On Monday, 12/08/2008 at 10:28 EST, Barton Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Not sure we've bothered to report the details since this problem > would not impact our users.
It would nonetheless be a good service to the community to report the problem you found, whether it affects your customers or not. <editorial> While we all want tools like 'top' to show accurate information, they only provide a slice of the information you need to really manage the throughput of your system, something arguably more important than absolute performance (vague term) of a single guest. To manage your *system* you need something like Performance Toolkit, OMEGAMON, or ESAMON. They make it easier (possible?) to tune your system to meet the needs of *your* workload, build an accurate charge-back system if you need one, and perform capacity planning based on historical data. I think getting a guest's view of performance is ok if you don't sit there with it in a loop and you use it primarily to compare to the output from yesterday, looking for unusual differences, not absolute numbers. As the number of servers grow, you can get more variability, so you might start seeing 'unusual' differences which, if you have a view of the entire system, are not unusual. </editorial> Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
