Does that imply that the 750 specified for Period 1 duration
equated to approx. 0.44 clock seconds with the 2003 (1724.7 SU/sec);
exclusive of wait times, natch. And, by extension, does that mean
the period is now down to 0.11 clock seconds on our latest z/890
(8084 SU/sec)?
The short
snip
Does that imply that the 750 specified for Period 1 duration equated to
approx. 0.44 clock seconds with the 2003 (1724.7 SU/sec); exclusive of
wait times, natch. And, by extension, does that mean the period is now
down to 0.11 clock seconds on our latest z/890
(8084 SU/sec)?
The short
Why worry?
RMF III and RMF post processor reports will both give you the
percentile breakdown of the activity (given a percentile goal). Just
adjust the duration of 750 SU's until A) 75% of transactions end in 1/2
second or less and then use that value or B) if 75% of trans are ending
wthin the
Hey, wait a minute guys.
I think that there is a bit of confusion on DUR and how TSO
transactions transit to Period 2.
1. Duration is the amount of service that a period should consume
before going on the next period. This is NOT service units per
second, but is total service units
You're absolutely right, however there are a few additional
considerations when examining TSO that are worth considering.
1. Duration is the amount of service that a period should consume
before going on the next period. This is NOT service units per
second, but is total service units
I'm reviewing our Workload Manager policy which hasn't really changed
since we implemented Goal Mode with OS/390 and an S/390 2003-237.
Granted, we haven't had many *real* problems over the years but ...
I'm trying to confirm my (lack of) understanding regarding the
duration value for a
6 matches
Mail list logo
