|
Mike, I generally measure system performance by user complaints, not by response times. If your users are content with the performance of your system, then why change anything? >From the looks of your system status displays, you really do not have any pool allocations because all of your pools are managed by the system. If you have some grizzled veterans among your counterparts in the other divisions, they may feel that the performance adjustments could never perform the level of tuning that they can obtain manually. This has a historical base in the earlier releases of OS/400, which really did not do an exemplary job of managing resources. It may also have a base in arrogance and professional pride. As a grizzled veteran myself, I've found that for a fairly generic system, performance under system control provides more than adequate allocation of resources and responds to changing requirements promptly enough. It is 'good enough'. If you start to require special batch subsystems or something different, you may find some manual tuning beneficial. What would your counterparts propose? Are your users content? Andy Andy Nolen-Parkhouse IBM Certified Expert, iSeries Technology > On Behalf Of Condon, Mike > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 4:49 PM > > Some of our counterparts in other divisions managing AS400's have > commented > negatively > on our pool size allocation, and also against using IBM's QPRFADJ set to 3 > (they prefer 0). > Our system is primarily green screen rpg/db2 stuff, fairly > straightforward. > We have about > 200 open interactive sessions on a typical day. Our interactive CPW is 70. > > My question is - do any of you all have any recommendations for system > tuning given our application? > > Here is a snapshot of our wrksyssts: > > Work with System Status > S105DGAM > 10/19/01 > 15:29:26 > % CPU used . . . . . . . : 7.0 Auxiliary storage: > > % DB capability . . . . : 3.0 System ASP . . . . . . : > 77.30 G > Elapsed time . . . . . . : 00:00:40 % system ASP used . . : > 29.5261 > Jobs in system . . . . . : 2233 Total . . . . . . . . : > 77.30 G > % perm addresses . . . . : .007 Current unprotect used : > 2589 M > % temp addresses . . . . : .053 Maximum unprotect . . : > 54509 M > > > Type changes (if allowed), press Enter. > > > > System Pool Reserved Max -----DB----- ---Non-DB--- > > Pool Size (M) Size (M) Active Fault Pages Fault Pages > > 1 111.03 67.31 +++++ .0 .0 15.3 25.2 > > 2 201.78 .26 43 .0 .0 3.7 13.9 > > 3 10.23 .00 8 .0 .0 4.0 8.0 > > 4 700.93 .00 36 1.5 6.0 10.8 25.0
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.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 on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.