Re: WLM and DDF enclaves

[patrickfalcone7]

And possibly checking to see if any zIIP eligible work is actually on the 
Speciality Processor or can go to a SP. Also sounds like a 4HRA event where I 
would have a look at makeup during 4HRA to see what Service Classes are 
contributing, and drill down and tune from there, if necessary.HTHSent from my 
Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
 Original message From: Martin Packer 
 Date: 3/14/24  12:10  (GMT-05:00) To: 
IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: WLM and DDF enclaves They should be below 
Db2 Engine in the hierarchy…IRLM should be in SYSSTC.DBM1, MSTR, DIST should be 
in Importance 1, CPU Critical.DDF transactions should be Importance 2 on 
downwards.Right now you have DDF work fighting with Db2 – in whatever shaped 
boxing ring. Cheers, MartinFrom: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
 on behalf of Jaime Fernandez 
<05f045ad6641-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>Date: Thursday, 14 March 2024 
at 14:26To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: 
[EXTERNAL] WLM and DDF enclavesHi fellow listers,Newcomer here, so... I hope my 
question makes sense.We have some amount of business critical distributed 
online transactions, running on enclaves into a Db2 zOS subsystem. Our current 
WLM configuration assigns them a specific service class with importance 1 and a 
velocity goal.We have been observing quite poor performance index for this 
service class (and awful response times for those transactions) whenever the 
lpar shows high cpu usage (on or around 100%) and specially when capping is on. 
Performance index stays between 1 and 2 most of the time, with peaks over 
40.From what I have read so far, I understand velocity goals can be tricky for 
short-term processes, and that gets worse with fewer logical processors. Which 
happens to be our case, last year we brought in a z16 with less capacity and 
processors than the previous machine.So, in your experience, could be a good 
idea switching to a response time goal?Any insights would be most 
appreciated.Jaime--For
 IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAINUnless otherwise stated 
above:IBM United Kingdom LimitedRegistered in England and Wales with number 
741598Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hants. PO6 
3AU--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

Re: WLM and DDF enclaves

[Martin Packer]

They should be below Db2 Engine in the hierarchy…

IRLM should be in SYSSTC.

DBM1, MSTR, DIST should be in Importance 1, CPU Critical.

DDF transactions should be Importance 2 on downwards.

Right now you have DDF work fighting with Db2 – in whatever shaped boxing ring. 


Cheers, Martin

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
Jaime Fernandez <05f045ad6641-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Date: Thursday, 14 March 2024 at 14:26
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: [EXTERNAL] WLM and DDF enclaves
Hi fellow listers,

Newcomer here, so... I hope my question makes sense.

We have some amount of business critical distributed online transactions, 
running on enclaves into a Db2 zOS subsystem. Our current WLM configuration 
assigns them a specific service class with importance 1 and a velocity goal.

We have been observing quite poor performance index for this service class (and 
awful response times for those transactions) whenever the lpar shows high cpu 
usage (on or around 100%) and specially when capping is on. Performance index 
stays between 1 and 2 most of the time, with peaks over 40.

From what I have read so far, I understand velocity goals can be tricky for 
short-term processes, and that gets worse with fewer logical processors. Which 
happens to be our case, last year we brought in a z16 with less capacity and 
processors than the previous machine.

So, in your experience, could be a good idea switching to a response time goal?

Any insights would be most appreciated.

Jaime

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Unless otherwise stated above:

IBM United Kingdom Limited
Registered in England and Wales with number 741598
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hants. PO6 3AU


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and DDF enclaves

[Colin Paice]

You might try to get WLM/RMF reports on response times to get a base line
Colin

On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 at 14:26, Jaime Fernandez <
05f045ad6641-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> Hi fellow listers,
>
> Newcomer here, so... I hope my question makes sense.
>
> We have some amount of business critical distributed online transactions,
> running on enclaves into a Db2 zOS subsystem. Our current WLM configuration
> assigns them a specific service class with importance 1 and a velocity
> goal.
>
> We have been observing quite poor performance index for this service class
> (and awful response times for those transactions) whenever the lpar shows
> high cpu usage (on or around 100%) and specially when capping is on.
> Performance index stays between 1 and 2 most of the time, with peaks over
> 40.
>
> From what I have read so far, I understand velocity goals can be tricky
> for short-term processes, and that gets worse with fewer logical
> processors. Which happens to be our case, last year we brought in a z16
> with less capacity and processors than the previous machine.
>
> So, in your experience, could be a good idea switching to a response time
> goal?
>
> Any insights would be most appreciated.
>
> Jaime
>
> --
> 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

Re: WLM - service class and Dispatch priority

[Scott Chapman]

Well, a significant portion of the value proposition for WLM when it was 
introduced in the mid 90s was in fact to eliminate the static assignment of 
dispatching priorities and the fact that WLM would potentially adjust the 
dispatching priorities every 10 seconds to attempt to balance the performance 
of different workloads at different importances to optimize overall throughput 
of the system. 

WLM makes those decisions based on how the different workloads are performing 
relative to their goals. But of course if the goals and importances are set 
"poorly" the results may not be ideal. 

The CPU Critical attribute can be set for service classes to keep a service 
class at a dispatching priority above all SCs at a lower importance. Well 
mostly... except for promotion that can happen for a variety of reasons to help 
resolve things like resource contention. But CPU Critical is generally not the 
first tool to be pulled out of the tool box.

If you want a (relatively) quick overview of WLM, you might check the 
presentations section of our website: https://pivotor.com/content.html You 
might want to click on the topic view button at the top and scroll down to the 
WLM section. The "Introdution to the WLM" presentation might be a good place to 
start. "WLM’s Algorithms – How WLM Works" might be another good early one to 
look at. It sounds like "Revisiting Goals over Time" might also be of interest. 
:)

Scott Chapman


On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 08:33:14 +0400, Peter  wrote:

>Hello
>
>I must confess that I am not a WLM expert but I just wanted to understand
>how this works
>
>In our environment we have few started where their Service class(Velocity)
>and Dispatch priority keeps changing on its own.
>
>Based on what constraint or definition in WLM the service class and
>Dispatch priority are dynamic? Keeping a static value would be right thing
>to do ?
>Sometimes those task loop and freezes the entire zOS. So If I make those
>started task Service class and DP static then will it help consuming the
>zOS memory due to looping?
>
>Sorry if this question are basic and lacks some information
>
>Any suggestions or advice are much appreciated
>
>Peter
>
>--
>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

Re: WLM for z/OSMF

[Mike Shorkend]

Also keep in mind that a large proportion of IZUSVR1 CPU consumption is
ZIIP eligible.
I prefer to send ZIIP heavy workloads to a dedicated service class(mixing
workloads might cause a ZIIP eligible workload to get denied ZIIP because
the service class it is associated with is meeting its goals because of
othernon-ZIIP workloads).
On a busy development LPAR I use a service class with importance 5 and
execution velocity of 30 and it performs well.
Also keep in mind the HONORPRIORITY setting for the service class which can
cause/prevent  spill over of ZIIP eligible work to general
usage processors.

On Fri, 12 May 2023 at 11:57, Ed Jaffe  wrote:

> On 5/11/2023 1:08 PM, Colin Paice wrote:
> > We are setting up z/OSMF for the 1st time (can't really avoid it any
> > longer). I've noticed that the IZUANG1 task has a default WLM SC of
> SYSSTC
> > (which is probably OK), but the IZUSVR1 task has a default of
> Discretionary
> > - which is probably NOT OK. Do you have a recommendation for a functional
> > SC that won't eat the LPAR alive?
>
> We have no default Service Class for STC and no rules for IZU* address
> spaces and yet our IZUSVR1 address space runs in SYSSTC under z/OS V2R5.
>
>
> --
> Phoenix Software International
> Edward E. Jaffe
> 831 Parkview Drive North
> El Segundo, CA 90245
> https://www.phoenixsoftware.com/
>
>
>
> 
> This e-mail message, including any attachments, appended messages and the
> information contained therein, is for the sole use of the intended
> recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient or have otherwise
> received this email message in error, any use, dissemination, distribution,
> review, storage or copying of this e-mail message and the information
> contained therein is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended
> recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies
> of this email message and do not otherwise utilize or retain this email
> message or any or all of the information contained therein. Although this
> email message and any attachments or appended messages are believed to be
> free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system
> into
> which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient
> to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by the
> sender for any loss or damage arising in any way from its opening or use.
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>


-- 
Mike Shorkend
m...@shorkend.com
Tel: +972524208743





--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM for z/OSMF

[Ed Jaffe]

On 5/11/2023 1:08 PM, Colin Paice wrote:

We are setting up z/OSMF for the 1st time (can't really avoid it any
longer). I've noticed that the IZUANG1 task has a default WLM SC of SYSSTC
(which is probably OK), but the IZUSVR1 task has a default of Discretionary
- which is probably NOT OK. Do you have a recommendation for a functional
SC that won't eat the LPAR alive?


We have no default Service Class for STC and no rules for IZU* address 
spaces and yet our IZUSVR1 address space runs in SYSSTC under z/OS V2R5.



--
Phoenix Software International
Edward E. Jaffe
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
https://www.phoenixsoftware.com/



This e-mail message, including any attachments, appended messages and the
information contained therein, is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient or have otherwise
received this email message in error, any use, dissemination, distribution,
review, storage or copying of this e-mail message and the information
contained therein is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended
recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies
of this email message and do not otherwise utilize or retain this email
message or any or all of the information contained therein. Although this
email message and any attachments or appended messages are believed to be
free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system into
which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient
to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by the
sender for any loss or damage arising in any way from its opening or use.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM for z/OSMF

[Attila Fogarasi]

Discretionary probably is ok, remember that SVR1 is the server address
space which is just WAS and competes with other application regions like
CICS AOR and IMS regions.  ANG1 provides services to SVR1 for the
"application" being run in z/OSMF.  How to manage resource consumption and
priority is no different than for the other lpar workload, though the
customer base for z/OSMF being sysprogs may view it is much higher priority
:)  It's only the Angel task that is time critical, hence defaulting to
SYSSTC.

On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 6:09 AM Colin Paice  wrote:

> I was asked
>
> We are setting up z/OSMF for the 1st time (can't really avoid it any
> longer). I've noticed that the IZUANG1 task has a default WLM SC of SYSSTC
> (which is probably OK), but the IZUSVR1 task has a default of Discretionary
> - which is probably NOT OK. Do you have a recommendation for a functional
> SC that won't eat the LPAR alive?
>
> Does anyone have a recommendation for this?
>
> 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

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Pommier, Rex]

Woo-hoo!  Yes, the context came through.  :-)

Rex

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Bill Giannelli
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2023 5:11 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: WLM Couple dataset?

Hi Rex,
No worries, I want my commination coherent if I am to get the answers I need. 
Please let me know how this response comes thru to you.with the rest of the 
thread, or not?
thanks
Bill 

On Fri, 10 Mar 2023 16:50:28 +, Pommier, Rex  
wrote:

>Thanks, Matthew.  
>
>Bill, if my initial post asking you to stop deleting the context came across 
>as rude, I apologize.  I didn't mean it that way, I didn't realize the 
>listserv web site automatically whacked the earlier parts of the thread by 
>default.
>
>Rex
>
>-Original Message-
>From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On 
>Behalf Of Matthew Stitt
>Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 10:35 AM
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: WLM Couple dataset?
>
>I use the LISTSERV web site.  On the left there are two apostrophes (quote 
>marks).  Those will include the entire thread (so far).
>
>It is considered good practice to remove the IBM-MAIN stuff at the bottom.
>
>Matthew
>
>On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 18:33:08 -0500, Tony Harminc  wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 at 18:27, Bill Giannelli  wrote:
>>
>>> I am in the listserv web page. I do not see 3 dots above the send 
>>> button
>>>
>>
>>Sorry - my advice was for Gmail only. I never use the listserv page to 
>>post things, so can't help you. But surely you aren't the only one, so 
>>perhaps someone will chime in.
>>
>>Tony H.
>


--
The information contained in this message is confidential, protected from 
disclosure and may be legally privileged. If the reader of this message is not 
the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this 
message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, 
distribution, copying, or any action taken or action omitted in reliance on it, 
is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this 
message and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard 
copy format. Thank you.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Bill Giannelli]

Hi Rex,
No worries, I want my commination coherent if I am to get the answers I need. 
Please let me know how this response comes thru to you.with the rest of the 
thread, or not?
thanks
Bill 

On Fri, 10 Mar 2023 16:50:28 +, Pommier, Rex  
wrote:

>Thanks, Matthew.  
>
>Bill, if my initial post asking you to stop deleting the context came across 
>as rude, I apologize.  I didn't mean it that way, I didn't realize the 
>listserv web site automatically whacked the earlier parts of the thread by 
>default.
>
>Rex 
>
>-Original Message-
>From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
>Matthew Stitt
>Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 10:35 AM
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: WLM Couple dataset?
>
>I use the LISTSERV web site.  On the left there are two apostrophes (quote 
>marks).  Those will include the entire thread (so far).
>
>It is considered good practice to remove the IBM-MAIN stuff at the bottom.
>
>Matthew
>
>On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 18:33:08 -0500, Tony Harminc  wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 at 18:27, Bill Giannelli  wrote:
>>
>>> I am in the listserv web page. I do not see 3 dots above the send 
>>> button
>>>
>>
>>Sorry - my advice was for Gmail only. I never use the listserv page to 
>>post things, so can't help you. But surely you aren't the only one, so 
>>perhaps someone will chime in.
>>
>>Tony H.
>
>
>--
>The information contained in this message is confidential, protected from 
>disclosure and may be legally privileged. If the reader of this message is not 
>the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this 
>message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 
>disclosure, distribution, copying, or any action taken or action omitted in 
>reliance on it, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have 
>received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying 
>to this message and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in 
>electronic or hard copy format. Thank you.
>
>
>--
>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

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Pommier, Rex]

Thanks, Matthew.  

Bill, if my initial post asking you to stop deleting the context came across as 
rude, I apologize.  I didn't mean it that way, I didn't realize the listserv 
web site automatically whacked the earlier parts of the thread by default.

Rex 

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Matthew Stitt
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 10:35 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: WLM Couple dataset?

I use the LISTSERV web site.  On the left there are two apostrophes (quote 
marks).  Those will include the entire thread (so far).

It is considered good practice to remove the IBM-MAIN stuff at the bottom.

Matthew

On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 18:33:08 -0500, Tony Harminc  wrote:

>On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 at 18:27, Bill Giannelli  wrote:
>
>> I am in the listserv web page. I do not see 3 dots above the send 
>> button
>>
>
>Sorry - my advice was for Gmail only. I never use the listserv page to 
>post things, so can't help you. But surely you aren't the only one, so 
>perhaps someone will chime in.
>
>Tony H.


--
The information contained in this message is confidential, protected from 
disclosure and may be legally privileged. If the reader of this message is not 
the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this 
message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, 
distribution, copying, or any action taken or action omitted in reliance on it, 
is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this 
message and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard 
copy format. Thank you.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Matthew Stitt]

I use the LISTSERV web site.  On the left there are two apostrophes (quote 
marks).  Those will include the entire thread (so far).

It is considered good practice to remove the IBM-MAIN stuff at the bottom.

Matthew

On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 18:33:08 -0500, Tony Harminc  wrote:

>On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 at 18:27, Bill Giannelli  wrote:
>
>> I am in the listserv web page. I do not see 3 dots above the send button
>>
>
>Sorry - my advice was for Gmail only. I never use the listserv page to post
>things, so can't help you. But surely you aren't the only one, so perhaps
>someone will chime in.
>
>Tony H.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Allan Staller]

Classification: Confidential

Horse hockey

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Bill Giannelli
Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2023 3:52 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[CAUTION: This Email is from outside the Organization. Unless you trust the 
sender, Don’t click links or open attachments as it may be a Phishing email, 
which can steal your Information and compromise your Computer.]

we are being told by our managed service vendor they have to manually update 
the DR WLM Couple datasets. that they cant be mirrored..

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
::DISCLAIMER::

The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are confidential and intended 
for the named recipient(s) only. E-mail transmission is not guaranteed to be 
secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, 
destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or may contain viruses in transmission. 
The e mail and its contents (with or without referred errors) shall therefore 
not attach any liability on the originator or HCL or its affiliates. Views or 
opinions, if any, presented in this email are solely those of the author and 
may not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of HCL or its affiliates. Any 
form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, 
distribution and / or publication of this message without the prior written 
consent of authorized representative of HCL is strictly prohibited. If you have 
received this email in error please delete it and notify the sender 
immediately. Before opening any email and/or attachments, please check them for 
viruses and other defects.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Allan Staller]

Classification: Confidential

D XCF,COUPLE,TYPE=WLM

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Mike Schwab
Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2023 2:24 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[CAUTION: This Email is from outside the Organization. Unless you trust the 
sender, Don’t click links or open attachments as it may be a Phishing email, 
which can steal your Information and compromise your Computer.]

https://apc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ibm.com%2Fdocs%2Fen%2Fzos%2F2.4.0%3Ftopic%3Dcommand-displaying-workload-manager-information-wlm=05%7C01%7Callan.staller%40HCL.COM%7C385414192a814997965d08db20dc42cf%7C189de737c93a4f5a8b686f4ca9941912%7C0%7C0%7C638139902621389716%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C=NGfHTU6KKLJb5QDx5aaJdVSlWhlvyznKTTcJf9FHJ%2FM%3D=0

D WLM

On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 2:19 PM Bill Giannelli  wrote:
>
> where can I find what the WLM Couple dataset is?
> we need a policy updated and then the WLM Couple Dataset mirrored in our DR.
> thanks
> Bill
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send
> email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN



--
Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA
Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all?

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
::DISCLAIMER::

The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are confidential and intended 
for the named recipient(s) only. E-mail transmission is not guaranteed to be 
secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, 
destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or may contain viruses in transmission. 
The e mail and its contents (with or without referred errors) shall therefore 
not attach any liability on the originator or HCL or its affiliates. Views or 
opinions, if any, presented in this email are solely those of the author and 
may not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of HCL or its affiliates. Any 
form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, 
distribution and / or publication of this message without the prior written 
consent of authorized representative of HCL is strictly prohibited. If you have 
received this email in error please delete it and notify the sender 
immediately. Before opening any email and/or attachments, please check them for 
viruses and other defects.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Michael Babcock]

We re-INIT the CFRM, XCF, and LOGR at DR.   The only one we reuse is WLM.

On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 8:41 PM Gabriel Tully  wrote:

> Bill,
>
> IBM doesn't recommend mirroring the couple data sets [1]. There may not be
> serious ramifications for the WLM CDS, but it could be on the same volume
> with a more critical Sysplex CDS or CFRM CDS. The last time I asked IBM
> about mirroring CDSes a severe tone was employed to strongly suggest
> thinking twice about what was at risk.
>
> [1]
> https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.5.0?topic=recovery-planning-disaster-actions
>
> --
> Gabe Tully
>
>
> On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 16:20:05 -0600, Bill Giannelli 
> wrote:
>
> >not that makes sense to me...
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
-- 
Michael Babcock
OneMain Financial
z/OS Systems Programmer, Lead

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Gabriel Tully]

Bill,

IBM doesn't recommend mirroring the couple data sets [1]. There may not be 
serious ramifications for the WLM CDS, but it could be on the same volume with 
a more critical Sysplex CDS or CFRM CDS. The last time I asked IBM about 
mirroring CDSes a severe tone was employed to strongly suggest thinking twice 
about what was at risk.

[1] 
https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.5.0?topic=recovery-planning-disaster-actions

-- 
Gabe Tully


On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 16:20:05 -0600, Bill Giannelli  
wrote:

>not that makes sense to me...

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Tom Marchant]

On the listserv web page, to the left of the top of the place where you type 
your reply, there is a large double quote. Click on that.

--
Tom Marchant

On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 18:33:08 -0500, Tony Harminc  wrote:

>On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 at 18:27, Bill Giannelli  wrote:
>
>> I am in the listserv web page. I do not see 3 dots above the send button

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Tony Harminc]

On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 at 18:27, Bill Giannelli  wrote:

> I am in the listserv web page. I do not see 3 dots above the send button
>

Sorry - my advice was for Gmail only. I never use the listserv page to post
things, so can't help you. But surely you aren't the only one, so perhaps
someone will chime in.

Tony H.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Bill Giannelli]

I am in the listserv web page. I do not see 3 dots above the send button

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Tony Harminc]

On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 at 18:14, Bill Giannelli  wrote:

> I apologize, it is inadvertent.
> How do I include the whole thread?
>

In Gmail (which you seem to be using), after you click Reply, click the
three little dots icon that's just above the Send button at the bottom.

But please do trim your threads intelligently - don't go to the other
extreme of including the entire text of a long thread!

Tony H.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Bill Giannelli]

I apologize, it is inadvertent.
How do I include the whole thread?

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Pommier, Rex]

Bill,

And your post doesn't make sense to anybody.  Please stop stripping all the 
context from your posts.  

Rex

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Bill Giannelli
Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2023 4:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: WLM Couple dataset?

not that makes sense to me...

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
The information contained in this message is confidential, protected from 
disclosure and may be legally privileged. If the reader of this message is not 
the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this 
message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, 
distribution, copying, or any action taken or action omitted in reliance on it, 
is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this 
message and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard 
copy format. Thank you.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Bill Giannelli]

not that makes sense to me...

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Gibney, Dave]

Do they give a reason? Or explanation?

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On
> Behalf Of Bill Giannelli
> Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2023 1:52 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM Couple dataset?
> > 
> we are being told by our managed service vendor they have to manually
> update the DR WLM Couple datasets. that they cant be mirrored..
> 
> --
> 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

Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Bill Giannelli]

we are being told by our managed service vendor they have to manually update 
the DR WLM Couple datasets. that they cant be mirrored..

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Michael Babcock]

We use Global Mirror to keep our WLM dataset in sync to our DR system.

On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 2:49 PM Bill Giannelli 
wrote:

> yes I understand that. but we had policy definitions in PROD that were not
> copied over to DR.
> We thought the WLM Couple dataset could be mirrored in our DR.
> We are being told they have to be manually kept in synch now.
> thanks
> Bill
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
-- 
Michael Babcock
OneMain Financial
z/OS Systems Programmer, Lead

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Bill Giannelli]

yes I understand that. but we had policy definitions in PROD that were not 
copied over to DR.
We thought the WLM Couple dataset could be mirrored in our DR.
We are being told they have to be manually kept in synch now.
thanks
Bill

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Dave Jousma]

On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 14:34:03 -0600, Bill Giannelli  
wrote:

>thank you both!!
>
>--
>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Just an FYI, you do not need to know the couple dataset name for WLM to update 
the WLM policy.   You do it through the panels.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Bill Giannelli]

thank you both!!

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Mickey Virdi]

On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 14:23:43 -0600, Mike Schwab  wrote:

>https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?topic=command-displaying-workload-manager-information-wlm
>
>D WLM
>
>On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 2:19 PM Bill Giannelli  wrote:
>>
>> where can I find what the WLM Couple dataset is?
>> we need a policy updated and then the WLM Couple Dataset mirrored in our DR.
>> thanks
>> Bill
>>
>> --
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
>
>
>-- 
>Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA
>Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all?
>
>--
>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN




D XCF,CPL,TYPE=WLM  will also show which CDS is in use

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Couple dataset?

[Mike Schwab]

https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?topic=command-displaying-workload-manager-information-wlm

D WLM

On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 2:19 PM Bill Giannelli  wrote:
>
> where can I find what the WLM Couple dataset is?
> we need a policy updated and then the WLM Couple Dataset mirrored in our DR.
> thanks
> Bill
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN



-- 
Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA
Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all?

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Service Classes

[Cheryl Watson]

This is usually very misunderstood. It's really the number of service class 
PERIODS WITH velocity or response GOALS (i.e. with an importance level). The 
reason is because WLM on each system will wake up every ten seconds (that's an 
eternity in a z14!) to see if goals are being missed. It starts with 
importance=1 periods and works its way down. If there are too many periods, the 
ones at a lower importance level will never get adjusted and you might have 
some less important periods exceeding their goals while more important periods 
are missing their goals. I was able to include both my own recommendations and 
other IBM recommendations when I was on an IBM residency working for Frank Kyne 
and writing a really neat Redbook called System z Mean Time to Recovery Best 
Practices - SG24-7816 - http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redbooks/pdfs/sg247816.pdf. 
I consider it one of the most useful Redbooks I own. It contains best practices 
for reducing start up and shut down of z/OS and each of the major subsystems. I 
especially like the section that explains the IPL process.

As an example, here are recommendations from section 5.2 of the Redbook:

General WLM recommendations:

1. Keep your WLM policy as simple as possible. Service classes with only a 
single period are usually better than two periods, and two periods are almost 
always better than three periods. Of course there are exceptions to every 
recommendation, but this provides a good place to start.

2. Use response time goals, especially percentile response time goals, when you 
can. Only use velocity goals when transactions goals are not supported, or for 
test subsystems. Specifically, you should use percentile response time goals 
for DB2, CICS, IMS, and WebSphere.

3. Remember to review and possibly adjust velocity goals after any hardware 
upgrade. 

4. If you have a very large number of classification rules, consider their 
sequence carefully. The rules are applied serially, starting with the first 
one, until a match is found. 

5. Do not have too many service class periods with non-discretionary goals. A 
good guideline is to have less than 30 non-discretionary service class periods 
that are active on any one system. [Cheryl note: ON ANY ONE SYSTEM! If a 
service class is active on SYSA and not on SYSB, you don't need to count that 
on SYSB.]

6. Any service class with velocity goals should have multiple address spaces 
assigned to it so that it can collect meaningful statistics. If you need more 
granularity for reporting reasons, assign the address spaces to report classes.

7. If you have not reviewed your WLM policy in several years, take the time to 
do it now. Several enhancements to WLM have been made that can simplify your 
policy, or improve response time for transactions.

Cheers!
Cheryl

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Service Classes

[Mark Jacobs]

We're in the software developmental business and one of our customers reported 
a problem when 100 WLM service classes were defined and active. We needed to 
reproduce their environment to test a fix. Once I read the advice "don't do 
it", I used one of our stand-alone z/OS systems to model the customers 
environment so as not to impact other activities in our main sysplex.

Mark Jacobs

Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email.

GPG Public Key - 
https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get=markjac...@protonmail.com

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐

On Tuesday, February 16th, 2021 at 9:38 AM, Martin Packer 
 wrote:

> We normally put it this way:
>
> Too many ACTIVE service class periods with too little work in each of them
>
> makes it difficult for WLM to be helpful.
>
> Cheers, Martin
>
> Martin Packer
>
> Systems Investigator & Performance Troubleshooter, IBM
>
> +44-7802-245-584
>
> email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com
>
> Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker
>
> Blog: https://mainframeperformancetopics.com
>
> Mainframe, Performance, Topics Podcast Series (With Marna Walle):
>
> https://anchor.fm/marna-walle
>
> Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu_65HaYgksbF6Q8SQ4oOvA
>
> From: "Edgington, Jerry" jerry.edging...@westernsouthernlife.com
>
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>
> Date: 16/02/2021 13:21
>
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: WLM Service Classes
>
> Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>
> Mark,
>
> IBM recommends < 30 Service Classes. WLM has a limited amount of time to
>
> cycle through the WLM service classes, and if > 30 service classes, IBM
>
> says WLM can't complete it in time.
>
> Jerry
>
> -Original Message-
>
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU On Behalf
>
> Of Mark Jacobs
>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 8:17 AM
>
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>
> Subject: WLM Service Classes
>
> This message was sent from an external source outside of Western &
>
> Southern's network. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
>
> recognize the sender and know the contents are safe.
>
> I seem to recall that there's a recommendation not to exceed a certain
>
> number of defined WLM service classes for reasons. Is my recollection
>
> correct?
>
> Mark Jacobs
>
> Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email.
>
> GPG Public Key -
>
> https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get=markjac...@protonmail.com
>
>
> 
>
> 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
>
> Unless stated otherwise above:
>
> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
>
> 741598.
>
> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
>
>
> 
>
> 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

Re: WLM Service Classes

[Martin Packer]

We normally put it this way:

Too many ACTIVE service class periods with too little work in each of them 
makes it difficult for WLM to be helpful.

Cheers, Martin

Martin Packer

Systems Investigator & Performance Troubleshooter, IBM

+44-7802-245-584

email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com

Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker

Blog: https://mainframeperformancetopics.com

Mainframe, Performance, Topics Podcast Series (With Marna Walle): 
https://anchor.fm/marna-walle

Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu_65HaYgksbF6Q8SQ4oOvA



From:   "Edgington, Jerry" 
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date:   16/02/2021 13:21
Subject:    [EXTERNAL] Re: WLM Service Classes
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List 



Mark,

IBM recommends < 30 Service Classes.  WLM has a limited amount of time to 
cycle through the WLM service classes, and if > 30 service classes, IBM 
says WLM can't complete it in time.

Jerry 

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf 
Of Mark Jacobs
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 8:17 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: WLM Service Classes

This message was sent from an external source outside of Western & 
Southern's network. Do not click links or open attachments unless you 
recognize the sender and know the contents are safe.


I seem to recall that there's a recommendation not to exceed a certain 
number of defined WLM service classes for *reasons*. Is my recollection 
correct?

Mark Jacobs

Sent from [ProtonMail](
https://protonmail.com 
), Swiss-based encrypted email.

GPG Public Key - 
https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get=markjac...@protonmail.com 


--
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




Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Service Classes

[Mark Jacobs]

Thanks. Exactly what I was looking for.

Mark Jacobs

Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email.

GPG Public Key - 
https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get=markjac...@protonmail.com

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐

On Tuesday, February 16th, 2021 at 8:20 AM, Edgington, Jerry 
 wrote:

> Mark,
>
> IBM recommends < 30 Service Classes. WLM has a limited amount of time to 
> cycle through the WLM service classes, and if > 30 service classes, IBM says 
> WLM can't complete it in time.
>
> Jerry
>
> -Original Message-
>
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU On Behalf Of 
> Mark Jacobs
>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 8:17 AM
>
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>
> Subject: WLM Service Classes
>
> This message was sent from an external source outside of Western & Southern's 
> network. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the 
> sender and know the contents are safe.
>
> I seem to recall that there's a recommendation not to exceed a certain number 
> of defined WLM service classes for reasons. Is my recollection correct?
>
> Mark Jacobs
>
> Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email.
>
> GPG Public Key - 
> https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get=markjac...@protonmail.com
>
> 
>
> 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

Re: WLM Service Classes

[Edgington, Jerry]

Mark,

IBM recommends < 30 Service Classes.  WLM has a limited amount of time to cycle 
through the WLM service classes, and if > 30 service classes, IBM says WLM 
can't complete it in time.

Jerry 

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Mark Jacobs
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 8:17 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: WLM Service Classes

This message was sent from an external source outside of Western & Southern's 
network. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender 
and know the contents are safe.


I seem to recall that there's a recommendation not to exceed a certain number 
of defined WLM service classes for *reasons*. Is my recollection correct?

Mark Jacobs

Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com), Swiss-based encrypted email.

GPG Public Key - 
https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get=markjac...@protonmail.com

--
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

Re: WLM query

[Sean Gleann]

Thank you, Massimo - that solved the problem.

'Resource Group' is something I've never used before - my WLM expertise
stopped developing about 15 years ago & ISTR the concept just didn't exist
back then.

Regards
Sean

On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 at 09:22, Massimo Biancucci  wrote:

> Sean,
>
> AFAIK WLM runs and manages continuously the workload setting DP as needed
> (if there's no CPU contention ... so no problems).
>
> Its main task is to make all the AS as fast as they can.
>
> If there's available CPU for everybody every AS will take as much as it
> can.
>
> If you want a single (or group of) AS to be limited you can use a capping
> based on a Resource Group (WLM menu option 3) to set a maximum of MSUs
> available for that group.
> You have to use a classification to assign the AS to that RG too.
>
> Hope this helps.
> Best regards.
> Max
>
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >
> Mail
> priva di virus. www.avast.com
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> Il giorno lun 24 ago 2020 alle ore 10:10 Sean Gleann <
> sean.gle...@gmail.com>
> ha scritto:
>
> > Is there a way to force a maximum CPU% utilisation for a specific task?
> >
> > Please correct me if I'm wrong here, but it is my understanding that WLM
> > only really starts 'doing it's stuff' when the system as a whole is
> heavily
> > loaded.
> > For example:
> >  - If my system is running at 80%, and a new incoming task wants 50% CPU,
> > then it is allowed to run, but it only gets a maximum of 20% (obviously),
> > and WLM starts switching task dispatch priorities around to try and
> > maintain the service levels defined in the policy.
> >  - On the other hand, if the system is only 20% busy and the 50%-usage
> task
> > comes along, then it is allowed to run and WLM just lets it happen
> >
> > What I want to do is to limit specific tasks to a maximum CPU% value no
> > matter what the overall loading is.
> >
> > Regards
> > Sean
> >
> > --
> > 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

Re: WLM query

[Massimo Biancucci]

Sean,

AFAIK WLM runs and manages continuously the workload setting DP as needed
(if there's no CPU contention ... so no problems).

Its main task is to make all the AS as fast as they can.

If there's available CPU for everybody every AS will take as much as it can.

If you want a single (or group of) AS to be limited you can use a capping
based on a Resource Group (WLM menu option 3) to set a maximum of MSUs
available for that group.
You have to use a classification to assign the AS to that RG too.

Hope this helps.
Best regards.
Max


Mail
priva di virus. www.avast.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

Il giorno lun 24 ago 2020 alle ore 10:10 Sean Gleann 
ha scritto:

> Is there a way to force a maximum CPU% utilisation for a specific task?
>
> Please correct me if I'm wrong here, but it is my understanding that WLM
> only really starts 'doing it's stuff' when the system as a whole is heavily
> loaded.
> For example:
>  - If my system is running at 80%, and a new incoming task wants 50% CPU,
> then it is allowed to run, but it only gets a maximum of 20% (obviously),
> and WLM starts switching task dispatch priorities around to try and
> maintain the service levels defined in the policy.
>  - On the other hand, if the system is only 20% busy and the 50%-usage task
> comes along, then it is allowed to run and WLM just lets it happen
>
> What I want to do is to limit specific tasks to a maximum CPU% value no
> matter what the overall loading is.
>
> Regards
> Sean
>
> --
> 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

Re: WLM Guidance/Suggestions ! ! !

[Andreas von Imhof]

What Kees has written is correct. My rule of thumb is the faster the CP the 
lower the velocity. With CPU upgrades I typically revise the velocity down.
It would help us if you would post a snapshot of the SUM report in RMF III, 
then we have all the info and not just a tiny bit and we can help you more 
accuately.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Guidance/Suggestions ! ! !

[Vernooij, Kees (ITOP NM) - KLM]

Your problem is probably caused by the faster CPs, combined with the definition 
of Velocity.
- Velocity in fact means that a job receives nn% of what it wants. CPU hungry 
jobs will therefor get much CPU if their imp os high enough.
- On the 5 CP machine, the jobs probably did not 'monopolize' all the engines, 
leaving room for other jobs, while on the 2 CP machine they are now able to 
monopolize it, leaving nothing for other jobs.

If the jobs are important, you can start with keeping their imp, but lowering 
their velocity, until they receive what you want them to, leaving capacity for 
other jobs.

Kees.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Pesce, Andy
Sent: 30 January 2020 15:24
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: WLM Guidance/Suggestions ! ! !

I have recently replace an IBM-2828 that had 5 GP's to a newer model machine 
IBM-3907-ZR1 with only 2 GP's.
Does anyone know of a guide or paper or something that might have some things 
to look at or modify when reducing the number of GP's.
I have 2 classes of service for my batch jobs.One runs with a velocity and 
importance of "2".   This is a grouping we have called our
critical path jobs that are time sensitive and they must run.Then I have 
another class that runs with a velocity, but has an importance of "3".
This grouping is for jobs that are not time sensitive, but they do need to run 
and get service.

The behavior that I am seeing is that the class that has the IMP-2 dominates 
the box until they are finished.  The other jobs will sit in the
initiator for 30mins up to an hour and I never see any service being consumed.  
 Then once the IMP-2 jobs finish, then the other jobs
will take off and get service.

My goal is to have the IMP-2 take 80-90%, but give the IMP-3 a small chunk of 
service.   The only way that I have been able to come close
is to make both classes the same importance level.

Any thoughts, documents, white papers, experiences with dealing with the 
reduction of GP's would be greatly appreciated.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: 
http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and 
privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the 
addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be 
disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this 
e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have 
received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail, and delete this message.

Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its 
employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of 
this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt.
Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch 
Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered number 
33014286


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Guidance/Suggestions ! ! !

[Edward Finnell]

Cheryl hasn't piped in for awhile. Widely published and referenced tuning 
metrics and Goal Tender software available at www.watsonwalker.com


In a message dated 1/30/2020 10:36:33 PM Central Standard Time, 
and...@blackhillsoftware.com writes:
>From my experience on systems with limited CPs (albeit some time ago):

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Guidance/Suggestions ! ! !

[Andrew Rowley]

From my experience on systems with limited CPs (albeit some time ago):

- Velocities need to be reviewed. Achievable velocities might be much 
lower than on a system with more CPs.


- It is critical that goals are achievable. The goal tells WLM when it 
can take resources away from high importance work to allow lower 
importance work to run. If high importance work isn't achieving its 
velocity goal, WLM will not allow lower importance work to take CPU time 
from higher importance work.


- Related to the previous point, it is better to under specify 
velocities than over specify. Specify the minimum velocity required to 
complete the work in time.


- I had good success with multi period batch service classes. This 
allowed small lower importance jobs (small enough that they wouldn't 
significantly impact more important work) to complete while the 
important work was prioritized over larger jobs.


- Multi period service classes made response time goals practical for 
the first periods and reduced the need to figure out velocities.


- Discretionary worked great for batch work *BUT* you need to have 
enough work running in discretionary. If you have e.g. 5% of work in 
discretionary it's likely to get starved. If it's 20-30% i.e. your CPU 
intensive batch, it will run and simplify WLM management -  WLM knows 
exactly where the CPU resources should come from to handle workload 
fluctuations.


- WLM also had a function where it would cap higher importance work that 
was over achieving goals to allocate more CPU to discretionary. This 
helped control high importance, CPU intensive work that WLM had 
difficulty managing with dispatching priorities. I think there have been 
changes in this area so I don't know whether this is still applicable.


I think my service classes for batch ended up something like:

Low importance batch:
Period 1: Long enough for small jobs to complete, response time goal.
Period 2: Discretionary

High Importance Batch:
Period 1: Small jobs, response time goal
Period 2: Most other work response time or velocity goal (can't remember)
Period 3: Monsters, discretionary.

This worked well.

High importance batch jobs in discretionary is a bit controversial, but 
it worked great for me on a system with limited CPs. I don't know why 
(maybe the MTTW dispatching in discretionary?) but when I implemented it 
the overnight batch run time reduced 15-20%.


I hope this helps,

Andrew Rowley


On 31/01/2020 1:23 am, Pesce, Andy wrote:

I have recently replace an IBM-2828 that had 5 GP's to a newer model machine 
IBM-3907-ZR1 with only 2 GP's.
Does anyone know of a guide or paper or something that might have some things 
to look at or modify when reducing the number of GP's.
I have 2 classes of service for my batch jobs.One runs with a velocity and importance 
of "2".   This is a grouping we have called our
critical path jobs that are time sensitive and they must run.Then I have another 
class that runs with a velocity, but has an importance of "3".
This grouping is for jobs that are not time sensitive, but they do need to run 
and get service.

The behavior that I am seeing is that the class that has the IMP-2 dominates 
the box until they are finished.  The other jobs will sit in the
initiator for 30mins up to an hour and I never see any service being consumed.  
 Then once the IMP-2 jobs finish, then the other jobs
will take off and get service.

My goal is to have the IMP-2 take 80-90%, but give the IMP-3 a small chunk of 
service.   The only way that I have been able to come close
is to make both classes the same importance level.

Any thoughts, documents, white papers, experiences with dealing with the 
reduction of GP's would be greatly appreciated.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
Andrew Rowley
Black Hill Software

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Guidance/Suggestions ! ! !

[Martin Packer]

For a start you need to review your goals. You mentioned Velocity - and 
that would be a prime one where some adjustment will be required. Check 
the velocity attained as it varies over a period of time and adjust the 
goal to be close to it (unless you want to give it a bonus or punish it).

If you really want to dole out specific proportions of the CPU you're 
probably talking about Resource Groups, though I'd not be that keen on 
that approach.

Cheers, Martin

Martin Packer

zChampion, Systems Investigator & Performance Troubleshooter, IBM

+44-7802-245-584

email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com

Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker

Blog: 
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker

Podcast Series (With Marna Walle): https://developer.ibm.com/tv/mpt/or 
  
https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/mainframe-performance-topics/id1127943573?mt=2


Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu_65HaYgksbF6Q8SQ4oOvA



From:   "Pesce, Andy" 
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date:   30/01/2020 14:24
Subject:[EXTERNAL] WLM Guidance/Suggestions ! ! !
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List 



I have recently replace an IBM-2828 that had 5 GP's to a newer model 
machine IBM-3907-ZR1 with only 2 GP's.
Does anyone know of a guide or paper or something that might have some 
things to look at or modify when reducing the number of GP's.
I have 2 classes of service for my batch jobs.One runs with a velocity 
and importance of "2".   This is a grouping we have called our
critical path jobs that are time sensitive and they must run.Then I 
have another class that runs with a velocity, but has an importance of 
"3".
This grouping is for jobs that are not time sensitive, but they do need to 
run and get service.

The behavior that I am seeing is that the class that has the IMP-2 
dominates the box until they are finished.  The other jobs will sit in the
initiator for 30mins up to an hour and I never see any service being 
consumed.   Then once the IMP-2 jobs finish, then the other jobs
will take off and get service.

My goal is to have the IMP-2 take 80-90%, but give the IMP-3 a small chunk 
of service.   The only way that I have been able to come close
is to make both classes the same importance level.

Any thoughts, documents, white papers, experiences with dealing with the 
reduction of GP's would be greatly appreciated.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN




Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Exit Samples

[Salva Carrasco]

Have you try DGAXWLMX?

What do you want to do with the exit?

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Service Definition Formatter

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 15:31:37 +, Herring, Bobby wrote:

>I have used IBM's WLM Service Definition Formatter spreadsheet tool for years. 
>It's just an Excel spreadsheet with lots of macros under the covers.
>
>It was a download from the WLM web page.
>
>Mine is an older version and has quit working. The last time it worked 
>correctly was last fall.
>
>I went to download a new copy but that download no longer works.
>
>Has anyone else tried downloading this tool and was it successful?
>
>Page:  https://www.ibm.com/it-infrastructure/z/zos-workload-management
>
>Bottom of the page under Service Definition Formatter
>
I had to open "Tools for WLM Analysis", then I can DL from :
ftp://public.dhe.ibm.com/eserver/zseries/zos/wlm/SetUpSvDef.V502.exe

504 $ cksum SetUp*
2530193812 207378 SetUpSvDef.V502.exe
507 $ file SetUp*
SetUpSvDef.V502.exe: PE32 executable for MS Windows (GUI) Intel 80386 32-bit

But many enterprises dread ".exe", fearing an intrusion.

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Service Definition Formatter

[Herring, Bobby]

I tried Chrome, IE and Firefox. Also WS FTP LE and FileZilla.

Thanks, Bobby

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Alan Young
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 4:42 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] WLM Service Definition Formatter

Yes, it is a 207,378 byte file. I was able to extract the spreadsheet, open it 
and load a definition. Is there an anti-virus or malware detection product 
blocking the download? Are you able to try to download with a ftp client or a 
different browser?

-Original Message-
>From: "Herring, Bobby" mailto:bherr...@txfb-ins.com>>
>Sent: Jun 12, 2019 12:06 PM
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU<mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>
>Subject: Re: WLM Service Definition Formatter
>
>I had someone at our help desk look at it and he thought his download worked, 
>too. But the file was 0kb.
>
>Did you get an actual exe file to download?
>
>I can download all the other four files on the site, just not that one.
>
>Thanks, Bobby
>
>From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
>mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>> On Behalf Of Alan 
>Young
>Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 11:21 AM
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU<mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>
>Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] WLM Service Definition Formatter
>
>The download works here. I do notice it is a ftp link and not an http(s) link. 
>Is it possible your organization is blocking ftp access?
>
>
>-Original Message-
>>From: "Herring, Bobby" 
>>mailto:bherr...@txfb-ins.com<mailto:bherr...@txfb-ins.com%3cmailto:bherr...@txfb-ins.com>>>
>>Sent: Jun 12, 2019 8:31 AM
>>To: 
>>IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU<mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU<mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU%3cmailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>>
>>Subject: WLM Service Definition Formatter
>>
>>I have used IBM's WLM Service Definition Formatter spreadsheet tool for 
>>years. It's just an Excel spreadsheet with lots of macros under the covers.
>>
>>It was a download from the WLM web page.
>>
>>Mine is an older version and has quit working. The last time it worked 
>>correctly was last fall.
>>
>>I went to download a new copy but that download no longer works.
>>
>>Has anyone else tried downloading this tool and was it successful?
>>
>>Page: 
>>https://www.ibm.com/it-infrastructure/z/zos-workload-management<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/8rylCJ6XrycQ69ACOA5ng?domain=ibm.com><https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/EdeDCNk1yLFMKQ4ir-KHp?domain=ibm.com<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/8rylCJ6XrycQ69ACOA5ng?domain=ibm.com>>
>>
>>Bottom of the page under Service Definition Formatter
>>
>>Bobby Herring
>>Texas Farm Bureau Insurance
>>Waco, TX 76710
>>[http://www.txfb-ins.com/TFBICImages/email.gif<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/9bKkCKrEv1crX7MSoGMFF?domain=txfb-ins.com><https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/VbwzCOY9zMh2VgWu5qDsw?domain=txfb-ins.com<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/9bKkCKrEv1crX7MSoGMFF?domain=txfb-ins.com>>]
>>WWW.TXFB-INS.COM<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/oI0DCL9Bw7cYGBwtK4wrr?domain=txfb-ins.com><https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/MJ53CPNJA7T5Y2pHB-iPL?domain=txfb-ins.com<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/v6g0CM8Bxws6wBkfOVBNb?domain=txfb-ins.com>><http://www.txfb-ins.com<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/gPnxCNk1yLFMOkPU8qeLf?domain=txfb-ins.com><https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/svQJCQWLBnFNGK0FQ1PO-?domain=txfb-ins.com<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/gPnxCNk1yLFMOkPU8qeLf?domain=txfb-ins.com>>>
>>
>>CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The foregoing message (including attachments) is 
>>covered by the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. sections 
>>2510-2521, and is CONFIDENTIAL. If you believe that it has been sent to you 
>>in error, do not read it. If you are not the intended recipient, you are 
>>hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying 
>>of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that 
>>you have received the message in error, then delete it. Thank you.
>>
>>--
>>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>>send email to 
>>lists...@listserv.ua.edu<mailto:lists...@listserv.ua.edu<mailto:lists...@listserv.ua.edu%3cmailto: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<mailto:lists...@listserv.ua.edu&l

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: WLM Service Definition Formatter

[Sankaranarayanan, Vignesh]

If you're up for it, there's this site where you can upload your WLM and you'll 
get a formatted copy --> https://www.pivotor.com/wlm2html.html

– Vignesh
Mainframe Infrastructure

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Alan Young
Sent: 12 June 2019 22:42
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: WLM Service Definition Formatter

Yes, it is a 207,378 byte file. I was able to extract the spreadsheet, open it 
and load a definition. Is there an anti-virus or malware detection product 
blocking the download? Are you able to try to download with a ftp client or a 
different browser?

-Original Message-
>From: "Herring, Bobby" 
>Sent: Jun 12, 2019 12:06 PM
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>Subject: Re: WLM Service Definition Formatter
>
>I had someone at our help desk look at it and he thought his download worked, 
>too. But the file was 0kb.
>
>Did you get an actual exe file to download?
>
>I can download all the other four files on the site, just not that one.
>
>Thanks, Bobby
>
>From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On
>Behalf Of Alan Young
>Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 11:21 AM
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] WLM Service Definition Formatter
>
>The download works here. I do notice it is a ftp link and not an http(s) link. 
>Is it possible your organization is blocking ftp access?
>
>
>-Original Message-
>>From: "Herring, Bobby"
>>mailto:bherr...@txfb-ins.com>>
>>Sent: Jun 12, 2019 8:31 AM
>>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU<mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>
>>Subject: WLM Service Definition Formatter
>>
>>I have used IBM's WLM Service Definition Formatter spreadsheet tool for 
>>years. It's just an Excel spreadsheet with lots of macros under the covers.
>>
>>It was a download from the WLM web page.
>>
>>Mine is an older version and has quit working. The last time it worked 
>>correctly was last fall.
>>
>>I went to download a new copy but that download no longer works.
>>
>>Has anyone else tried downloading this tool and was it successful?
>>
>>Page:
>>https://www.ibm.com/it-infrastructure/z/zos-workload-management>//protect-us.mimecast.com/s/EdeDCNk1yLFMKQ4ir-KHp?domain=ibm.com>
>>
>>Bottom of the page under Service Definition Formatter
>>
>>Bobby Herring
>>Texas Farm Bureau Insurance
>>Waco, TX 76710
>>[http://www.txfb-ins.com/TFBICImages/email.gif<https://protect-us.mime
>>cast.com/s/VbwzCOY9zMh2VgWu5qDsw?domain=txfb-ins.com>]
>>WWW.TXFB-INS.COM<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/MJ53CPNJA7T5Y2pHB-i
>>PL?domain=txfb-ins.com><http://www.txfb-ins.com<https://protect-us.mim
>>ecast.com/s/svQJCQWLBnFNGK0FQ1PO-?domain=txfb-ins.com>>
>>
>>CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The foregoing message (including attachments) is 
>>covered by the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. sections 
>>2510-2521, and is CONFIDENTIAL. If you believe that it has been sent to you 
>>in error, do not read it. If you are not the intended recipient, you are 
>>hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying 
>>of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that 
>>you have received the message in error, then delete it. Thank you.
>>
>>--
>>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send
>>email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu<mailto: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<mailto:lists...@listserv.ua.edu> with
>the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>[http://www.txfb-ins.com/TFBICImages/email.gif]
>WWW.TXFB-INS.COM<http://www.txfb-ins.com>
>
>CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The foregoing message (including attachments) is 
>covered by the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. sections 
>2510-2521, and is CONFIDENTIAL. If you believe that it has been sent to you in 
>error, do not read it. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby 
>notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this 
>communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have 
>received the message in error, then delete it. Thank you.
>
>--
>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send
>email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: I

Re: WLM Service Definition Formatter

[Alan Young]

Yes, it is a 207,378 byte file. I was able to extract the spreadsheet, open it 
and load a definition. Is there an anti-virus or malware detection product 
blocking the download? Are you able to try to download with a ftp client or a 
different browser?

-Original Message-
>From: "Herring, Bobby" 
>Sent: Jun 12, 2019 12:06 PM
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>Subject: Re: WLM Service Definition Formatter
>
>I had someone at our help desk look at it and he thought his download worked, 
>too. But the file was 0kb.
>
>Did you get an actual exe file to download?
>
>I can download all the other four files on the site, just not that one.
>
>Thanks, Bobby
>
>From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
>Alan Young
>Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 11:21 AM
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] WLM Service Definition Formatter
>
>The download works here. I do notice it is a ftp link and not an http(s) link. 
>Is it possible your organization is blocking ftp access?
>
>
>-Original Message-
>>From: "Herring, Bobby" mailto:bherr...@txfb-ins.com>>
>>Sent: Jun 12, 2019 8:31 AM
>>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU<mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>
>>Subject: WLM Service Definition Formatter
>>
>>I have used IBM's WLM Service Definition Formatter spreadsheet tool for 
>>years. It's just an Excel spreadsheet with lots of macros under the covers.
>>
>>It was a download from the WLM web page.
>>
>>Mine is an older version and has quit working. The last time it worked 
>>correctly was last fall.
>>
>>I went to download a new copy but that download no longer works.
>>
>>Has anyone else tried downloading this tool and was it successful?
>>
>>Page: 
>>https://www.ibm.com/it-infrastructure/z/zos-workload-management<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/EdeDCNk1yLFMKQ4ir-KHp?domain=ibm.com>
>>
>>Bottom of the page under Service Definition Formatter
>>
>>Bobby Herring
>>Texas Farm Bureau Insurance
>>Waco, TX 76710
>>[http://www.txfb-ins.com/TFBICImages/email.gif<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/VbwzCOY9zMh2VgWu5qDsw?domain=txfb-ins.com>]
>>WWW.TXFB-INS.COM<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/MJ53CPNJA7T5Y2pHB-iPL?domain=txfb-ins.com><http://www.txfb-ins.com<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/svQJCQWLBnFNGK0FQ1PO-?domain=txfb-ins.com>>
>>
>>CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The foregoing message (including attachments) is 
>>covered by the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. sections 
>>2510-2521, and is CONFIDENTIAL. If you believe that it has been sent to you 
>>in error, do not read it. If you are not the intended recipient, you are 
>>hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying 
>>of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that 
>>you have received the message in error, then delete it. Thank you.
>>
>>--
>>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>>send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu<mailto: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<mailto:lists...@listserv.ua.edu> with 
>the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>[http://www.txfb-ins.com/TFBICImages/email.gif]
>WWW.TXFB-INS.COM<http://www.txfb-ins.com>
>
>CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The foregoing message (including attachments) is 
>covered by the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. sections 
>2510-2521, and is CONFIDENTIAL. If you believe that it has been sent to you in 
>error, do not read it. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby 
>notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this 
>communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have 
>received the message in error, then delete it. Thank you.
>
>--
>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

Re: WLM Service Definition Formatter

[Herring, Bobby]

I had someone at our help desk look at it and he thought his download worked, 
too. But the file was 0kb.

Did you get an actual exe file to download?

I can download all the other four files on the site, just not that one.

Thanks, Bobby

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Alan Young
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 11:21 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] WLM Service Definition Formatter

The download works here. I do notice it is a ftp link and not an http(s) link. 
Is it possible your organization is blocking ftp access?


-Original Message-
>From: "Herring, Bobby" mailto:bherr...@txfb-ins.com>>
>Sent: Jun 12, 2019 8:31 AM
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>Subject: WLM Service Definition Formatter
>
>I have used IBM's WLM Service Definition Formatter spreadsheet tool for years. 
>It's just an Excel spreadsheet with lots of macros under the covers.
>
>It was a download from the WLM web page.
>
>Mine is an older version and has quit working. The last time it worked 
>correctly was last fall.
>
>I went to download a new copy but that download no longer works.
>
>Has anyone else tried downloading this tool and was it successful?
>
>Page: 
>https://www.ibm.com/it-infrastructure/z/zos-workload-management
>
>Bottom of the page under Service Definition Formatter
>
>Bobby Herring
>Texas Farm Bureau Insurance
>Waco, TX 76710
>[http://www.txfb-ins.com/TFBICImages/email.gif]
>WWW.TXFB-INS.COM>
>
>CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The foregoing message (including attachments) is 
>covered by the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. sections 
>2510-2521, and is CONFIDENTIAL. If you believe that it has been sent to you in 
>error, do not read it. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby 
>notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this 
>communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have 
>received the message in error, then delete it. Thank you.
>
>--
>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
[http://www.txfb-ins.com/TFBICImages/email.gif]
WWW.TXFB-INS.COM

CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The foregoing message (including attachments) is 
covered by the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. sections 
2510-2521, and is CONFIDENTIAL. If you believe that it has been sent to you in 
error, do not read it. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby 
notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have 
received the message in error, then delete it. Thank you.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM Service Definition Formatter

[Alan Young]

The download works here. I do notice it is a ftp link and not an http(s) link. 
Is it possible your organization is blocking ftp access?


-Original Message-
>From: "Herring, Bobby" 
>Sent: Jun 12, 2019 8:31 AM
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>Subject: WLM Service Definition Formatter
>
>I have used IBM's WLM Service Definition Formatter spreadsheet tool for years. 
>It's just an Excel spreadsheet with lots of macros under the covers.
>
>It was a download from the WLM web page.
>
>Mine is an older version and has quit working. The last time it worked 
>correctly was last fall.
>
>I went to download a new copy but that download no longer works.
>
>Has anyone else tried downloading this tool and was it successful?
>
>Page:  https://www.ibm.com/it-infrastructure/z/zos-workload-management
>
>Bottom of the page under Service Definition Formatter
>
>Bobby Herring
>Texas Farm Bureau Insurance
>Waco, TX 76710
>[http://www.txfb-ins.com/TFBICImages/email.gif]
>WWW.TXFB-INS.COM
>
>CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The foregoing message (including attachments) is 
>covered by the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. sections 
>2510-2521, and is CONFIDENTIAL. If you believe that it has been sent to you in 
>error, do not read it. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby 
>notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this 
>communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have 
>received the message in error, then delete it. Thank you.
>
>--
>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

Re: WLM?

[Tom Marchant]

On Fri, 4 May 2018 12:19:14 -0500, Horst Sinram wrote:

>a daemon is a long running task, like an STC.

I wondered about that, but noticed that the Infoprint manual suggests 
using what Anne had described.

>A single period velocity goal is the preferred goal type for a daemon.

It might make sense to use SYSSTC if it is known to use few resources.

-- 
Tom Marchant

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM?

[Horst Sinram]

Anne,
a daemon is a long running task, like an STC. It makes very little sense to use 
multi period goals (with short durations) because it will eventually fall 
through to later periods. A single period velocity goal is the preferred goal 
type for a daemon. 
Only if the daemon would be at risk to loop you would consider a multi period 
goal using a *really huge* duration value. Even in that latter case a resource 
group would be a better safety net.
Horst Sinram - STSM, IBM z/OS Workload and Capacity Management

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM?

[Gerhard Adam]

Bear in mind that regardless of the goals (in other words you don't know that a 
velocity of 40% won't give you a response time of .5 seconds).

The essential metric is the importance level.  In period 3, you are essentially 
saying that when your system gets busy, Infoprint simply isn't that important 
to help meet its goals.  The change from Importance 3 to Importance 5 shifts 
the degree to which WLM will help the service class period in meetings its 
goals.

Adam

Sent from my iPhone

> On May 3, 2018, at 12:27 PM, David Betten <bet...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> I would suggest looking at an RMF workload activity report to see what the
> workload is doing now rather than arbitrarily changing period durations and
> goals.  The workload activity report can tell you the average response time
> and transactions rates, along with the service units and velocity as it's
> performing now.  Based on that, you should then be able to set some
> reasonable period durations and goals.
> 
> 
> Have a nice day,
> Dave Betten
> z/OS Performance Specialist
> Cloud and Systems Performance
> IBM Corporation
> email:  bet...@us.ibm.com
> 1-720-396-3882
> 
> IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> wrote on
> 05/03/2018 03:14:40 PM:
> 
>> From: "Adams, Anne (DTI)" <anne.ad...@state.de.us>
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Date: 05/03/2018 03:15 PM
>> Subject: Re: WLM?
>> Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>
>> 
>> Omg  ... my bad. I get it now. I'll just go over and stand by the
>> truck. Thanks.
>> 
>> Anne R. Adams, CISSP
>> DTI, Systems Engineering
>> Lead Mainframe Services Analyst
>> 302.739.9500
>> 
>> We support the mainframe, it just works.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On
>> Behalf Of Jackson, Rob
>> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 2:58 PM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: WLM?
>> 
>> On our tiny mainframe 800 SUs is still only .03 CPU seconds, which
>> is not insignificant, but is really not that much CPU time.  800 SUs
>> is just not that much CPU.
>> 
>> First Tennessee Bank
>> Mainframe Technical Support
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On
>> Behalf Of Adams, Anne (DTI)
>> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 2:35 PM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: WLM?
>> 
>> [External Email]
>> 
>> I understand the words in your response but I still don't
>> understand. How is it possible that it takes over 800 SUs to respond
>> to and Infoprint daemon? What am I missing here?
>> 
>> Anne R. Adams, CISSP
>> DTI, Systems Engineering
>> Lead Mainframe Services Analyst
>> 302.739.9500
>> 
>> We support the mainframe, it just works.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On
>> Behalf Of Gerhard Adam
>> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 2:20 PM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: WLM?
>> 
>> The first two periods are ALWAYS used, but the duration limits how
>> long the work stays there before it transitions into the next period.
>> 
>> So, if most of our work is in period 3, it's because it has exceeded
>> the 800 SU's that have been designated in the previous periods.
>> 
>> Adam
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> ] On Behalf Of Adams, Anne (DTI)
>> Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2018 10:24 AM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: WLM?
>> 
>> Question for any WLM/performance geniuses,
>> 
>> Our Inforprint processes suffer when the system gets slow and
>> therefore print slows. The Infoprint manual suggests changing the
>> WLM Service Class for these processes thusly:
>> 
>> * Service Class OMVSDMN - OMVS Print Daemons
>> 
>>  Base goal:
>>  CPU Critical = NOI/O Priority Group = NORMAL
>> 
>>#  Duration   Imp  Goal description
>>-  -  -
>>1  200380% complete within 00:00:00.500
>>2  600460% complete within 00:00:01.000
>>3 5Execution velocity of 40
>> 
>> It's that last period that has us confused. It appears that the
>> first two periods are never attempted and everything falls i

Re: WLM?

[David Betten]

I would suggest looking at an RMF workload activity report to see what the
workload is doing now rather than arbitrarily changing period durations and
goals.  The workload activity report can tell you the average response time
and transactions rates, along with the service units and velocity as it's
performing now.  Based on that, you should then be able to set some
reasonable period durations and goals.


Have a nice day,
Dave Betten
z/OS Performance Specialist
Cloud and Systems Performance
IBM Corporation
email:  bet...@us.ibm.com
1-720-396-3882

IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> wrote on
05/03/2018 03:14:40 PM:

> From: "Adams, Anne (DTI)" <anne.ad...@state.de.us>
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Date: 05/03/2018 03:15 PM
> Subject: Re: WLM?
> Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>
>
> Omg  ... my bad. I get it now. I'll just go over and stand by the
> truck. Thanks.
>
> Anne R. Adams, CISSP
> DTI, Systems Engineering
> Lead Mainframe Services Analyst
> 302.739.9500
>
> We support the mainframe, it just works.
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On
> Behalf Of Jackson, Rob
> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 2:58 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM?
>
> On our tiny mainframe 800 SUs is still only .03 CPU seconds, which
> is not insignificant, but is really not that much CPU time.  800 SUs
> is just not that much CPU.
>
> First Tennessee Bank
> Mainframe Technical Support
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On
> Behalf Of Adams, Anne (DTI)
> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 2:35 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM?
>
> [External Email]
>
> I understand the words in your response but I still don't
> understand. How is it possible that it takes over 800 SUs to respond
> to and Infoprint daemon? What am I missing here?
>
> Anne R. Adams, CISSP
> DTI, Systems Engineering
> Lead Mainframe Services Analyst
> 302.739.9500
>
> We support the mainframe, it just works.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On
> Behalf Of Gerhard Adam
> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 2:20 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM?
>
> The first two periods are ALWAYS used, but the duration limits how
> long the work stays there before it transitions into the next period.
>
> So, if most of our work is in period 3, it's because it has exceeded
> the 800 SU's that have been designated in the previous periods.
>
> Adam
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> ] On Behalf Of Adams, Anne (DTI)
> Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2018 10:24 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: WLM?
>
> Question for any WLM/performance geniuses,
>
> Our Inforprint processes suffer when the system gets slow and
> therefore print slows. The Infoprint manual suggests changing the
> WLM Service Class for these processes thusly:
>
> * Service Class OMVSDMN - OMVS Print Daemons
>
>   Base goal:
>   CPU Critical = NOI/O Priority Group = NORMAL
>
> #  Duration   Imp  Goal description
> -  -  -
> 1  200380% complete within 00:00:00.500
> 2  600460% complete within 00:00:01.000
> 3 5Execution velocity of 40
>
> It's that last period that has us confused. It appears that the
> first two periods are never attempted and everything falls into the
> third one (which is not what we want, we want the first one). Should
> the third one be more like the first two?
>
> Anne R. Adams, CISSP
> DTI, Systems Engineering
> Lead Mainframe Services Analyst
> 302.739.9500
>
> We support the mainframe, it just works.
>
> --
> 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
> FIRST TENNESSEE
>
> Confidentiality notice:
> This e-mail message, including any attachment

Re: WLM?

[Adams, Anne (DTI)]

Omg  ... my bad. I get it now. I'll just go over and stand by the truck. Thanks.

Anne R. Adams, CISSP
DTI, Systems Engineering
Lead Mainframe Services Analyst 
302.739.9500

We support the mainframe, it just works.



-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On Behalf Of 
Jackson, Rob
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 2:58 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM?

On our tiny mainframe 800 SUs is still only .03 CPU seconds, which is not 
insignificant, but is really not that much CPU time.  800 SUs is just not that 
much CPU.

First Tennessee Bank
Mainframe Technical Support

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On Behalf Of 
Adams, Anne (DTI)
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 2:35 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM?

[External Email]

I understand the words in your response but I still don't understand. How is it 
possible that it takes over 800 SUs to respond to and Infoprint daemon? What am 
I missing here?

Anne R. Adams, CISSP
DTI, Systems Engineering
Lead Mainframe Services Analyst
302.739.9500

We support the mainframe, it just works.



-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On Behalf Of 
Gerhard Adam
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 2:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM?

The first two periods are ALWAYS used, but the duration limits how long the 
work stays there before it transitions into the next period.

So, if most of our work is in period 3, it's because it has exceeded the 800 
SU's that have been designated in the previous periods.

Adam

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Adams, Anne (DTI)
Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2018 10:24 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: WLM?

Question for any WLM/performance geniuses,

Our Inforprint processes suffer when the system gets slow and therefore print 
slows. The Infoprint manual suggests changing the WLM Service Class for these 
processes thusly:

* Service Class OMVSDMN - OMVS Print Daemons

  Base goal:
  CPU Critical = NOI/O Priority Group = NORMAL

#  Duration   Imp  Goal description
-  -  -
1  200380% complete within 00:00:00.500
2  600460% complete within 00:00:01.000
3 5Execution velocity of 40

It's that last period that has us confused. It appears that the first two 
periods are never attempted and everything falls into the third one (which is 
not what we want, we want the first one). Should the third one be more like the 
first two?

Anne R. Adams, CISSP
DTI, Systems Engineering
Lead Mainframe Services Analyst
302.739.9500

We support the mainframe, it just works.

--
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 FIRST TENNESSEE

Confidentiality notice: 
This e-mail message, including any attachments, may contain legally privileged 
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient(s), or 
the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this message to the intended 
recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or 
copying of this e-mail message is strictly prohibited. If you have received 
this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete this 
e-mail message from your computer.

--
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

Re: WLM?

[Jackson, Rob]

On our tiny mainframe 800 SUs is still only .03 CPU seconds, which is not 
insignificant, but is really not that much CPU time.  800 SUs is just not that 
much CPU.

First Tennessee Bank
Mainframe Technical Support

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On Behalf Of 
Adams, Anne (DTI)
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 2:35 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM?

[External Email]

I understand the words in your response but I still don't understand. How is it 
possible that it takes over 800 SUs to respond to and Infoprint daemon? What am 
I missing here?

Anne R. Adams, CISSP
DTI, Systems Engineering
Lead Mainframe Services Analyst
302.739.9500

We support the mainframe, it just works.



-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On Behalf Of 
Gerhard Adam
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 2:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM?

The first two periods are ALWAYS used, but the duration limits how long the 
work stays there before it transitions into the next period.

So, if most of our work is in period 3, it's because it has exceeded the 800 
SU's that have been designated in the previous periods.

Adam

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Adams, Anne (DTI)
Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2018 10:24 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: WLM?

Question for any WLM/performance geniuses,

Our Inforprint processes suffer when the system gets slow and therefore print 
slows. The Infoprint manual suggests changing the WLM Service Class for these 
processes thusly:

* Service Class OMVSDMN - OMVS Print Daemons

  Base goal:
  CPU Critical = NOI/O Priority Group = NORMAL

#  Duration   Imp  Goal description
-  -  -
1  200380% complete within 00:00:00.500
2  600460% complete within 00:00:01.000
3 5Execution velocity of 40

It's that last period that has us confused. It appears that the first two 
periods are never attempted and everything falls into the third one (which is 
not what we want, we want the first one). Should the third one be more like the 
first two?

Anne R. Adams, CISSP
DTI, Systems Engineering
Lead Mainframe Services Analyst
302.739.9500

We support the mainframe, it just works.

--
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
FIRST TENNESSEE

Confidentiality notice: 
This e-mail message, including any attachments, may contain legally privileged 
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient(s), or 
the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this message to the intended 
recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or 
copying of this e-mail message is strictly prohibited. If you have received 
this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete this 
e-mail message from your computer.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM?

[Adams, Anne (DTI)]

I understand the words in your response but I still don't understand. How is it 
possible that it takes over 800 SUs to respond to and Infoprint daemon? What am 
I missing here?

Anne R. Adams, CISSP
DTI, Systems Engineering
Lead Mainframe Services Analyst 
302.739.9500

We support the mainframe, it just works.



-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On Behalf Of 
Gerhard Adam
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 2:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM?

The first two periods are ALWAYS used, but the duration limits how long the 
work stays there before it transitions into the next period.

So, if most of our work is in period 3, it's because it has exceeded the 800 
SU's that have been designated in the previous periods.

Adam

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Adams, Anne (DTI)
Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2018 10:24 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: WLM?

Question for any WLM/performance geniuses,

Our Inforprint processes suffer when the system gets slow and therefore print 
slows. The Infoprint manual suggests changing the WLM Service Class for these 
processes thusly:

* Service Class OMVSDMN - OMVS Print Daemons

  Base goal:
  CPU Critical = NOI/O Priority Group = NORMAL  

#  Duration   Imp  Goal description 
-  -  - 
1  200380% complete within 00:00:00.500 
2  600460% complete within 00:00:01.000 
3 5Execution velocity of 40 

It's that last period that has us confused. It appears that the first two 
periods are never attempted and everything falls into the third one (which is 
not what we want, we want the first one). Should the third one be more like the 
first two?

Anne R. Adams, CISSP
DTI, Systems Engineering
Lead Mainframe Services Analyst
302.739.9500

We support the mainframe, it just works.

--
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

Re: WLM?

[Tom Marchant]

On Thu, 3 May 2018 17:23:52 +, Adams, Anne (DTI) wrote:

>Our Inforprint processes suffer when the system gets slow and therefore 
>print slows. The Infoprint manual suggests changing the WLM Service Class 
>for these processes thusly:
>
>* Service Class OMVSDMN - OMVS Print Daemons   
>  
>  Base goal:
>  CPU Critical = NOI/O Priority Group = NORMAL  
>
>#  Duration   Imp  Goal description 
>-  -  - 
>1  200380% complete within 00:00:00.500 
>2  600460% complete within 00:00:01.000 
>3 5Execution velocity of 40 

200 or 800 service units isn't very much, so you drop quickly to period 3. 
You might want to play with those durations, and perhaps adjust the response 
time goal as well. If you increase the durations to 2000 and 6000, those 
response times might not be reasonable.

-- 
Tom Marchant

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM?

[Gerhard Adam]

BTW, the reason your Infoprint work suffers is most likely due to it having
an Importance level of 5.  If you make that higher, then it should ensure
that Infoprint gets serviced by WLM to ensure its goals are being met
[regardless of the velocity or response time settings].

Adam

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Adams, Anne (DTI)
Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2018 10:24 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: WLM?

Question for any WLM/performance geniuses,

Our Inforprint processes suffer when the system gets slow and therefore
print slows. The Infoprint manual suggests changing the WLM Service Class
for these processes thusly:

* Service Class OMVSDMN - OMVS Print Daemons

  Base goal:
  CPU Critical = NOI/O Priority Group = NORMAL  

#  Duration   Imp  Goal description 
-  -  - 
1  200380% complete within 00:00:00.500 
2  600460% complete within 00:00:01.000 
3 5Execution velocity of 40 

It's that last period that has us confused. It appears that the first two
periods are never attempted and everything falls into the third one (which
is not what we want, we want the first one). Should the third one be more
like the first two?

Anne R. Adams, CISSP
DTI, Systems Engineering
Lead Mainframe Services Analyst
302.739.9500

We support the mainframe, it just works.

--
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

Re: WLM?

[Gerhard Adam]

The first two periods are ALWAYS used, but the duration limits how long the
work stays there before it transitions into the next period.

So, if most of our work is in period 3, it's because it has exceeded the 800
SU's that have been designated in the previous periods.

Adam

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Adams, Anne (DTI)
Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2018 10:24 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: WLM?

Question for any WLM/performance geniuses,

Our Inforprint processes suffer when the system gets slow and therefore
print slows. The Infoprint manual suggests changing the WLM Service Class
for these processes thusly:

* Service Class OMVSDMN - OMVS Print Daemons

  Base goal:
  CPU Critical = NOI/O Priority Group = NORMAL  

#  Duration   Imp  Goal description 
-  -  - 
1  200380% complete within 00:00:00.500 
2  600460% complete within 00:00:01.000 
3 5Execution velocity of 40 

It's that last period that has us confused. It appears that the first two
periods are never attempted and everything falls into the third one (which
is not what we want, we want the first one). Should the third one be more
like the first two?

Anne R. Adams, CISSP
DTI, Systems Engineering
Lead Mainframe Services Analyst
302.739.9500

We support the mainframe, it just works.

--
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

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Martin Packer]

Likewise SMF 30.

Cheers, Martin

Martin Packer

zChampion, Systems Investigator & Performance Troubleshooter, IBM

+44-7802-245-584

email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com

Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker

Blog: 
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker

Podcast Series (With Marna Walle): https://developer.ibm.com/tv/mpt/or 
  
https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/mainframe-performance-topics/id1127943573?mt=2


Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu_65HaYgksbF6Q8SQ4oOvA



From:   Tom Marchant <000a2a8c2020-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date:   06/04/2018 16:10
Subject:        Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>



On Fri, 6 Apr 2018 06:05:03 -0700, Gerhard Adam wrote:

>If we display the address space, then only the address space service 
class 
>and dispatching priority should be shown.  If those are different, then 
it 
>suggests a problem with the display.

The display should also indicate whether WLM considers the address space 
to 
be server address space. If it is, it is not managed by service class, but 
to 
meet the goals defined for the work that the server is processing.

-- 
Tom Marchant

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN




Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Tom Marchant]

On Fri, 6 Apr 2018 06:05:03 -0700, Gerhard Adam wrote:

>If we display the address space, then only the address space service class 
>and dispatching priority should be shown.  If those are different, then it 
>suggests a problem with the display.

The display should also indicate whether WLM considers the address space to 
be server address space. If it is, it is not managed by service class, but to 
meet the goals defined for the work that the server is processing.

-- 
Tom Marchant

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Gerhard Adam]

Agreed.  That's not a problem and with multiple service classes, one would 
expect multiple dispatching priorities to be assigned to the enclaves.

However, that suggests that when the address space is displayed, such 
considerations shouldn't matter.  We aren't displaying the enclave or any other 
unit of work.  If we display the address space, then only the address space 
service class and dispatching priority should be shown.  If those are 
different, then it suggests a problem with the display.

Adam

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Gabriel Tully
Sent: Friday, April 6, 2018 4:51 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

But the address space can be servicing multiple enclaves with different service 
classes.  Granted that the DP is generally adjusted to the highest goal, but 
it's a moving target that would lead to inaccuracies.  

Thanks,
Gabe

--
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

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Vernooij, Kees (ITOPT1) - KLM]

Right, enclaves are independent units of work (running under pre-emptible 
SRBs), running with their own DP's, not the DP of the owning address space.

Kees.

Grtn,
Kees.


> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Gabriel Tully
> Sent: 06 April, 2018 13:57
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
> 
> Sorry, I spoke to soon.  I believe a new application environment address
> space is created to serve different service classes.
> 
> Thanks,
> Gabe
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: 
http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and 
privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the 
addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be 
disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this 
e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have 
received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail, and delete this message. 

Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its 
employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of 
this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt. 
Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch 
Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered number 
33014286



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Gabriel Tully]

Sorry, I spoke to soon.  I believe a new application environment address space 
is created to serve different service classes. 

Thanks,
Gabe

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Gabriel Tully]

But the address space can be servicing multiple enclaves with different service 
classes.  Granted that the DP is generally adjusted to the highest goal, but 
it's a moving target that would lead to inaccuracies.  

Thanks,
Gabe

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Gerhard Adam]

Thanks.  That helps.  However, doesn't that now suggest that the monitor's
display is actually wrong?  In other words, I would expect that if a monitor
was going to display a dispatching priority, it would also display the
service class with which it was associated.   It would be erroneous to
report on a service class and include a dispatching priority from a unit of
work that was running in a different service class.

I would expect more consistency than that.

Adam

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Martin Packer
Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 11:30 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

A DB2 WLM Stored Procedures server address space might well show up as being
in a service class. However, it - with its peers - supports a Service Class
/ Application Environment combination with a queue of work. 
The queue of work is EXCLUSIVELY  that with the Service Class and also the
Application Environment stated. The work executes at that Service Class' 
goal, not the server address space's Service Class goal.

(I wrote the Server Address Space Management chapters in the 2003/4 Redbook
"DB2 Stored Procedures: Through The Call And Beyond" - and did quite a bit
of research and client work in this very area.)

Cheers, Martin

Martin Packer

zChampion, Systems Investigator & Performance Troubleshooter, IBM

+44-7802-245-584

email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com

Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker

Blog: 
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker

Podcast Series (With Marna Walle): https://developer.ibm.com/tv/mpt/or 
  
https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/mainframe-performance-topics/id112794357
3?mt=2


Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu_65HaYgksbF6Q8SQ4oOvA



From:   Gerhard Adam <gada...@charter.net>
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date:   05/04/2018 18:49
Subject:Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>



I don't understand what you're trying to say.  Enclaves are certainly
assigned to service classes and can be reset or even quiesced.  From the ENC
display in SDSF

NAMESSType StatusSrvClass  Per
240002   STCINACTIVE SYSSTC 1
4C000C   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
700015   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1
380007   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
48000B   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1
5D   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
680013   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1
340006   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
44000A   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1
600011   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
640012   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1
49   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
58000F   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1
5C0010   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
6C0014   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1
3C0008   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
54000E   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1

I specifically don't understand what you mean by service classes not being 
applicable to server address spaces.   How can any address space that is 
associated with a service class, not be managed to that service class' 
goals? 

It would have to be identifiable as a separate internal service class, but
whatever the reason, it would have to be something that can be specifically
seen and tracked using the Type 99 data.

Adam

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Tom Marchant
Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 9:35 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 08:37:20 -0700, Gerhard Adam wrote:

>I don't see the relevance of enclaves or anything else in this.  It is 
>the service class period that matters.

That is only one factor. Transaction response time goals are another factor.
>
>So, if I assigned DB2, enclaves, TSO, and batch to the same service 
>class,

You don't assign an enclave to a service class. WLM defines enclaves based
upon transaction response time goals and the address spaces that are
involved in those transactions.

Those server address spaces are managed to meet the goals of the
transactions that include that address space in their enclave(s). This can
get complicated because many different transactions with different
requirements and involving different address spaces can be in different
enclaves that involve an address space.

WLM does not change the service class of those server address spaces, but it
no longer manages them based on their service class. It wouldn't make any
sense to change the service class of the DB2 region to match the service
class of a CICS transaction whose enclave requires the DP of the
DB2 region to change.

At least, that's the way I understand it.

>they should still all have the same dispatchin

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Martin Packer]

A DB2 WLM Stored Procedures server address space might well show up as 
being in a service class. However, it - with its peers - supports a 
Service Class / Application Environment combination with a queue of work. 
The queue of work is EXCLUSIVELY  that with the Service Class and also the 
Application Environment stated. The work executes at that Service Class' 
goal, not the server address space's Service Class goal.

(I wrote the Server Address Space Management chapters in the 2003/4 
Redbook "DB2 Stored Procedures: Through The Call And Beyond" - and did 
quite a bit of research and client work in this very area.)

Cheers, Martin

Martin Packer

zChampion, Systems Investigator & Performance Troubleshooter, IBM

+44-7802-245-584

email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com

Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker

Blog: 
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker

Podcast Series (With Marna Walle): https://developer.ibm.com/tv/mpt/or 
  
https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/mainframe-performance-topics/id1127943573?mt=2


Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu_65HaYgksbF6Q8SQ4oOvA



From:   Gerhard Adam <gada...@charter.net>
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date:   05/04/2018 18:49
Subject:Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>



I don't understand what you're trying to say.  Enclaves are certainly 
assigned to service classes and can be reset or even quiesced.  From the 
ENC display in SDSF

NAMESSType StatusSrvClass  Per
240002   STCINACTIVE SYSSTC 1
4C000C   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
700015   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1
380007   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
48000B   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1
5D   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
680013   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1
340006   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
44000A   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1
600011   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
640012   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1
49   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
58000F   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1
5C0010   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
6C0014   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1
3C0008   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
54000E   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1

I specifically don't understand what you mean by service classes not being 
applicable to server address spaces.   How can any address space that is 
associated with a service class, not be managed to that service class' 
goals? 

It would have to be identifiable as a separate internal service class, but 
whatever the reason, it would have to be something that can be 
specifically seen and tracked using the Type 99 data.

Adam

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
Behalf Of Tom Marchant
Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 9:35 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 08:37:20 -0700, Gerhard Adam wrote:

>I don't see the relevance of enclaves or anything else in this.  It is 
>the service class period that matters.

That is only one factor. Transaction response time goals are another 
factor.
>
>So, if I assigned DB2, enclaves, TSO, and batch to the same service 
>class,

You don't assign an enclave to a service class. WLM defines enclaves based 
upon transaction response time goals and the address spaces that are 
involved in those transactions.

Those server address spaces are managed to meet the goals of the 
transactions that include that address space in their enclave(s). This can 
get complicated because many different transactions with different 
requirements and involving different address spaces can be in different 
enclaves that involve an address space.

WLM does not change the service class of those server address spaces, but 
it no longer manages them based on their service class. It wouldn't make 
any sense to change the service class of the DB2 region to match the 
service class of a CICS transaction whose enclave requires the DP of the 
DB2 region to change.

At least, that's the way I understand it.

>they should still all have the same dispatching priority.  Workload 
>Manager doesn't care what type of work is in the service class, since 
>only the data related to the service class can be examined.

That's not true of server address spaces.

--
Tom Marchant

--
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




Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Gerhard Adam]

My dispute about the dispatching priorities comes from the Type 99 subtype 1
records.I've included the data from a report that shows that the
dispatching priority changes [including the projected changes afterwards]
are all based on the entire service class.  In this case, it clearly shows
that WLM is making the assessment and increasing the receiver's dispatching
priority.  You can see how WLM took the initial value at dispatching
priority 247 and combined that with 251 to arrive at the new projected
value.  Whether SRM is the specific mechanism that makes that change isn't
important here.


  167 233   ONLTST  1   1.00   1.27
270 PA - Receiver candidate selected

  167 233   SERVERS 1  11.66   2.59
308 PA - Donor period

  167 233   SERVERS 1  11.66   2.59
880 PA - Processor donor selected

  167 233   ONLTST  1   1.00   1.27
620 PA - Assess moving receiver up to
 
occupied priority
  167 233   ONLTST  1.96   1.25
750 PA - Increase receiver priority

  167 233   SERVERS 1  14.00   2.59
940 PA - Unchanged donor


 Priority Table Report:  Numbers as indicated are "at priority"

 DP AfterUtilizationCPU Samples Wait to   Cumulative
Utilization  Avg MTTW (SU/sec) Used (SU/sec)
  PA  Unbunching Init   Proj   Using   Delay  Using Ratio  Init
Projected  Achievable   Initial  Projected   Actual Projected
 

---

 19220.7%   20.7%  6  25 4 134.3%
134.3% .0%  3.6   3.6 8302.1   8302.1
 231 3.2%3.2%  0   1 1 113.6%
113.6% .0%  4.0   4.0  258.1258.1
 23361.8%   61.8% 45  24 1 110.4%
110.4% .0% 12.7  12.7 5930.0   5930.0
 235  .8% .8%  0   0 1  48.6%
48.6% .0%  6.3   6.30.8  0.8
 23712.0%   12.0%  4   2 1  47.8%
47.8% .0%  3.1   3.1 3838.9   3838.9
 239 3.9%3.9%  4   4 1  35.8%
35.8% .0%  3.1   3.1 2010.5   2010.5
 243  .6% .6%  0   0 1  31.9%
31.9% .0%  3.2   3.2   16.0 16.0
 245  .6% .6%  1   0 1  31.3%
31.3% .0%  2.6   2.6  359.4359.4
 247 7.0% .0%  4   5 1  30.7%
30.7%   30.7%  2.7   6.3 2910.4  0.0
 251 3.8%   10.8% 11   2 0  23.7%
30.7%   30.7% 12.7   6.7 2013.0   4923.4
 253  .1% .1%  0   0 0  19.9%
19.9%   19.9%  9.2   9.23.0  3.0
 25410.5%   10.5% 13   1 0  19.8%
19.8% .0%  3.0   3.0 4974.4   4974.4
 255 9.3%9.3%  8   0 0   9.3%
9.3% .0%  1.8   1.8 4215.4   4215.4

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Edgington, Jerry
Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 9:09 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

SRM is a component of the system control program. It determines which
address spaces, of all active address spaces, should be given access to
system resources and the rate at which each address space is allowed to
consume these resources.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Edgington, Jerry
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2018 12:06 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU <mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> 
Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSLTBW_2.1.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r1
.ieaw200/iea3w201112.htm

Dispatching Priority
 
SRM defines dispatching priority for service class periods. All address
spaces in a service class period have the same base dispatching priority.
Multiple service class periods may have the same base dispatching priority.
After a dispatching priority change, service class periods may be remapped
to different dispatching priorities such that there is an unoccupied
priority between each occupied priority. This process is referred to as
priority unbunching. 

The dispatching priority is recorded in the subtype 2 records.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Gerhard Adam
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2018 12:02 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU <mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> 
Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

I beg to differ, but do 

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Gerhard Adam]

I don't understand what you're trying to say.  Enclaves are certainly assigned 
to service classes and can be reset or even quiesced.  From the ENC display in 
SDSF

NAMESSType StatusSrvClass  Per
240002   STCINACTIVE SYSSTC 1
4C000C   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
700015   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1
380007   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
48000B   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1
5D   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
680013   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1
340006   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
44000A   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1
600011   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
640012   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1
49   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
58000F   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1
5C0010   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
6C0014   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1
3C0008   STCACTIVE   SRVHIM 1
54000E   STCINACTIVE SRVHIM 1

I specifically don't understand what you mean by service classes not being 
applicable to server address spaces.   How can any address space that is 
associated with a service class, not be managed to that service class' goals?  

It would have to be identifiable as a separate internal service class, but 
whatever the reason, it would have to be something that can be specifically 
seen and tracked using the Type 99 data.

Adam

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Tom Marchant
Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 9:35 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 08:37:20 -0700, Gerhard Adam wrote:

>I don't see the relevance of enclaves or anything else in this.  It is 
>the service class period that matters.

That is only one factor. Transaction response time goals are another factor.
>
>So, if I assigned DB2, enclaves, TSO, and batch to the same service 
>class,

You don't assign an enclave to a service class. WLM defines enclaves based upon 
transaction response time goals and the address spaces that are involved in 
those transactions.

Those server address spaces are managed to meet the goals of the transactions 
that include that address space in their enclave(s). This can get complicated 
because many different transactions with different requirements and involving 
different address spaces can be in different enclaves that involve an address 
space.

WLM does not change the service class of those server address spaces, but it no 
longer manages them based on their service class. It wouldn't make any sense to 
change the service class of the DB2 region to match the service class of a CICS 
transaction whose enclave requires the DP of the DB2 region to change.

At least, that's the way I understand it.

>they should still all have the same dispatching priority.  Workload 
>Manager doesn't care what type of work is in the service class, since 
>only the data related to the service class can be examined.

That's not true of server address spaces.

--
Tom Marchant

--
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

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Tom Marchant]

On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 08:37:20 -0700, Gerhard Adam wrote:

>I don't see the relevance of enclaves or anything else in this.  It is the
>service class period that matters.

That is only one factor. Transaction response time goals are another factor.
>
>So, if I assigned DB2, enclaves, TSO, and batch to the same service class,

You don't assign an enclave to a service class. WLM defines enclaves based 
upon transaction response time goals and the address spaces that are 
involved in those transactions.

Those server address spaces are managed to meet the goals of the 
transactions that include that address space in their enclave(s). This can 
get complicated because many different transactions with different 
requirements and involving different address spaces can be in different 
enclaves that involve an address space.

WLM does not change the service class of those server address spaces, 
but it no longer manages them based on their service class. It wouldn't 
make any sense to change the service class of the DB2 region to match 
the service class of a CICS transaction whose enclave requires the DP 
of the DB2 region to change.

At least, that's the way I understand it.

>they should still all have the same dispatching priority.  Workload Manager
>doesn't care what type of work is in the service class, since only the data
>related to the service class can be examined.

That's not true of server address spaces.

-- 
Tom Marchant

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Gerhard Adam]

Your documentation doesn't say what you say it does.  It explicitly
indicates that service class periods are associated with a dispatching
priority and does not say anything about differences within a service class.
In short, there is nothing to indicate that individual address spaces would
be subject to variations in dispatching priorities within a service class
period.

Adam

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Edgington, Jerry
Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 9:06 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSLTBW_2.1.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r1
.ieaw200/iea3w201112.htm

Dispatching Priority
 
SRM defines dispatching priority for service class periods. All address
spaces in a service class period have the same base dispatching priority.
Multiple service class periods may have the same base dispatching priority.
After a dispatching priority change, service class periods may be remapped
to different dispatching priorities such that there is an unoccupied
priority between each occupied priority. This process is referred to as
priority unbunching. 

The dispatching priority is recorded in the subtype 2 records.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Gerhard Adam
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2018 12:02 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

I beg to differ, but do you have documentation that supports what you say?
I have looked at a lot of type 99 records and WLM most certainly assigns the
DP.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 5, 2018, at 8:44 AM, Edgington, Jerry
<jerry.edging...@westernsouthernlife.com> wrote:
> 
> WLM uses the configuration to determine what SRVCLASS a specific piece of
work should be assigned upon initial job entry.  After that, WLM will
recommend to SRM how to adjust the dispatching priorities, based on
information provided in WLM definitions.  
> 
> WLM doesn't make changes to dispatching priorities, only SRM does that.
Also, SRVCLASS doesn't equal a specific dispatching priority.
> 
> SRM still works like it always has and WLM is way of defining "business
rules" to workload versus assigning specific dispatching priorities to the
workload.
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
> On Behalf Of Gerhard Adam
> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2018 11:37 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
> 
> I don't see the relevance of enclaves or anything else in this.  It is the
service class period that matters.
> 
> So, if I assigned DB2, enclaves, TSO, and batch to the same service class,
they should still all have the same dispatching priority.  Workload Manager
doesn't care what type of work is in the service class, since only the data
related to the service class can be examined.  
> 
> I would expect to see different dispatching priorities for the small
consumer, or an address space that has been temporarily promoted, but that
should only be short-term.  I would also expect to see different dispatching
priorities for the MTTW usage in discretionary.
> 
> However, I still don't see how a goal-managed service class period can
have different dispatching priorities.  It would render the goal
meaningless.
> 
> Adam
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
> On Behalf Of Martin Packer
> Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 7:14 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
> 
> There is also DIST and DBM1 in there. The action will be heavily 
> geared towards DBM1. (DIST has work in it mostly on Independent 
> Enclaves so relatively little of the work therein is at the address 
> space's DP.)
> 
> Cheers, Martin
> 
> Martin Packer
> 
> zChampion, Systems Investigator & Performance Troubleshooter, IBM
> 
> --
> 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

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email
to lists...@listserv.ua.edu

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Edgington, Jerry]

SRM is a component of the system control program. It determines which address 
spaces, of all active address spaces, should be given access to system 
resources and the rate at which each address space is allowed to consume these 
resources.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Edgington, Jerry
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2018 12:06 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSLTBW_2.1.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r1.ieaw200/iea3w201112.htm

Dispatching Priority
 
SRM defines dispatching priority for service class periods. All address spaces 
in a service class period have the same base dispatching priority. Multiple 
service class periods may have the same base dispatching priority. After a 
dispatching priority change, service class periods may be remapped to different 
dispatching priorities such that there is an unoccupied priority between each 
occupied priority. This process is referred to as priority unbunching. 

The dispatching priority is recorded in the subtype 2 records.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Gerhard Adam
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2018 12:02 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

I beg to differ, but do you have documentation that supports what you say?  I 
have looked at a lot of type 99 records and WLM most certainly assigns the DP.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 5, 2018, at 8:44 AM, Edgington, Jerry 
> <jerry.edging...@westernsouthernlife.com> wrote:
> 
> WLM uses the configuration to determine what SRVCLASS a specific piece of 
> work should be assigned upon initial job entry.  After that, WLM will 
> recommend to SRM how to adjust the dispatching priorities, based on 
> information provided in WLM definitions.  
> 
> WLM doesn't make changes to dispatching priorities, only SRM does that.  
> Also, SRVCLASS doesn't equal a specific dispatching priority.
> 
> SRM still works like it always has and WLM is way of defining "business 
> rules" to workload versus assigning specific dispatching priorities to the 
> workload.
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
> On Behalf Of Gerhard Adam
> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2018 11:37 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
> 
> I don't see the relevance of enclaves or anything else in this.  It is the 
> service class period that matters.
> 
> So, if I assigned DB2, enclaves, TSO, and batch to the same service class, 
> they should still all have the same dispatching priority.  Workload Manager 
> doesn't care what type of work is in the service class, since only the data 
> related to the service class can be examined.  
> 
> I would expect to see different dispatching priorities for the small 
> consumer, or an address space that has been temporarily promoted, but that 
> should only be short-term.  I would also expect to see different dispatching 
> priorities for the MTTW usage in discretionary.
> 
> However, I still don't see how a goal-managed service class period can have 
> different dispatching priorities.  It would render the goal meaningless.
> 
> Adam
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
> On Behalf Of Martin Packer
> Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 7:14 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
> 
> There is also DIST and DBM1 in there. The action will be heavily 
> geared towards DBM1. (DIST has work in it mostly on Independent 
> Enclaves so relatively little of the work therein is at the address 
> space's DP.)
> 
> Cheers, Martin
> 
> Martin Packer
> 
> zChampion, Systems Investigator & Performance Troubleshooter, IBM
> 
> --
> 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

--
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

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Edgington, Jerry]

https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSLTBW_2.1.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r1.ieaw200/iea3w201112.htm

Dispatching Priority
 
SRM defines dispatching priority for service class periods. All address spaces 
in a service class period have the same base dispatching priority. Multiple 
service class periods may have the same base dispatching priority. After a 
dispatching priority change, service class periods may be remapped to different 
dispatching priorities such that there is an unoccupied priority between each 
occupied priority. This process is referred to as priority unbunching. 

The dispatching priority is recorded in the subtype 2 records.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Gerhard Adam
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2018 12:02 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

I beg to differ, but do you have documentation that supports what you say?  I 
have looked at a lot of type 99 records and WLM most certainly assigns the DP.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 5, 2018, at 8:44 AM, Edgington, Jerry 
> <jerry.edging...@westernsouthernlife.com> wrote:
> 
> WLM uses the configuration to determine what SRVCLASS a specific piece of 
> work should be assigned upon initial job entry.  After that, WLM will 
> recommend to SRM how to adjust the dispatching priorities, based on 
> information provided in WLM definitions.  
> 
> WLM doesn't make changes to dispatching priorities, only SRM does that.  
> Also, SRVCLASS doesn't equal a specific dispatching priority.
> 
> SRM still works like it always has and WLM is way of defining "business 
> rules" to workload versus assigning specific dispatching priorities to the 
> workload.
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
> On Behalf Of Gerhard Adam
> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2018 11:37 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
> 
> I don't see the relevance of enclaves or anything else in this.  It is the 
> service class period that matters.
> 
> So, if I assigned DB2, enclaves, TSO, and batch to the same service class, 
> they should still all have the same dispatching priority.  Workload Manager 
> doesn't care what type of work is in the service class, since only the data 
> related to the service class can be examined.  
> 
> I would expect to see different dispatching priorities for the small 
> consumer, or an address space that has been temporarily promoted, but that 
> should only be short-term.  I would also expect to see different dispatching 
> priorities for the MTTW usage in discretionary.
> 
> However, I still don't see how a goal-managed service class period can have 
> different dispatching priorities.  It would render the goal meaningless.
> 
> Adam
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
> On Behalf Of Martin Packer
> Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 7:14 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
> 
> There is also DIST and DBM1 in there. The action will be heavily 
> geared towards DBM1. (DIST has work in it mostly on Independent 
> Enclaves so relatively little of the work therein is at the address 
> space's DP.)
> 
> Cheers, Martin
> 
> Martin Packer
> 
> zChampion, Systems Investigator & Performance Troubleshooter, IBM
> 
> --
> 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

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Gerhard Adam]

I beg to differ, but do you have documentation that supports what you say?  I 
have looked at a lot of type 99 records and WLM most certainly assigns the DP.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 5, 2018, at 8:44 AM, Edgington, Jerry 
> <jerry.edging...@westernsouthernlife.com> wrote:
> 
> WLM uses the configuration to determine what SRVCLASS a specific piece of 
> work should be assigned upon initial job entry.  After that, WLM will 
> recommend to SRM how to adjust the dispatching priorities, based on 
> information provided in WLM definitions.  
> 
> WLM doesn't make changes to dispatching priorities, only SRM does that.  
> Also, SRVCLASS doesn't equal a specific dispatching priority.
> 
> SRM still works like it always has and WLM is way of defining "business 
> rules" to workload versus assigning specific dispatching priorities to the 
> workload.
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
> Behalf Of Gerhard Adam
> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2018 11:37 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
> 
> I don't see the relevance of enclaves or anything else in this.  It is the 
> service class period that matters.
> 
> So, if I assigned DB2, enclaves, TSO, and batch to the same service class, 
> they should still all have the same dispatching priority.  Workload Manager 
> doesn't care what type of work is in the service class, since only the data 
> related to the service class can be examined.  
> 
> I would expect to see different dispatching priorities for the small 
> consumer, or an address space that has been temporarily promoted, but that 
> should only be short-term.  I would also expect to see different dispatching 
> priorities for the MTTW usage in discretionary.
> 
> However, I still don't see how a goal-managed service class period can have 
> different dispatching priorities.  It would render the goal meaningless.
> 
> Adam
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
> Behalf Of Martin Packer
> Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 7:14 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
> 
> There is also DIST and DBM1 in there. The action will be heavily geared 
> towards DBM1. (DIST has work in it mostly on Independent Enclaves so 
> relatively little of the work therein is at the address space's DP.)
> 
> Cheers, Martin
> 
> Martin Packer
> 
> zChampion, Systems Investigator & Performance Troubleshooter, IBM
> 
> --
> 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

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Edgington, Jerry]

WLM uses the configuration to determine what SRVCLASS a specific piece of work 
should be assigned upon initial job entry.  After that, WLM will recommend to 
SRM how to adjust the dispatching priorities, based on information provided in 
WLM definitions.  

WLM doesn't make changes to dispatching priorities, only SRM does that.  Also, 
SRVCLASS doesn't equal a specific dispatching priority.

SRM still works like it always has and WLM is way of defining "business rules" 
to workload versus assigning specific dispatching priorities to the workload.


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Gerhard Adam
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2018 11:37 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

I don't see the relevance of enclaves or anything else in this.  It is the 
service class period that matters.

So, if I assigned DB2, enclaves, TSO, and batch to the same service class, they 
should still all have the same dispatching priority.  Workload Manager doesn't 
care what type of work is in the service class, since only the data related to 
the service class can be examined.  

I would expect to see different dispatching priorities for the small consumer, 
or an address space that has been temporarily promoted, but that should only be 
short-term.  I would also expect to see different dispatching priorities for 
the MTTW usage in discretionary.

However, I still don't see how a goal-managed service class period can have 
different dispatching priorities.  It would render the goal meaningless.

Adam

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Martin Packer
Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 7:14 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

There is also DIST and DBM1 in there. The action will be heavily geared towards 
DBM1. (DIST has work in it mostly on Independent Enclaves so relatively little 
of the work therein is at the address space's DP.)

Cheers, Martin

Martin Packer

zChampion, Systems Investigator & Performance Troubleshooter, IBM

--
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

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Gerhard Adam]

I don't see the relevance of enclaves or anything else in this.  It is the
service class period that matters.

So, if I assigned DB2, enclaves, TSO, and batch to the same service class,
they should still all have the same dispatching priority.  Workload Manager
doesn't care what type of work is in the service class, since only the data
related to the service class can be examined.  

I would expect to see different dispatching priorities for the small
consumer, or an address space that has been temporarily promoted, but that
should only be short-term.  I would also expect to see different dispatching
priorities for the MTTW usage in discretionary.

However, I still don't see how a goal-managed service class period can have
different dispatching priorities.  It would render the goal meaningless.

Adam

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Martin Packer
Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 7:14 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

There is also DIST and DBM1 in there. The action will be heavily geared
towards DBM1. (DIST has work in it mostly on Independent Enclaves so
relatively little of the work therein is at the address space's DP.)

Cheers, Martin

Martin Packer

zChampion, Systems Investigator & Performance Troubleshooter, IBM

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Gerhard Adam]

While multiple periods certainly makes sense, the idea that different 
dispatching priorities exist within a single period service class doesn't.

Workload manager adjusts the dispatching priority of an entire service class, 
both in terms of "unbunching" and in the algorithms used to assess the goals.  
To have individual units of work within a service class have different 
dispatching priorities renders any measurement meaningless.  In other words, a 
service class could be meeting its goals simply because one unit of work has a 
higher priority while everything else suffers.

Whether it is an enclave or an application's environment, presumably they would 
be classified into a unique service class in order to have a different 
dispatching priority.  

Adam

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Vernooij, Kees (ITOPT1) - KLM
Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 6:34 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

Correct.

Kees.


> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
> On Behalf Of Gabriel Tully
> Sent: 05 April, 2018 15:29
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
> 
> These address spaces look like stored procedure address spaces and 
> they are likely marked as a server .  Their goals would be managed 
> under the DDF subsystem in WLM classification rules and would depend 
> on what srvclasses are this ASID is servicing.
> 
> Gabe
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send 
> email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: 
http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and 
privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the 
addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be 
disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this 
e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have 
received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail, and delete this message. 

Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its 
employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of 
this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt. 
Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch 
Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered number 
33014286



--
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

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Martin Packer]

There is also DIST and DBM1 in there. The action will be heavily geared 
towards DBM1. (DIST has work in it mostly on Independent Enclaves so 
relatively little of the work therein is at the address space's DP.)

Cheers, Martin

Martin Packer

zChampion, Systems Investigator & Performance Troubleshooter, IBM

+44-7802-245-584

email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com

Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker

Blog: 
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker

Podcast Series (With Marna Walle): https://developer.ibm.com/tv/mpt/or 
  
https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/mainframe-performance-topics/id1127943573?mt=2


Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu_65HaYgksbF6Q8SQ4oOvA



From:   Gabriel Tully <gjtu...@gmail.com>
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date:   05/04/2018 14:29
Subject:        Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>



These address spaces look like stored procedure address spaces and they 
are likely marked as a server .  Their goals would be managed under the 
DDF subsystem in WLM classification rules and would depend on what 
srvclasses are this ASID is servicing. 

Gabe

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN




Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Tom Marchant]

On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 13:37:43 +, Edgington, Jerry wrote:

>Dispatching priorities work the same way prior to WLM.  If Service class is 
>WLM velocity, then the dispatching priority is a range, just like prior to 
>WLM.  
>However, I don't remember which way SRM adjusts the DP.  SRM would 
>adjust DP up/down depending upon the resource, I/O or CPU, being consumed 
>within the range.
>
>For example;
>- DP   C0-CF,  SRM would adjust the dispatching priority up or down, if the 
>   process is using more I/O versus CPU.

This sounds like the SRM Mean Time To Wait algorithm. AFAIK, WLM 
only does that for discretionary work.

-- 
Tom Marchant

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Edgington, Jerry]

Here is my understanding of WLM and dispatching priorities.

Dispatching priorities work the same way prior to WLM.  If Service class is WLM 
velocity, then the dispatching priority is a range, just like prior to WLM.  
However, I don't remember which way SRM adjusts the DP.  SRM would adjust DP 
up/down depending upon the resource, I/O or CPU, being consumed within the 
range.

For example;
- DP   C0-CF,  SRM would adjust the dispatching priority up or down, if the 
process is using more I/O versus CPU.
- I believe SRM would move closer to CF, if I/O intensive and closer to 
C0 if CPU intensive, but it could be the reverse

WLM only adjusts which dispatching priority range, if velocity.

Jerry 

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Gerhard Adam
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2018 7:23 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

Has anyone ever seen something like this before?   Two started tasks {both
DB2 address spaces] in the same service class and yet have different
dispatching priorities?   This screen capture shows the essential details.

Any thoughts?





Adam

--
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

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Vernooij, Kees (ITOPT1) - KLM]

Correct.

Kees.


> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Gabriel Tully
> Sent: 05 April, 2018 15:29
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
> 
> These address spaces look like stored procedure address spaces and they
> are likely marked as a server .  Their goals would be managed under the
> DDF subsystem in WLM classification rules and would depend on what
> srvclasses are this ASID is servicing.
> 
> Gabe
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: 
http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and 
privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the 
addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be 
disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this 
e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have 
received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail, and delete this message. 

Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its 
employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of 
this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt. 
Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch 
Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered number 
33014286



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Gabriel Tully]

These address spaces look like stored procedure address spaces and they are 
likely marked as a server .  Their goals would be managed under the DDF 
subsystem in WLM classification rules and would depend on what srvclasses are 
this ASID is servicing. 

Gabe

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Vernooij, Kees (ITOPT1) - KLM]

Depends on the meaning of 'manage'.
Individual units of work don't have a goal, but realizing a Service Class's 
Goal can only be done by managing the attributes of the individual tasks in the 
Service Class.

As to the suggestion of Service Class Periods: the DB2 Service Classes have 
only 1 Period.

Grtn,
Kees.


> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Gerhard Adam
> Sent: 05 April, 2018 15:15
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
> 
> Workload manager doesn't manage individual address spaces within a
> service class.  That wouldn't make any sense.
> 
> That's why my question.  After all, if the service class has varying
> dispatching priorities, then how can the goal of the service class be
> assessed when individual units of work have different goals?
> 
> Adam
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Vernooij, Kees (ITOPT1) - KLM
> Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 6:01 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
> 
> Why shouldn't they? WLM manages Goals and uses all resources, including
> DPTRY, to realize them.
> I see this now:
> 
> Jobname   SrvClass  CUR
>     PTY
> MZCMT01A  BAT_PJ220
> COECM01L  BAT_PJ224
> MZFFB03B  BAT_PJ214
> DBP1DBM1  DB2P_CTL  246
> DBP1DIST  DB2P_CTL  246
> DB2PSPU1  DB2P_CTL  242
> DB2PSPS2  DB2P_CTL  255
> DBH1DBM1  DB2P_CTL  246
> DBK1DIST  DB2P_CTL  246
> DBK1DBM1  DB2P_CTL  246
> DBH1DIST  DB2P_CTL  246
> 
> Kees.
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
> > On Behalf Of Gerhard Adam
> > Sent: 05 April, 2018 13:23
> > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> > Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
> >
> > Has anyone ever seen something like this before?   Two started tasks
> > {both
> > DB2 address spaces] in the same service class and yet have different
> > dispatching priorities?   This screen capture shows the essential
> > details.
> >
> > Any thoughts?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Adam
> >
> > --
> > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send
> > email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> 
> For information, services and offers, please visit our web site:
> http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain
> confidential and privileged material intended for the addressee only. If
> you are not the addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail
> or any attachment may be disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any
> other action related to this e-mail or attachment is strictly
> prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail by
> error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and delete
> this message.
> 
> Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or
> its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete
> transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any
> delay in receipt.
> Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch
> Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered
> number 33014286
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 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 information, services and offers, please visit our web site: 
http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and 
privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the 
addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be 
disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this 
e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have 
received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail, and delete this message. 

Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatsch

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Tom Marchant]

On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 06:14:49 -0700, Gerhard Adam wrote:

>Workload manager doesn't manage individual address spaces within 
>a service class.  That wouldn't make any sense.
>
>That's why my question.  After all, if the service class has varying 
>dispatching priorities, then how can the goal of the service class be 
>assessed when individual units of work have different goals?

Are these DB2 regions part of an enclave that is managed by response 
time goals, perhaps for CICS or IMS? In that case, IIRC, the service 
class assigned is used only for startup.

-- 
Tom Marchant

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Martin Packer]

DB2 DOESN'T alter DPs. So far I see no cause to panic - so long as goals 
are being met. (And that they are the right goals.)

Cheers, Martin

Martin Packer

zChampion, Systems Investigator & Performance Troubleshooter, IBM

+44-7802-245-584

email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com

Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker

Blog: 
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker

Podcast Series (With Marna Walle): https://developer.ibm.com/tv/mpt/or 
  
https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/mainframe-performance-topics/id1127943573?mt=2


Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu_65HaYgksbF6Q8SQ4oOvA



From:   Allan Staller <allan.stal...@hcl.com>
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date:   05/04/2018 14:09
Subject:        Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>



Possible bug in reporting tool? (SDSF, RMF, 3rd Party).

Never heard of this, however, if WLM CICS Transaction Management is 
involved, I can see where it might happen.
Also, DB2 is smart enough to alter DP's if it thinks it needs to.

I would ask IBM for an explanation.
Hopefully you are recording SMF99's and relevant DB2 information.

HTH,


Has anyone ever seen something like this before?   Two started tasks {both
DB2 address spaces] in the same service class and yet have different
dispatching priorities?   This screen capture shows the essential details.

Any thoughts?

::DISCLAIMER::
--
The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are confidential and 
intended for the named recipient(s) only. E-mail transmission is not 
guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, 
corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or may contain 
viruses in transmission. The e mail and its contents (with or without 
referred errors) shall therefore not attach any liability on the 
originator or HCL or its affiliates. Views or opinions, if any, presented 
in this email are solely those of the author and may not necessarily 
reflect the views or opinions of HCL or its affiliates. Any form of 
reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, 
distribution and / or publication of this message without the prior 
written consent of authorized representative of HCL is strictly 
prohibited. If you have received this email in error please delete it and 
notify the sender immediately. Before opening any email and/or 
attachments, please check them for viruses and other defects.
--

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN



Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Gerhard Adam]

Workload manager doesn't manage individual address spaces within a service 
class.  That wouldn't make any sense.

That's why my question.  After all, if the service class has varying 
dispatching priorities, then how can the goal of the service class be assessed 
when individual units of work have different goals?

Adam

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Vernooij, Kees (ITOPT1) - KLM
Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 6:01 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

Why shouldn't they? WLM manages Goals and uses all resources, including DPTRY, 
to realize them.
I see this now:

Jobname   SrvClass  CUR 
    PTY 
MZCMT01A  BAT_PJ220 
COECM01L  BAT_PJ224 
MZFFB03B  BAT_PJ214 
DBP1DBM1  DB2P_CTL  246
DBP1DIST  DB2P_CTL  246
DB2PSPU1  DB2P_CTL  242
DB2PSPS2  DB2P_CTL  255
DBH1DBM1  DB2P_CTL  246
DBK1DIST  DB2P_CTL  246
DBK1DBM1  DB2P_CTL  246
DBH1DIST  DB2P_CTL  246

Kees.


> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
> On Behalf Of Gerhard Adam
> Sent: 05 April, 2018 13:23
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
> 
> Has anyone ever seen something like this before?   Two started tasks
> {both
> DB2 address spaces] in the same service class and yet have different
> dispatching priorities?   This screen capture shows the essential
> details.
> 
> Any thoughts?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Adam
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send 
> email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: 
http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and 
privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the 
addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be 
disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this 
e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have 
received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail, and delete this message. 

Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its 
employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of 
this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt. 
Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch 
Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered number 
33014286



--
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

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Gerhard Adam]

Yes, sorry.  For some reason the paste didn't work.

Basically it simply shows two tasks in the same service class with different 
dispatching priorities.  One has a priority of F6 and the other is F0.

Adam

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Elardus Engelbrecht
Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 5:50 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

Gerhard Adam wrote:

>Has anyone ever seen something like this before?   Two started tasks {both DB2 
>address spaces] in the same service class and yet have different dispatching 
>priorities?   This screen capture shows the essential details.

What screen print?  I only see white letters on a white background...  ;-D

Perhaps you should re-post your question with more details using some 
copy/paste actions?

Groete / Greetings
Elardus Engelbrecht

--
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

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Martin Packer]

Agreed, and further to that point...

... Does the WLM Policy include Using / Delay for I/O samples?

In my extensive experience if so

1) The Velocity achieved is normally very high. (Indicates a protective 
goal of 70% or higher, generally. Imp 1 BTW.)

2) The samples are dominated by Using I/O.

So probably the CPU component - hence DP - is "almost random". (Don't 
shoot me for the rhetorical and inaccurate flourish.) :-)

Some people might benefit from / enjoy / snigger at / curse at THIS: 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMtjB_GUyxs . It's a relevant YouTube 
screencast of mine "Screencast 12 - Get WLM Set Up Right For DB2".

Cheers, Martin

Martin Packer

zChampion, Systems Investigator & Performance Troubleshooter, IBM

+44-7802-245-584

email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com

Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker

Blog: 
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker

Podcast Series (With Marna Walle): https://developer.ibm.com/tv/mpt/or 
  
https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/mainframe-performance-topics/id1127943573?mt=2


Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu_65HaYgksbF6Q8SQ4oOvA



From:   "Vernooij, Kees (ITOPT1) - KLM" <kees.verno...@klm.com>
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date:   05/04/2018 14:02
Subject:Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>



Why shouldn't they? WLM manages Goals and uses all resources, including 
DPTRY, to realize them.

I see this now:



Jobname   SrvClass  CUR 

    PTY 

MZCMT01A  BAT_PJ220 

COECM01L  BAT_PJ224 

MZFFB03B  BAT_PJ214 

DBP1DBM1  DB2P_CTL  246 

DBP1DIST  DB2P_CTL  246 

DB2PSPU1  DB2P_CTL  242 

DB2PSPS2  DB2P_CTL  255 

DBH1DBM1  DB2P_CTL  246 

DBK1DIST  DB2P_CTL  246 

DBK1DBM1  DB2P_CTL  246 

DBH1DIST  DB2P_CTL  246



Kees.





> -Original Message-

> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On

> Behalf Of Gerhard Adam

> Sent: 05 April, 2018 13:23

> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

> Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

> 

> Has anyone ever seen something like this before?   Two started tasks

> {both

> DB2 address spaces] in the same service class and yet have different

> dispatching priorities?   This screen capture shows the essential

> details.

> 

> Any thoughts?

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Adam

> 

> --

> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,

> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN



For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.klm.com=DwIGaQ=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg=BsPGKdq7-Vl8MW2-WOWZjlZ0NwmcFSpQCLphNznBSDQ=N6F9BCgUHwZusdX8ZyCyU2jwc4Pymcw9q5eAiUx-I40=mPX-a6u383YitKnpjBFg_MUX_WJOsr8-U2CxRT-AQJs=
. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and privileged 
material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, 
you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be 
disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to 
this e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If 
you have received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender 
immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message. 



Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its 
employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission 
of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in 
receipt. 

Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch 
Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered 
number 33014286






--

For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,

send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN





Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Allan Staller]

Possible bug in reporting tool? (SDSF, RMF, 3rd Party).

Never heard of this, however, if WLM CICS Transaction Management is involved, I 
can see where it might happen.
Also, DB2 is smart enough to alter DP's if it thinks it needs to.

I would ask IBM for an explanation.
Hopefully you are recording SMF99's and relevant DB2 information.

HTH,


Has anyone ever seen something like this before?   Two started tasks {both
DB2 address spaces] in the same service class and yet have different
dispatching priorities?   This screen capture shows the essential details.

Any thoughts?

::DISCLAIMER::
--
The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are confidential and intended 
for the named recipient(s) only. E-mail transmission is not guaranteed to be 
secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, 
destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or may contain viruses in transmission. 
The e mail and its contents (with or without referred errors) shall therefore 
not attach any liability on the originator or HCL or its affiliates. Views or 
opinions, if any, presented in this email are solely those of the author and 
may not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of HCL or its affiliates. Any 
form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, 
distribution and / or publication of this message without the prior written 
consent of authorized representative of HCL is strictly prohibited. If you have 
received this email in error please delete it and notify the sender 
immediately. Before opening any email and/or attachments, please check them for 
viruses and other defects.
--

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Vernooij, Kees (ITOPT1) - KLM]

Why shouldn't they? WLM manages Goals and uses all resources, including DPTRY, 
to realize them.
I see this now:

Jobname   SrvClass  CUR 
    PTY 
MZCMT01A  BAT_PJ220 
COECM01L  BAT_PJ224 
MZFFB03B  BAT_PJ214 
DBP1DBM1  DB2P_CTL  246 
DBP1DIST  DB2P_CTL  246 
DB2PSPU1  DB2P_CTL  242 
DB2PSPS2  DB2P_CTL  255 
DBH1DBM1  DB2P_CTL  246 
DBK1DIST  DB2P_CTL  246 
DBK1DBM1  DB2P_CTL  246 
DBH1DIST  DB2P_CTL  246

Kees.


> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Gerhard Adam
> Sent: 05 April, 2018 13:23
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority
> 
> Has anyone ever seen something like this before?   Two started tasks
> {both
> DB2 address spaces] in the same service class and yet have different
> dispatching priorities?   This screen capture shows the essential
> details.
> 
> Any thoughts?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Adam
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: 
http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and 
privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the 
addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be 
disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this 
e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have 
received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail, and delete this message. 

Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its 
employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of 
this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt. 
Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch 
Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered number 
33014286



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Elardus Engelbrecht]

Gerhard Adam wrote:

>Has anyone ever seen something like this before?   Two started tasks {both DB2 
>address spaces] in the same service class and yet have different dispatching 
>priorities?   This screen capture shows the essential details.

What screen print?  I only see white letters on a white background...  ;-D

Perhaps you should re-post your question with more details using some 
copy/paste actions?

Groete / Greetings
Elardus Engelbrecht

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and Dispatching Priority

[Gerhard Adam]

Has anyone ever seen something like this before?   Two started tasks {both
DB2 address spaces] in the same service class and yet have different
dispatching priorities?   This screen capture shows the essential details.

Any thoughts?





Adam

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and response time

[patrickfalcone7]

I'm wondering if state sampling for these non ending transactions are part of 
the overall emphasis on the performance of the service class. If these samples 
were discarded for non ending, high resource usage transactions as an example, 
I could envision some unfavorable results to service class and possibly system 
performance...but it is a bit confusing. 


Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone

 Original message 
From: Gerhard Adam <gada...@charter.net> 
Date: 02/15/2018  1:59 PM  (GMT-05:00) 
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: WLM and response time 

Here's an example of why I'm questioning this.  This is from a book by Robert 
Vaupel.  I know he's knowledgeable, but the explanation is confusing.

Using an average response time example he says "The running or in-flight 
transactions are also captured in order to make sure that long running and not 
ending transactions are used for managing the service class too.".

Why should a transaction that hasn't ended be relevant?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 15, 2018, at 10:34 AM, Allan Staller <allan.stal...@hcl.com> wrote:
> 
> IIRC, WLM only uses ended transactions for the policy adjustment cycle.
> 
> Further suggested reading SYSTEM Programmers Guide to WLM:
> 
> www.redbooks.ibm.com/redbooks/pdfs/sg246472.pdf
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
> Behalf Of Gerhard Adam
> Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2018 11:25 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM and response time
> 
> I agree.  But the question remains.  How does WLM manage a response time that 
> is longer than the policy adjustment interval?  Is it only based on ended 
> transactions at that time (which would seem logical).
> 
> I've also seen a lot of recommendations from various sources talking about 
> short batch, which is what gave rise to the question.  Specifically the 
> recommendation used 5 initiators as the example.  
> 
> Also it doesn't matter if it is percentile or average response time.  What 
> makes me wonder is that it basically tenders the percentile useless.
> 
> For example, if I have an average response time of 1 sec, then it is easy to 
> see that enough transactions would end in an interval to provide samples to 
> evaluate.  However let's also say that there are some transactions that will 
> experience a response time of 60 seconds (and stay in the same period).  In 
> fact, this can happen with USS where transactions may show a response time of 
> 20 seconds.
> 
> Since these end during different policy adjustment intervals, it seems that 
> they are only a sporadic effect, because during the interval when none end, 
> the average response time would hold.  During the intervals when they do end, 
> the percentile would be applicable.
> 
> Yet wouldn't this cause me to perpetually fluctuate between exceeding goals 
> and meeting them?  After all during the intervals when I have no long running 
> transactions ending, I would show 100% meeting goals and exceed by goal.
> 
> Yet I don't recall ever seeing this kind of behavior.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Feb 15, 2018, at 6:17 AM, Allan Staller <allan.stal...@hcl.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Response time goals for batch do not (IMO) make any sense.
>> 
>> WLM is predicated on having enough samples to make an informed decision. If 
>> you only have 1 or 2 samples (ended transactions) in an interval, that is 
>> not statistically valid.
>> I would suggest a velocity goal be used in its place.
>> 
>> If queue time is needed to be considered, the I would expand the suggestion 
>> to include WLM managed initiators. This will change the velocity calculation 
>> to include queue time as part of the delay.
>> 
>> Suggested reading: 
>> ftp://public.dhe.ibm.com/s390/zos/wlm/WLMvelocity.pdf
>> 
>> HTH,
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
>> On Behalf Of Gerhard Adam
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 9:40 PM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: WLM and response time
>> 
>> Well, this may seem like an obvious answer, but I can't tell if I'm 
>> confusing myself or missing something.
>> 
>> If I use a long response time (like 10 minutes for batch), then I would 
>> think that I only consider that during the Performance Adjustment interval 
>> in which the transaction ends.  Yet that raises the question that if I have 
>> multiple jobs in such a service class, then over what interval must they end 
>>  to provide a meaningful metric?  Assuming they would all 

Re: WLM and response time

[Gerhard Adam]

Here's an example of why I'm questioning this.  This is from a book by Robert 
Vaupel.  I know he's knowledgeable, but the explanation is confusing.

Using an average response time example he says "The running or in-flight 
transactions are also captured in order to make sure that long running and not 
ending transactions are used for managing the service class too.".

Why should a transaction that hasn't ended be relevant?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 15, 2018, at 10:34 AM, Allan Staller <allan.stal...@hcl.com> wrote:
> 
> IIRC, WLM only uses ended transactions for the policy adjustment cycle.
> 
> Further suggested reading SYSTEM Programmers Guide to WLM:
> 
> www.redbooks.ibm.com/redbooks/pdfs/sg246472.pdf
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
> Behalf Of Gerhard Adam
> Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2018 11:25 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM and response time
> 
> I agree.  But the question remains.  How does WLM manage a response time that 
> is longer than the policy adjustment interval?  Is it only based on ended 
> transactions at that time (which would seem logical).
> 
> I've also seen a lot of recommendations from various sources talking about 
> short batch, which is what gave rise to the question.  Specifically the 
> recommendation used 5 initiators as the example.  
> 
> Also it doesn't matter if it is percentile or average response time.  What 
> makes me wonder is that it basically tenders the percentile useless.
> 
> For example, if I have an average response time of 1 sec, then it is easy to 
> see that enough transactions would end in an interval to provide samples to 
> evaluate.  However let's also say that there are some transactions that will 
> experience a response time of 60 seconds (and stay in the same period).  In 
> fact, this can happen with USS where transactions may show a response time of 
> 20 seconds.
> 
> Since these end during different policy adjustment intervals, it seems that 
> they are only a sporadic effect, because during the interval when none end, 
> the average response time would hold.  During the intervals when they do end, 
> the percentile would be applicable.
> 
> Yet wouldn't this cause me to perpetually fluctuate between exceeding goals 
> and meeting them?  After all during the intervals when I have no long running 
> transactions ending, I would show 100% meeting goals and exceed by goal.
> 
> Yet I don't recall ever seeing this kind of behavior.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Feb 15, 2018, at 6:17 AM, Allan Staller <allan.stal...@hcl.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Response time goals for batch do not (IMO) make any sense.
>> 
>> WLM is predicated on having enough samples to make an informed decision. If 
>> you only have 1 or 2 samples (ended transactions) in an interval, that is 
>> not statistically valid.
>> I would suggest a velocity goal be used in its place.
>> 
>> If queue time is needed to be considered, the I would expand the suggestion 
>> to include WLM managed initiators. This will change the velocity calculation 
>> to include queue time as part of the delay.
>> 
>> Suggested reading: 
>> ftp://public.dhe.ibm.com/s390/zos/wlm/WLMvelocity.pdf
>> 
>> HTH,
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
>> On Behalf Of Gerhard Adam
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 9:40 PM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: WLM and response time
>> 
>> Well, this may seem like an obvious answer, but I can't tell if I'm 
>> confusing myself or missing something.
>> 
>> If I use a long response time (like 10 minutes for batch), then I would 
>> think that I only consider that during the Performance Adjustment interval 
>> in which the transaction ends.  Yet that raises the question that if I have 
>> multiple jobs in such a service class, then over what interval must they end 
>>  to provide a meaningful metric?  Assuming they would all end within a 10 
>> second window seems implausible, so how can a response time goal 
>> realistically be managed at such high values?
>> 
>> In addition I recently read that even transactions that haven't ended can be 
>> used in the evaluation of goals, but that doesn't make sense since, by 
>> definition, they haven't ended.  Yet this is what percentile goals are 
>> supposed to represent.
>> 
>> So I guess my question involves how a policy adjustment inter

Re: WLM and response time

[Allan Staller]

IIRC, WLM only uses ended transactions for the policy adjustment cycle.

Further suggested reading SYSTEM Programmers Guide to WLM:

www.redbooks.ibm.com/redbooks/pdfs/sg246472.pdf

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Gerhard Adam
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2018 11:25 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM and response time

I agree.  But the question remains.  How does WLM manage a response time that 
is longer than the policy adjustment interval?  Is it only based on ended 
transactions at that time (which would seem logical).

I've also seen a lot of recommendations from various sources talking about 
short batch, which is what gave rise to the question.  Specifically the 
recommendation used 5 initiators as the example.  

Also it doesn't matter if it is percentile or average response time.  What 
makes me wonder is that it basically tenders the percentile useless.

For example, if I have an average response time of 1 sec, then it is easy to 
see that enough transactions would end in an interval to provide samples to 
evaluate.  However let's also say that there are some transactions that will 
experience a response time of 60 seconds (and stay in the same period).  In 
fact, this can happen with USS where transactions may show a response time of 
20 seconds.

Since these end during different policy adjustment intervals, it seems that 
they are only a sporadic effect, because during the interval when none end, the 
average response time would hold.  During the intervals when they do end, the 
percentile would be applicable.

Yet wouldn't this cause me to perpetually fluctuate between exceeding goals and 
meeting them?  After all during the intervals when I have no long running 
transactions ending, I would show 100% meeting goals and exceed by goal.

Yet I don't recall ever seeing this kind of behavior.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 15, 2018, at 6:17 AM, Allan Staller <allan.stal...@hcl.com> wrote:
> 
> Response time goals for batch do not (IMO) make any sense.
> 
> WLM is predicated on having enough samples to make an informed decision. If 
> you only have 1 or 2 samples (ended transactions) in an interval, that is not 
> statistically valid.
> I would suggest a velocity goal be used in its place.
> 
> If queue time is needed to be considered, the I would expand the suggestion 
> to include WLM managed initiators. This will change the velocity calculation 
> to include queue time as part of the delay.
> 
> Suggested reading: 
> ftp://public.dhe.ibm.com/s390/zos/wlm/WLMvelocity.pdf
> 
> HTH,
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
> On Behalf Of Gerhard Adam
> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 9:40 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM and response time
> 
> Well, this may seem like an obvious answer, but I can't tell if I'm confusing 
> myself or missing something.
> 
> If I use a long response time (like 10 minutes for batch), then I would think 
> that I only consider that during the Performance Adjustment interval in which 
> the transaction ends.  Yet that raises the question that if I have multiple 
> jobs in such a service class, then over what interval must they end  to 
> provide a meaningful metric?  Assuming they would all end within a 10 second 
> window seems implausible, so how can a response time goal realistically be 
> managed at such high values?
> 
> In addition I recently read that even transactions that haven't ended can be 
> used in the evaluation of goals, but that doesn't make sense since, by 
> definition, they haven't ended.  Yet this is what percentile goals are 
> supposed to represent.
> 
> So I guess my question involves how a policy adjustment interval addresses 
> transaction that run longer than the time between intervals, or is it merely 
> that they are only examined during the interval they actually end in?
> 
> Adam
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send 
> email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> ::DISCLAIMER::
> --
> --
> --
> 
> The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are confidential and 
> intended for the named recipient(s) only. E-mail transmission is not 
> guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, 
> corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or may contain

Re: WLM and response time

[Gerhard Adam]

I agree.  But the question remains.  How does WLM manage a response time that 
is longer than the policy adjustment interval?  Is it only based on ended 
transactions at that time (which would seem logical).

I've also seen a lot of recommendations from various sources talking about 
short batch, which is what gave rise to the question.  Specifically the 
recommendation used 5 initiators as the example.  

Also it doesn't matter if it is percentile or average response time.  What 
makes me wonder is that it basically tenders the percentile useless.

For example, if I have an average response time of 1 sec, then it is easy to 
see that enough transactions would end in an interval to provide samples to 
evaluate.  However let's also say that there are some transactions that will 
experience a response time of 60 seconds (and stay in the same period).  In 
fact, this can happen with USS where transactions may show a response time of 
20 seconds.

Since these end during different policy adjustment intervals, it seems that 
they are only a sporadic effect, because during the interval when none end, the 
average response time would hold.  During the intervals when they do end, the 
percentile would be applicable.

Yet wouldn't this cause me to perpetually fluctuate between exceeding goals and 
meeting them?  After all during the intervals when I have no long running 
transactions ending, I would show 100% meeting goals and exceed by goal.

Yet I don't recall ever seeing this kind of behavior.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 15, 2018, at 6:17 AM, Allan Staller <allan.stal...@hcl.com> wrote:
> 
> Response time goals for batch do not (IMO) make any sense.
> 
> WLM is predicated on having enough samples to make an informed decision. If 
> you only have 1 or 2 samples (ended transactions) in an interval, that is not 
> statistically valid.
> I would suggest a velocity goal be used in its place.
> 
> If queue time is needed to be considered, the I would expand the suggestion 
> to include WLM managed initiators. This will change the velocity calculation 
> to include queue time as part of the delay.
> 
> Suggested reading: ftp://public.dhe.ibm.com/s390/zos/wlm/WLMvelocity.pdf
> 
> HTH,
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
> Behalf Of Gerhard Adam
> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 9:40 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM and response time
> 
> Well, this may seem like an obvious answer, but I can't tell if I'm confusing 
> myself or missing something.
> 
> If I use a long response time (like 10 minutes for batch), then I would think 
> that I only consider that during the Performance Adjustment interval in which 
> the transaction ends.  Yet that raises the question that if I have multiple 
> jobs in such a service class, then over what interval must they end  to 
> provide a meaningful metric?  Assuming they would all end within a 10 second 
> window seems implausible, so how can a response time goal realistically be 
> managed at such high values?
> 
> In addition I recently read that even transactions that haven't ended can be 
> used in the evaluation of goals, but that doesn't make sense since, by 
> definition, they haven't ended.  Yet this is what percentile goals are 
> supposed to represent.
> 
> So I guess my question involves how a policy adjustment interval addresses 
> transaction that run longer than the time between intervals, or is it merely 
> that they are only examined during the interval they actually end in?
> 
> Adam
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
> lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> ::DISCLAIMER::
> --
> The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are confidential and 
> intended for the named recipient(s) only. E-mail transmission is not 
> guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, 
> corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or may contain viruses 
> in transmission. The e mail and its contents (with or without referred 
> errors) shall therefore not attach any liability on the originator or HCL or 
> its affiliates. Views or opinions, if any, presented in this email are solely 
> those of the author and may not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of 
> HCL or its affiliates. Any form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, 
> disclosure, modificat

Re: WLM and response time

[Allan Staller]

Response time goals for batch do not (IMO) make any sense.

WLM is predicated on having enough samples to make an informed decision. If you 
only have 1 or 2 samples (ended transactions) in an interval, that is not 
statistically valid.
I would suggest a velocity goal be used in its place.

If queue time is needed to be considered, the I would expand the suggestion to 
include WLM managed initiators. This will change the velocity calculation to 
include queue time as part of the delay.

Suggested reading: ftp://public.dhe.ibm.com/s390/zos/wlm/WLMvelocity.pdf

HTH,

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Gerhard Adam
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 9:40 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: WLM and response time

Well, this may seem like an obvious answer, but I can't tell if I'm confusing 
myself or missing something.

If I use a long response time (like 10 minutes for batch), then I would think 
that I only consider that during the Performance Adjustment interval in which 
the transaction ends.  Yet that raises the question that if I have multiple 
jobs in such a service class, then over what interval must they end  to provide 
a meaningful metric?  Assuming they would all end within a 10 second window 
seems implausible, so how can a response time goal realistically be managed at 
such high values?

In addition I recently read that even transactions that haven't ended can be 
used in the evaluation of goals, but that doesn't make sense since, by 
definition, they haven't ended.  Yet this is what percentile goals are supposed 
to represent.

So I guess my question involves how a policy adjustment interval addresses 
transaction that run longer than the time between intervals, or is it merely 
that they are only examined during the interval they actually end in?

Adam
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
::DISCLAIMER::
--
The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are confidential and intended 
for the named recipient(s) only. E-mail transmission is not guaranteed to be 
secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, 
destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or may contain viruses in transmission. 
The e mail and its contents (with or without referred errors) shall therefore 
not attach any liability on the originator or HCL or its affiliates. Views or 
opinions, if any, presented in this email are solely those of the author and 
may not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of HCL or its affiliates. Any 
form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, 
distribution and / or publication of this message without the prior written 
consent of authorized representative of HCL is strictly prohibited. If you have 
received this email in error please delete it and notify the sender 
immediately. Before opening any email and/or attachments, please check them for 
viruses and other defects.
--

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and response time

[Vernooij, Kees (ITOPT1) - KLM]

Percentile response times are only useful if there are sufficient transactions 
to make a useful calculation. 90% of 5 transactions is useless, 90% of 100 
transactions gives useful measures.

Kees.

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Gerhard Adam
> Sent: 15 February, 2018 4:46
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: WLM and response time
> 
> For additional clarification, consider a batch response time goal of 10
> minutes.  If we assume 5 initiators, and the service class is managed by
> transaction class for these 5 initiators, then how do I not risk have a
> policy adjustment interval where there is only one response time sample
> in any of the buckets during the adjustment interval.  It would render
> the percentile response time worthless.
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: 
http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and 
privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the 
addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be 
disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this 
e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have 
received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail, and delete this message. 

Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its 
employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of 
this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt. 
Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal Dutch 
Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with registered number 
33014286


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and response time

[Gerhard Adam]

For additional clarification, consider a batch response time goal of 10 
minutes.  If we assume 5 initiators, and the service class is managed by 
transaction class for these 5 initiators, then how do I not risk have a policy 
adjustment interval where there is only one response time sample in any of the 
buckets during the adjustment interval.  It would render the percentile 
response time worthless.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: WLM and response time

[Gerhard Adam]

Well, this may seem like an obvious answer, but I can't tell if I'm confusing 
myself or missing something.

If I use a long response time (like 10 minutes for batch), then I would think 
that I only consider that during the Performance Adjustment interval in which 
the transaction ends.  Yet that raises the question that if I have multiple 
jobs in such a service class, then over what interval must they end  to provide 
a meaningful metric?  Assuming they would all end within a 10 second window 
seems implausible, so how can a response time goal realistically be managed at 
such high values?

In addition I recently read that even transactions that haven't ended can be 
used in the evaluation of goals, but that doesn't make sense since, by 
definition, they haven't ended.  Yet this is what percentile goals are supposed 
to represent.  

So I guess my question involves how a policy adjustment interval addresses 
transaction that run longer than the time between intervals, or is it merely 
that they are only examined during the interval they actually end in?

Adam
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN