Re: Performance Issues on 570

   Jim,

   System values were the same originally.  Of course, there have been many
   changes and tuning and tests going on by the engineers over the past
   month. No improvements yet. 

   Early on, I did find some PTF's that we had to apply on V5R2 (to fix
   problems in the debugger) that apparently, did not make it V5R3 or the
   cumes.  The debugger went back to it's old bad ways until I found new
   PTF's. When you finally get something fixed on one release, you just kinda
   assume you want have the same problem in the next one. 

   Thanks for the imput.

   Jim Franz wrote:

 Has there been a verification if any system values changed in release
 upgrade?
 Same for the subsystem descriptions (and class descriptions)?
 I assume you have latest ptf cume, and at least current group ptfs hiper &
 database?
 Has the paging option or max active value or pool size for the pools
 changed?
 Any verification with system tools of the drives (new & old) having
 problems?
 If nothing changed in programs. I would be looking at the work environment
 and
 what changed in the release upgrade.
 jim

 ----- Original Message -----
 From: "Nelson Smith" <ncsmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
 To: "Midrange Systems Technical Discussion" <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
 Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 8:46 PM
 Subject: Re: Performance Issues on 570


  

 About a month ago, my company upgraded from an 870 to a 570.  We went
 from 48G to 96G and more than doubled our disk capacity and increased
 the number of arms from around 90 to 128. We went down in processors
 from 12 to 11. Unfortunately, we also upgraded from V5R2 to V5R3 at the
 same time (I know, I know).

 After spending many hundreds of thousands of dollars, the sad result is
 that some of our major batch processes have more than doubled in run
 times.  For example, a 4-hour nightly billing run is now taking upwards
 of 9 hours.  Needless to say, there is much knashing of teeth going on
 around here and it is not a pleasant experience. It seems to be
 primarily a batch problem.  Processor efficiency and interactive
 response times seem to be improved.  During the batch runs, there seems
 to be a great amount of paging going on.

 Both the old system and the new one, have (had) a development partitian
 and a production partition. Relative sizes have not changed.  There have
 been no significant changes in database sizes or the applications. Both
 Business Partner and IBM have had many engineers working on the problem
 for a month now and of course, everyone is pointing fingers at everyone
 else.  They have been running every sort of performance management tool
 you can think of. They have tuned this and that. They have replace card
 after card.  They have tried all sorts of caching schemes.  All to no
 avail.

 Lately, they are starting to point fingers at the applications.  Now I
 grant you that our applications are old and could stand much
 improvement, but they have not changed since before the upgrade.  We are
 embarking on a modernation project in development, but we will not
 implement any such improvements until the upgrade issues are settled.

 The one question I have not been able to get a straight answer out of
 any of these engineers, and the reason for this post, is what has been
 the experience of other recent converts to the 570?  Or, what has been
 the experience of other upgraders from V5R2 to V5R3? Particularly in
 relation to long-running batch jobs.  I can't think of anything unique
 in what we are running.  We have very little, if any, embedded SQL.
 That's the only thing I've seen any complaints about on this list.  Has
 anyone else going to a 570 experienced any sort of major slowdown?  At
 this point, we are willing to look at anything.



 --
 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.