Re: CPU Utilization

Hello, I am able to get RMF3B messages on on my syslog. But I unable to find the way to get these message like below when DASD activity rate goes above limit on console. Can you please suggest way of achieving this task . +RMF100I 3B: Processing WFEX Report... +RMF100I 3B: Name Reason Critical

Re: CPU Utilization

-0595 Mobile 626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW robin...@sce.com -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Joel C. Ewing Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2018 10:07 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: CPU Utilization When

Re: CPU Utilization

03, 2018 10:10 PM >>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >>> Subject: AW: Re: CPU Utilization >>> >>>> No, IEFUTL is called INSIDE an Address Space as often as specified in >> SMFPRMxx in >>> statement JWT. >>> >>> >>> and it

Re: AW: Re: CPU Utilization

t shouldn't be penalized for being well-tuned.   A job in an infinite loop on a heavily-loaded system may not show up with as high of CPU utilization, but can soak up enough remaing CPU resource to raise your 4-hour MSU average and either raise software charges or result in LPAR capping which could then cau

Re: CPU Utilization

On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 03:24:00 -0500, Vince Getgood wrote: >Saurabh, >How much is your management willing to spend on achieving this requirement? > >From the few posts that I've seen, I'd suggest no-one here does this now, or >has ever done it. If a company wants to monitor it's mainframe

AW: Re: CPU Utilization

>But if you specify the desired time on the job statement (the OP said 30 min?), IEFUTL would get called and could take the desired action (extend for another 30 after generating some console message?). I stand corrected. I had in mind he wanted an alert when some address space consumes more

Re: CPU Utilization

Saurabh, How much is your management willing to spend on achieving this requirement? From the few posts that I've seen, I'd suggest no-one here does this now, or has ever done it. If a company wants to monitor it's mainframe resource usage dynamically, it buys and impliments a product. (BMC

Re: CPU Utilization

Of Peter Hunkeler > > Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2018 10:10 PM > > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > > Subject: AW: Re: CPU Utilization > > > > >No, IEFUTL is called INSIDE an Address Space as often as specified in > SMFPRMxx in > > statement JWT. > > >

Re: CPU Utilization

> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf > Of Peter Hunkeler > Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2018 10:10 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: AW: Re: CPU Utilization > > >No, IEFUTL is called INSIDE an Address Space as oft

Re: CPU Utilization

nframe Technical Support > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of saurabh khandelwal > Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2018 6:42 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: CPU Utilization > > Hello Group, &

AW: Re: CPU Utilization

>No, IEFUTL is called INSIDE an Address Space as often as specified in SMFPRMxx >in statement JWT. and it would also be called when the CPU time used exceeds the time limit of the job or step (TIME= parameter). But this means also that the exit is most never called. And since we're at

Re: CPU Utilization

: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of saurabh khandelwal Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2018 6:42 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: CPU Utilization Hello Group, We have requirement to trigger alert to operator console, once CPU utilization for any address

Re: CPU Utilization

This sounds like something that could be done with a product like BMC Mainview for z/OS or ASG TMON for z/OS (or other). I think alerts can be set for CPU usage in these products. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive

Re: CPU Utilization

On Tue, 3 Jul 2018 14:42:21 +0300, saurabh khandelwal wrote: >Hello Group, > >We have requirement to trigger alert to operator console, once CPU >utilization for any address space or any Job or any running STC reach to >certain pre defined number. Like any job or address space o

Re: CPU Utilization

saurabh khandelwal wrote: >Can IEFUTL exit also provide live CPU usage detail by every job, stc, address >space, omvs etc and send alert to operator console, if any set limit for CPU >is exceeded . No, IEFUTL is called INSIDE an Address Space as often as specified in SMFPRMxx in statement JWT

Re: CPU Utilization

> >Hello Group, > > > >We have requirement to trigger alert to operator console, once CPU > >utilization for any address space or any Job or any running STC reach to > >certain pre defined number. Like any job or address space or STC consuming > >CPU for more then 30

Re: CPU Utilization

MVS Installation Exits manual to see if it > can do what you want. > > > -Original Message- > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf > > Of saurabh khandelwal > > Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2018 4:42 AM > > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > >

Re: CPU Utilization

You might look at IEFUTL in the MVS Installation Exits manual to see if it can do what you want. > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf > Of saurabh khandelwal > Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2018 4:42 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subjec

Re: CPU Utilization

On Tue, 3 Jul 2018 14:42:21 +0300, saurabh khandelwal wrote: >Hello Group, > >We have requirement to trigger alert to operator console, once CPU >utilization for any address space or any Job or any running STC reach to >certain pre defined number. Like any job or address space o

CPU Utilization

Hello Group, We have requirement to trigger alert to operator console, once CPU utilization for any address space or any Job or any running STC reach to certain pre defined number. Like any job or address space or STC consuming CPU for more then 30 min etc , operator should get alter on his

Re: large VSAM LSR buffering vs. CPU utilization

> On May 25, 2017, at 3:28 PM, Martin Packer wrote: > > > > Back in the late 1980's there was a "coffee table book" on Data In Memory, > with a bunch of studies in. VSAM LSR was one of them. It was one of the > cases where CPU was SAVED across the range. > > Pure

Re: large VSAM LSR buffering vs. CPU utilization

To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: large VSAM LSR buffering vs. CPU utilization > > A post on another forum has gotten me to wondering about the size & number > of buffers in a VSAM LSR pool versus the CPU utilization needed to manage > them. Around here the idea has alwa

Re: large VSAM LSR buffering vs. CPU utilization

-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of John McKown Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 07:59 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: large VSAM LSR buffering vs. CPU utilization A post on another forum has gotten me to wondering about

large VSAM LSR buffering vs. CPU utilization

A post on another forum has gotten me to wondering about the size & number of buffers in a VSAM LSR pool versus the CPU utilization needed to manage them. Around here the idea has always been "the more buffers the better" and no analysis has ever been done. But in today's I/O

Re: Performance question - handling of max CPU % utilization

Shane Ginnane wrote: Don't. I bloody wish I could do that. Simple as that - I am constantly trying to disavow people of the notion of one number per day. Agreed! One number does not tell the story truthfully. Don't use the LPAR MVS busy numbers. Period. Go to the Partition Data Report

Re: Performance question - handling of max CPU % utilization

Date: 11/05/2015 07:28 Subject:Re: Performance question - handling of max CPU % utilization Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Shane Ginnane wrote: Don't. I bloody wish I could do that. Simple as that - I am constantly trying to disavow people

Re: Performance question - handling of max CPU % utilization

Martin Packer wrote: Agree with the stacked graph of LPARs. But one plea: Do it by processor pool for (at least) GCPs and zIIPs. (IFLs might be meaningful, ICFs less likely, zAAPs possibly.) Agreed! That I already does. Anyways, according to my local IBMer, the zIIP CPU is shared by the DB2

Performance question - handling of max CPU % utilization

Hi to all, It is part of my duties to show to management z/OS performance daily and monthly based on SMF RMF records. CPU% utilization averages, memory usage, MSU, I/O rates, transaction rates, etc. are usually easy to present and explain. You get Averages, 90th percentile, absolute maximum

Re: Performance question - handling of max CPU % utilization

On Thu, 7 May 2015 06:51:42 -0500, Elardus Engelbrecht wrote: If I combine these values for the day, they're sometimes over 100% which is undesirable or difficult to explain. Don't. Simple as that - I am constantly trying to disavow people of the notion of one number per day. RMF is a sampler

Re: Performance question - handling of max CPU % utilization

Question: how do you performance guys and gals present those maximums? Or how do you prove that machines are heavily used? Do you use averages of those maximum CPU% utilization or what do you use? Do you combine all the LPARs and then work out the max? Any trending or statistical analysis

Re: Performance question - handling of max CPU % utilization

One way to aggregate multiple CECs is to total all processors and normalize to 100% for the manglers HTH, snip It is part of my duties to show to management z/OS performance daily and monthly based on SMF RMF records. CPU% utilization averages, memory usage, MSU, I/O rates, transaction rates

Watch the wrap! (Was: CPU Utilization)

Allan and anyone quoting an IBM manual URL I was prompted to include this post in IBM-MAIN based on a thread I have been checking in the IBMTCP-L list. I have used a recent example from IBM-MAIN. If you discard all the unnecessary verbiage following - and including - the question mark, ?, you

Re: CPU Utilization

Workload Manager is your friend. Hmmm - *IF* you understand the (history of the) workload, the SLAs, the expectations of the customer, the politics, ... And WLM itself of course. Take it from me, it is bloody difficult to walk into a site and make sensible determinations that will be

Re: CPU Utilization

Thanks a lot for everyone and appreciate your time and help, I will consider the recommendations given as i move on, Thanks again! On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 11:00 AM, nitz-...@gmx.net nitz-...@gmx.net wrote: Not sure how Workload Manager is being used or configured at your shop. From the

Re: CPU Utilization

Probably your mainframe capacity enginneer should have this in his Mind.(It really requires a professional approach) Peter. On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 3:45 PM, RCG rkcgowda1...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks a lot for everyone and appreciate your time and help, I will consider the recommendations given

Re: CPU Utilization

Yeah, then sometimes you need outside help to make things better. Perf. Assoc, Watsonwalker.com, even IBM has tuning services. They are for a fee. It might mean spending thousands to save millions in software/hardware upgrades. In a message dated 11/8/2012 3:01:45 A.M. Central Standard

Re: CPU Utilization

a profession and requires a professional! --Original Message-- From: RCG Sender: IBM Mainframe Discussion List To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU ReplyTo: IBM Mainframe Discussion List Subject: CPU Utilization Sent: 7 Nov 2012 09:30 Dear Group, In one of the shop that I work, I have CPU

Re: CPU Utilization

snip Also trying to figure out any batch loads that are of not high priority to run over a non-peak hours which might help a bit to it, /snip This is a techno-political question which only the customer can answer snip Any expert advice on the other ways that i can consider to help would be

Re: CPU Utilization

07677 P: 201-930-8260 | M: 512-627-3803 E: cblaic...@syncsort.com -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of RCG Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 8:30 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: CPU Utilization Dear Group, In one

Re: CPU Utilization

-3803 E: cblaic...@syncsort.com -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of RCG Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 8:30 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: CPU Utilization Dear Group, In one of the shop that I work, I

Re: CPU Utilization

, NJ 07677 P: 201-930-8260 | M: 512-627-3803 E: cblaic...@syncsort.com -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of RCG Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 8:30 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: CPU Utilization Dear

Re: CPU Utilization

. Ron -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of RCG Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 6:30 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: [IBM-MAIN] CPU Utilization Dear Group, In one of the shop that I work, I have CPU

Re: CPU Utilization

: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 10:04:08 -0500 From: cblaic...@syncsort.com Subject: Re: CPU Utilization To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Running 100% is not bad. What is bad is missing SLA's. So if you are not missing SLA's, you don't have an immediate problem. If your shop is like most shops, the work

Re: CPU Utilization

[mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of RCG Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 9:30 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: CPU Utilization Dear Group, In one of the shop that I work, I have CPU constraint where the utilization is @ 100% most of the times and that is impacting much

Re: CPU Utilization

? It's a profession and requires a professional! --Original Message-- From: RCG Sender: IBM Mainframe Discussion List To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU ReplyTo: IBM Mainframe Discussion List Subject: CPU Utilization Sent: 7 Nov 2012 09:30 Dear Group, In one of the shop that I work, I have CPU

Re: CPU Utilization

Not sure how Workload Manager is being used or configured at your shop. From the original description, I am assuming that that installation runs more than one lpar on the box, most probably with lpar weights that reflect importance of the lpars. If the OP happens to work on an lpar that is not