Thanks Barbera, that explains 'mixed' perfectly.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
m
Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker
Blog:
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker
From:
Skip Robinson
To:
IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu,
Date:
16/02/2012 05:07
Subject:
Re: Dedicated vs. Shared CPs
Sent by:
IBM Mainframe Discussion List
I checked out an MVS Image pro
Barbara Nitz writes:
>And coming from a z9 presumably to a z196, chances are very
>good that you would loose physical cps to keep money down.
It's not clear yet which z9 the original poster has. Moving from a z9 BC to
a z114, no. There are more capacity models in the z114 and more
configurable eng
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
626-302-7535 Office
323-715-0595 Mobile
jo.skip.robin...@sce.com
From: Barbara Nitz
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Date: 02/15/2012 08:58 PM
Subject:Re: Dedicated vs. Shared CPs
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List
>Is it possible to
>Is it possible to mix shared and dedicated CPs on the same LPAR?
No. Not on a z9 and not the way you mean.
The RMF report deals with what an lpar can look like when it uses
Hiperdispatch. That is not available on a z9.
Hiperdispatch semi-dedicates logical processors to physical processors
depen
Is it possible to mix shared and dedicated CPs on the same LPAR?
I thought it wasn't, but a note on the RMF partition data report implies it is;
On WGT
Either the partition's current weighting of the shared processor resources or
one of the following indicators:
DED
Indicates that the partition
I do not. Sorry. Check the past SHARE Proceedings, particularly for Kath
Walsh's sessions. Although I know of nothing specific, she has talked about
topics such as this in the past.
Bob Shannon
Rocket Software
--
For IBM-MAIN s
Bob,
Would you know of any redbooks/manuals that might discuss this?
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Last I heard from IBM and other sources, the "official" recommendation
was not to exceed 2:1 logical to physical.
I myself, have run with 3:1 logical to physical with similar results to
yours on 9672, z/800, z/9 and z/10(no hiperdispatch). This seems to be a
constant!
No info on z/196 w/hiperdisp
>Our workload is entirely for development. Since we can't predict where demand
>will come from we share all of the CPs so that capacity will float to where
>it's
>needed. One disadvantage is that this is bad for the cache(s). In our
>environment
>the cost is acceptable. I wouldn't do this if we
> Why would this be bad for cache?
Since multiple LPAR are isong the CP, because multiple LPARs are causing cache
updates. If you have production LPARs it's best to limit cache updates to a
single LPAR so that your cache hit ratio will be better. Dedicating CPs will do
that.
Bob Shannon
Rocke
Bob,
Why would this be bad for cache?
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Our workload is entirely for development. Since we can't predict where demand
will come from we share all of the CPs so that capacity will float to where
it's needed. One disadvantage is that this is bad for the cache(s). In our
environment the cost is acceptable. I wouldn't do this if we ran a
PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Dedicated vs. Shared CPs
I know you can define processors as dedicated or shared. Is there any
advantages/disadvantages to dedicating some to specific LPARs and shared
for others?
TIA
This email/fax message is for the sole use of the
8, 2012 11:25:48 AM
Subject: Dedicated vs. Shared CPs
I know you can define processors as dedicated or shared. Is there any
advantages/disadvantages to dedicating some to specific LPARs and shared for
others?
TIA
--
Fo
I know you can define processors as dedicated or shared. Is there any
advantages/disadvantages to dedicating some to specific LPARs and shared for
others?
TIA
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
16 matches
Mail list logo
