RE: Multiple processors

No, not sure about it.  ;)  All good points.


--
Justin C. Haase - Solution Engineer
IBM Certified Systems Expert - System i
Kingland Systems Corporation

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Wilt, Charles
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 11:34 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: RE: Multiple processors

Justin, are you sure about that?

If this partition really only runs the one job, as the OP said, and the
system CPU is at ++++.  Then would adding another processor help?  I
don't believe that the iSeries can spilt a single job between 2
processors, a jobs only runs on one processor at a time right?

With just a single job involved, the most work you can get is a single
physical CPU's work of work.

Is he currently getting a physical CPU's worth of work?  Given that the
OP is talking about partitions, he'd need to look at his partition setup
since with partitions you're dealing with physical and virtual
partitions.

If the OP has a single physical CPU assigned to the partition, and that
CPU is being maxed out on this one job; the only way to get more work
would be too add CPU(s) AND split the job into multiple jobs.

Splitting the job could be very easy.  For example, if the job reads
from record #1 to record #1,000,000 split it into 2 jobs one that
handles records 1-500,000 the other handles 500,001 to 1,000,000.
Assuming a 2 CPU system and storage subsystem that can support it,
you'll get done in half the time.

I remember reading an article, I think from the IBM teraplex Center,
that discussed this method of improving batch jobs.  

Lastly, when looking at the DASD subsystem, we need to know if the job
uses journal files and rather or not it uses commitment control.

HTH,

Charles Wilt
--
iSeries Systems Administrator / Developer Mitsubishi Electric Automotive
America
ph: 513-573-4343
fax: 513-398-1121
  

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Haase, Justin C.
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 11:38 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: RE: Multiple processors

Depends if it's bound by processor, disk, memory, what have you.

If the job is running at +++++ CPU, yes, processor would help.

If it's running at 1.7% CPU and your disks are at 100% busy, no amount

of processor will help.

How's the system look? 


--
Justin C. Haase - Solution Engineer
IBM Certified Systems Expert - System i Kingland Systems Corporation

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Steve McKay
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 10:36 AM
To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Multiple processors

We have a partition which runs *one* batch job and one interactive 
session for the operator that checks on the batch job occasionally.
This batch job runs for days at a time and when it finishes, another 
similar job is kicked off by the operator.  We want to reduce the run 
time of the batch job.  One suggestion is to add another processor to 
the partition.  I'm not convinced that adding another processor will 
improve the run time.  So my dumb question for today is:

Will adding another processor to a partition running a single batch 
job decrease the run time of the batch job?

Thanks,

Steve


--
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.



CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This e-mail communication, including 
attachments, is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 
18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is confidential, and may be legally privileged.  
If you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this 
communication in error, please reply to the sender indicating that 
fact and delete the copy you received.  In addition, retention, 
dissemination, distribution, copying, or otherwise use of the 
information contained in this communication is strictly prohibited.  
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.

--
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.



CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This e-mail communication, including attachments, is 
covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is 
confidential, and may be legally privileged.  If you are not the intended 
recipient or believe you received this communication in error, please reply to 
the sender indicating that fact and delete the copy you received.  In addition, 
retention, dissemination, distribution, copying, or otherwise use of the 
information contained in this communication is strictly prohibited.  Thank you.