we turned all the knobs we could in VM to help VSE, surprise, surprise, it took it all. So we put a limithard on the guest to make it play nicer with the rest of us all. I know the VSE performance people recommend against considering multiple virtual CPU's for guests on machines with one CPU. It doesn't work very well, I gather. As for teminal response time, we use Performance ToolKit for that. Ron On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Horlick, Michael <[email protected]> wrote: > Is anyone out there using VMRM? What do they see it doing? Issuing SET > SHARE with ABSOLUTE, RELATIVE with LIMITSOFT, LIMITHARD, etc...? > > Should I just make everyone SHARE RELATIVE 100 and see what it does with > my own VMRM config file? Maybe the client would go for it if I can say > that it seems to do a better job then the ABS values I use. > > I want my CICS production system running in my VSEs to have no CPU > constraints (no LIMITHARD or LIMITSOFT) so would that be a 100% CPU > velocity goal? > > Another thing... I know I can define multiple virtual CPUs for a virtual > machine but wouldn't it be nice if I can say to VSE use Virtual CPU 0 > for CICS,VTAM,TCPIP and use Virtual CPU 1 for these batch partitions and > then wouldn't it be nice to say to z/VM to set a SHARE value for Virtual > CPU 0 for that virtual machine? > > Thanks, > > Mike
