MIDRANGE dot COM Mailing List Archive



Home » MIDRANGE-L » May 2014

Re: Running jobs on a separate core



fixed

Interesting that the system didn't create it as a MTI...

Charles


On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:44 AM, DrFranken <midrange@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Index activity is an ongoing issue....it seems like we are forever
creating new indexes (and it appears we are recreating these on a continual
basis for the same index).

Well there's half your problem! Creating indexes isn't bad, constantly
re-creating them is VERY bad. Use the Index adviser and these should stick
out like sore thumbs!

We once created an index that took only 1 second to create yet it dropped
system wide CPU usage by TWENTY Percent! How can that be you say? It was
needed by every single query from their web site!! The index adviser nearly
cried out to create that one!

- Larry "DrFranken" Bolhuis

www.frankeni.com
www.iDevCloud.com
www.iInTheCloud.com


On 5/22/2014 10:03 AM, Brian Piotrowski wrote:

Thanks, Jim.

Index activity is an ongoing issue....it seems like we are forever
creating new indexes (and it appears we are recreating these on a continual
basis for the same index).

With that said has anyone taken the IBM course "IBM DB2 for i SQL
Performance Monitoring, Analysis and Tuning" and found any value from it?

Thanks!

/b;

-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Jim Oberholtzer
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 10:00 AM
To: 'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'
Subject: RE: Running jobs on a separate core

I don't know if a processor group will work in this case because
ordinarily the license program is set to run in a processor group. Having
not tried to push the QZDASOINIT and/or QSQSRVR jobs into one, I don't know
if it can be done (Domino and WAS can be pushed into one).

Look into processor groups, only because you have more than one processor.

Also in your performance investigations remember to look at index
activity.
Unless this box is just stressed with workload, I usually find quite a
bit of temporary index activity in situations like the one you describe.
You should also see quite a bit of I/O activity on the disk units if
indexing is going on too.

--
Jim Oberholtzer
Chief Technical Architect
Agile Technology Architects


-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
rob@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 8:47 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: Running jobs on a separate core

Now there's an oxymoron: "new 400".

I don't believe there is a way to dedicate out processors like you can
memory. With memory, you can bust it up into subsystems and whatnot. This
has been around since, well, back on 400's.
About the only way to dedicate processors is to create separate
partitions.


Rob Berendt
--
IBM Certified System Administrator - IBM i 6.1 Group Dekko Dept 1600 Mail
to: 2505 Dekko Drive
Garrett, IN 46738
Ship to: Dock 108
6928N 400E
Kendallville, IN 46755
http://www.dekko.com





From: Brian Piotrowski <bpiotrowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx)"
<midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 05/22/2014 09:26 AM
Subject: Running jobs on a separate core
Sent by: "MIDRANGE-L" <midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx>



All,

In the next month or so our new 400 will be delivered to us. The new box
will have two cores because right now our single core machine is being
crushed by the QZDASOINIT jobs (they occupy anywhere from 75% - 90% of the
CPU utilization at any given time).

Yes, we are investigating the reasons why these jobs are occupying so
much, but I wanted to know if there's a way I can dedicate a core to a
specific job or subsystem? I would like to move the web jobs off to their
own core so the other core can focus on taking care of the other tasks.

Any advice or recommendations would be appreciated.


Thankee-sai!

/b;

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Brian Piotrowski
Manager - I.T.
Simcoe Parts Service, Inc.
Ph: 705-435-7814 x343
Fx: 705-435-5029
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
http://www.simcoeparts.com<http://www.simcoeparts.com/>

Please consider the environment. Don't print this e-mail unless you
really need to.

The information contained in this communication is confidential and
intended only for the use of those to whom it is addressed. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify me by telephone
(collect if necessary) and delete or destroy any copies of it. Thank you!

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.







Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2014 by MIDRANGE dot COM and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available here. If you have questions about this, please contact