What kind of work management are you trying to accomplish where the number of virtual processors exceeds physical? Seems to me the i LPARs should cap at 5 VCPUs each.
I'm not assuming changing the VCPU setting will fix anything, but unless you've something unusual going on there really isn't any advantage to setting max VCPU > max physical CPU.
--
John A. Jones, CISSP
Sr. Analyst, Global Information Security
Jones Lang LaSalle, Inc.
Voice: +1.630-455.2787
FAX: +1.312.601.1782
Email: john.jones@xxxxxxxxxx
-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of rob@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 12:31 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Processor pools
Let's say your MMA has 6 processors and you are licensed for 5 processors
for i. You have 5 of the processors spread out against 3 i lpars, leaving
you one processor. You put that into a Linux lpar. All processors are
still in the default processor pool however.
You are getting:
CPF9E7F-i5/OS usage limit exceeded - operator action required.
Cause . . . . . : The processor usage limit of 5 processors for product
5722SS1, license term V5, feature 5051 has been exceeded.
-- Current processor usage across all active i5/OS partitions is 6.00.
-- Current processor usage for the local partition is 6.00.
But, you argue, are only using 5 for i. No matter, either
- The Linux lpar has to be "dedicated" instead of "shared" on it's
processors, or,
- Each i lpar should have dedicated processors.
- All of the processors for i should be busted out of the default pool and
into their own shared pool.
- "Change the number of desired virtual processors for the IBM i
partitions so that they are five or less. The only one that is greater
than five currently is GDIHQ."
- Apparently busting the Linux out into it's own shared pool doesn't cut
the mustard.
I'm no wizard on "virtual processors" but my boss makes them some
multiple. Like GDIHQ is saying
Processing Units Minimum: 0.10 Sharing mode: Uncapped
Assigned: 3.70 Weight: 240
Maximum: 5.00 Shared processor pool: DefaultPool (0)
Virtual Processors
Minimum: 1.0
Assigned: 10.0
Maximum: 40.0
Now, the CPF9E7F message isn't crying about no 10 or 40 so I don't
understand the comment about virtual processors.
The least disruptive would be to drop the Linux lpar and make it's
processor dedicated.
Rob Berendt
--
Group Dekko Services, LLC
Dept 01.073
Dock 108
6928N 400E
Kendallville, IN 46755
http://www.dekko.com
--
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 email is for the use of the intended recipient(s) only. If you have
received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and then
delete it. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not keep, use,
disclose, copy or distribute this email without the author's prior
permission. We have taken precautions to minimize the risk of transmitting
software viruses, but we advise you to carry out your own virus checks on
any attachment to this message. We cannot accept liability for any loss
or damage caused by software viruses. The information contained in this
communication may be confidential and may be subject to the attorney-client
privilege. If you are the intended recipient and you do not wish to receive
similar electronic messages from us in the future then please respond to the
sender to this effect.
midrange.com
