Phil,

You have certainly identified some of the politics of performance
management ...

Unless the one screen that takes two minutes to run must read 1,000,000
records to get the result, the answer will probably not be obvious.

How many "Interactive CPW's" do you have on your machine?  This is a
separately charged feature code ... it is different than the processor
CPW.  If these are "green screen" applications, they may be running into
IBM's limits on Interactive performance.

This probably isn't a matter of "take two aspirin and call me in the
morning" ... there is usually no easy way out.  Performance issues get very
complex very quickly ... you had better pull out the work management books
too ...

In the IBM Performance Tools, there is a capacity planner called Best/1
that allows you to model your system's performance and will recommend what
is necessary to meet a particular response time objective.

Good luck!

John Myers

Free Sports League Management - Powered by AS/400
      http://www.ScoreBook.com

At 11:20 AM 12/13/2001, you wrote:
>--
>[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
>
>I would start by setting the system value(s) relating to machine pool
>size, max active and a few others.  If you look in the work management
>manual there used to be a section on performance tuning, whereby pool
>sizes, faulting rates, and paging are explained.  You can really speed the
>system up by properly allocating memory in your subsystem descriptions.
>Be sure that you understand what you are doing before jumping on this as
>you could end up doing more harm than good.  Just take your time and
>follow the manual.  I found that it worked quite nicely.
>   prumschlag@phdinc.com wrote:
>
>I have been asked to come up with a plan so that no user will ever have to
>wait
>more than 30 seconds for an AS/400 interactive response. The request (from the
>company president) was based on a completely out-of-context observation of one
>user who had to wait 2 minutes for a response to one particular screen on one
>occurrence. The president's intent is good, he just does not know what he is
>asking for.
>
>Because I don't believe his request can be or should be satisfied as he worded
>it, I am planning to reshape it into an initiative to monitor both average and
>longest response times, set goals (not guarantees) for both, be able to
>explain
>exceptions, and propose a series of solutions that are most cost effective. I
>will report this to him on a monthly basis. Sounds pretty noble, huh?
>
>Just for the record, Ops Navigator shows that throughout the day our average
>response time is normally under 2 seconds, and often under 1 second. We are
>running JDE World on a 730 dual processor.
>
>I am sure there are hundreds of ways to approach this (bigger processor, more
>memory, more disks, better management of file sizes, better scheduling of
>batch
>jobs, LPAR(?), separate test box, programming changes, yada, yada, yada.).
>
>Here is my question (finally). Other than pulling out the Performance Tuning
>manuals, is there a quicker/easier/better way to approach this? Remember, my
>goal is to develop meaningful performance measures and be able to identify
>solutions to performance problems.
>
>Thanks.
>Phil




As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2022 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.