Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

Elardus Engelbrecht wrote: >For some costs, you just can't calculate it. One example, we >don't charge for FTP, simply there is no accurate way to try >to guess costs. But you are guessing. You guessed zero. As I'm fond of saying, we might not know what the correct answer is, but zero is surely

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

Timothy Sipples wrote: >Elardus Engelbrecht wrote: >>If you get your chargeback defined+setup properly, do your SMF, DCOLLECT, 3th >>party transaction monitor, etc. properly, you can't go wrong with chargeback. >I disagree, unless the "etc. properly" part is truly enormous in scope. Feel free

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

were still using the data to 'plan'. -teD   Original Message   From: Timothy Sipples Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 01:19 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List Subject: Re: Does everybody use chargeback? Elardus Engelbrecht wrote: >If you get your chargeback defined+s

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

Elardus Engelbrecht wrote: >If you get your chargeback defined+setup properly, >do your SMF, DCOLLECT, 3th party transaction monitor, >etc. properly, you can't go wrong with chargeback. I disagree, unless the "etc. properly" part is truly enormous in scope. I notice you didn't mention anything

Re: :Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

] On Behalf Of Jesse 1 Robinson Sent: Wednesday, March 9, 2016 12:17 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: :Re: Does everybody use chargeback? For the record, the in-storage database was not huge, but this was the late 1970s, so all resources were dearer in those days. The RYO database was ingenious

:Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

logs/MartinPacker From: Ed Jaffe <edja...@phoenixsoftware.com> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 09/03/2016 16:12 Subject: Re: Does everybody use chargeback? Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On 3/8/2016 9:59 PM, Jesse 1 Robinson wr

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

logs/MartinPacker From: Ed Jaffe <edja...@phoenixsoftware.com> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Date: 09/03/2016 16:12 Subject: Re: Does everybody use chargeback? Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On 3/8/2016 9:59 PM, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote:

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 08:12:18 -0800, Ed Jaffe wrote: >On 3/8/2016 9:59 PM, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: >> -- A data base application was redesigned at the last minute to read the >> entire data base into memory at startup. The business unit noticed that they >> were charged for I/O but not for memory

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

Pew, Curtis G wrote: >Since I started this thread, I’ll jump back in. Welcome back... ;-) >This is why we never did chargeback; our director from 1968 through about 1993 >felt that if we did people would do the wrong thing to avoid computer charges. >(The main “wrong thing” being continue to

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

On Mar 8, 2016, at 11:18 PM, Timothy Sipples wrote: > > In my view a bad chargeback regime is worse than no chargeback regime, and > it's quite easy to have a bad chargeback regime. "Bad" here means > encouraging perverse behaviors and/or discouraging smart behaviors. Since

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

>Scott Chapman wrote: >>Software billing is based on available/consumed capacity. > >IBM's is/are not. It's based on *peak* four hour rolling average >utilization per month -- or, effectively, per subscription year for >products that are not Monthly License Charge products. Peak R4Ha is a measure

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 11:59 PM, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: > Ah, bad or perverse behaviors. Two stand out in my career. > > -- A data base application was redesigned at the last minute to read the > entire data base into memory at startup. The business unit noticed that >

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

Ted MacNEIL wrote: >Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: >>-- A data base application was redesigned at the last minute to read the >>entire data base into memory at startup. The business unit noticed that they >>were charged for I/O but not for memory use. It was cheaper to occupy virtual >>storage than

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

Your first example is not necessarily bad behavior. I bet it performed! -teD   Original Message   From: Jesse 1 Robinson Sent: Wednesday, March 9, 2016 00:59 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List Subject: Re: Does everybody use chargeback? Ah, bad or perverse

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Timothy Sipples Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 9:18 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: Does everybody use chargeback? Scott Chapman wrote: >Software billing is based on available/consumed capacity. IBM's is/are not. It's based on *peak* four h

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

Scott Chapman wrote: >Software billing is based on available/consumed capacity. IBM's is/are not. It's based on *peak* four hour rolling average utilization per month -- or, effectively, per subscription year for products that are not Monthly License Charge products. You can set whatever pricing

Re: SMT vs. chargeback [was: Does everybody use chargeback?]

On 3/8/2016 11:44 AM, Neil Duffee wrote: If all my threads have to run on a single CP, don't I become singly threaded? That is precisely the concept behind SMT (symmetric multithreading). During the pipeline stalls that inevitably occur (e.g., interlocks, cache misses, etc.) the other thread

Re: SMT vs. chargeback [was: Does everybody use chargeback?]

8, 2016 11:44 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: SMT vs. chargeback [was: Does everybody use chargeback?] The U of Zero (*grin*) hasn't charged back for more than 2.5 decades. I still saw account numbers in job cards when I started back then but expect it was hold-over from the card/

Re: SMT vs. chargeback [was: Does everybody use chargeback?]

arch 7, 2016 12:40 Subject: Does everybody use chargeback? I’d wondered why SMT is turned off for CPs on the new z13 and z13s. I learned at SHARE that it’s because CPU timing can’t be done as accurately when using SMT, and since that could affect chargeback it’s not allowed. This is interesting

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

On 3/8/2016 3:58 AM, Scott Chapman wrote: Even absent the chargeback and software cost issues, how do you do capacity planning with that level of variability? How do you do performance testing? Of course the other platforms that have this sort of technology seem to largely just say something

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

I believe that while chargeback is an important issue that SMT messes up, that's already somewhat messed up today because there's more variance from execution to execution. I.E. run the same exact job twice and even absent SMT you'll get different CPU measurements. That's always been the case,

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

Curtis: At one installation we used it to get gross idea for charging for usage. It worked well until we accidently found out that the numbers were *WAY* off (we weren't charging for execution batch monitoring). The *SHIT* hit the fan and the subsidiary was sold off a few years later. That

Re: Does everybody use chargeback?

hits = less CPU time. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Pew, Curtis G Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 9:40 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Does everybody use chargeback? I’d wondered why SMT is turned off

Does everybody use chargeback?

I’d wondered why SMT is turned off for CPs on the new z13 and z13s. I learned at SHARE that it’s because CPU timing can’t be done as accurately when using SMT, and since that could affect chargeback it’s not allowed. This is interesting, because we’ve never done chargeback here at UT. I was