Re: Core processor utilization Was: Cumulative PTF w/o Technology Refresh

Hey, Jim O.,
Do this mean what I think it means?
ENTITLED PROCESSING CAPACITY: 2.00.
Basically Kurt should have 2?


Rob Berendt
-- IBM Certified System Administrator - IBM i 6.1 Group Dekko Dept 1600 Mail to: 2505 Dekko Drive Garrett, IN 46738 Ship to: Dock 108 6928N 400E Kendallville, IN 46755 http://www.dekko.com From: "Anderson, Kurt" <KAnderson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Date: 05/16/2013 09:58 AM Subject: RE: Core processor utilization Was: Cumulative PTF w/o Technology Refresh Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx I ran it in QCmd, pressed F10 and did not see additional information.

> call qlzarcapi

SYSTEM INFO -> SYSTEM SERIAL NUMBER: 10-A67CP . SYSTEM TYPE-MODEL:
8202-
E4B. PROCESSOR FEATURE CODE: 8352. PROCESSOR GROUP: P10. MAX PHYSICAL

PROCS IN SYSTEM: 8. CONFIGURABLE PROCS IN SYSTEM: 8.
PARTITION INFO -> NETWORK NAME: 10A67CP . PARTITION NAME: 10-A67CP.
PARTITION ID: 1. SHARING TYPE: DEDICATED. MINIMUM PROCESSING UNITS:
1.00. DESIRED PROCESSING UNITS: 8.00. MAXIMUM PROCESSING CAPACITY:
8.00. ENTITLED PROCESSING CAPACITY: 2.00.

-Kurt

-----Original Message-----
From:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [
mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Ofrob@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2013 6:21 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: Core processor utilization Was: Cumulative PTF w/o Technology
Refresh

Worked great! The catch was I had to look at the whole joblog and not
just the last message on the screen.
call qlzarcapi
SYSTEM INFO -> SYSTEM SERIAL NUMBER: 10-3BDDD . SYSTEM TYPE-MODEL: 9117-
MMA. PROCESSOR FEATURE CODE: 7380. PROCESSOR GROUP: P30. MAX PHYSICAL
PROCS IN SYSTEM: 8. CONFIGURABLE PROCS IN SYSTEM: 8.
PARTITION INFO -> NETWORK NAME: GDISYS . PARTITION NAME: GDISYS.
PARTITION ID: 3. SHARING TYPE: SHARED. SHARING MODE: UNCAPPED. MIN
PROCESSING CAPACITY: 0.10. DESIRED PROCESSING UNITS: 1.25. MAX
PROCESSING CAPACITY: 7.00. ENTITLED PROCESSING CAPACITY: 1.25. MIN
VIRTUAL PROCESSORS: 1. DESIRED VIRTUAL PROCESSORS: 3. MAX VIRTUAL
PROCESSORS: 8. ONLINE VIRTUAL PROCESSORS: 3 PROCESSOR POOL INFO ->
NUMBER OF VIRTUAL PROCESSOR POOLS CONFIGURED: 1.
CURRENT PROCESSOR POOL ID: 0. MAXIMUM PROCESSING UNITS FOR PROCESSOR
POOL 0: 7.

Kurt should try this.


Rob Berendt
--
IBM Certified System Administrator - IBM i 6.1 Group Dekko Dept 1600 Mail
to: 2505 Dekko Drive
Garrett, IN 46738
Ship to: Dock 108
6928N 400E
Kendallville, IN 46755
http://www.dekko.com





From: Jack Kingsley<iseriesflorida@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion<midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date: 05/15/2013 05:09 PM
Subject: Re: Core processor utilization Was: Cumulative PTF w/o
Technology Refresh
Sent by:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx



Rob, this isn't what your looking for, call qlzarcapi




On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 2:49 PM,<rob@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Trying to tie the information available on HMC to that available from
> other limited resources. For example, if I display this on my HMC
>
> Processing Units
> Minimum: 0.10
> Sharing mode: Uncapped
> Assigned: 1.25
> Weight: 128
> Maximum: 7.00
> Shared processor pool: DefaultPool (0)
>
> Virtual Processors
> Minimum: 1.0
> Assigned: 3.0
> Maximum: 8.0
>
>
> What would match this on 5250 or iNav?
> I don't see a match using
> wrkhdwrsc *prc
> wrksysact
> wrksyssts
>
> And, short of display/alter/debug, nothing sticks out in SST.
>
>
> Rob Berendt
> --
> IBM Certified System Administrator - IBM i 6.1
> Group Dekko
> Dept 1600
> Mail to: 2505 Dekko Drive
> Garrett, IN 46738
> Ship to: Dock 108
> 6928N 400E
> Kendallville, IN 46755
> http://www.dekko.com
>
>
>
>
>
> From: "Steinmetz, Paul"<PSteinmetz@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'"
> <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> Date: 05/15/2013 11:27 AM
> Subject: RE: Cumulative PTF w/o Technology Refresh
> Sent by:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> Active jobs: 1222, even with 10 batch jobs running at one, 2nd core
> never used.
> Spikes are hitting .8, never goes over 1.0
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [
> mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Ofrob@xxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 11:22 AM
> To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
> Subject: RE: Cumulative PTF w/o Technology Refresh
>
> You ought to try running more than one job at a time. The fact that one
> or more is single threaded doesn't matter. One could be running on one
> core and the second on the other.
>
>
> Rob Berendt
> --
> IBM Certified System Administrator - IBM i 6.1 Group Dekko Dept 1600

Mail

> to: 2505 Dekko Drive
> Garrett, IN 46738
> Ship to: Dock 108
> 6928N 400E
> Kendallville, IN 46755
> http://www.dekko.com
>
>
>
>
>
> From: "Steinmetz, Paul"<PSteinmetz@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'"
> <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> Date: 05/15/2013 11:17 AM
> Subject: RE: Cumulative PTF w/o Technology Refresh
> Sent by:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> I have 2 cores on my production LPAR, 2nd core is never used, majority

of

> AS/400 software is single threaded, biggest reason why the core is not
> used.
> Confirmed this with MPG performance processor used graph.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [
> mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Ofrob@xxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 11:08 AM
> To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
> Subject: Re: Cumulative PTF w/o Technology Refresh
>
> Jim hit the biggest one
> Was the LPAR profile changed to use the extra processor?
> I can go to my HMC and activate another core by entering the key in our
> Capacity Upgrade on Demand. However, if I don't then allocate that to

one

>
> or more lpars it's a waste of money.
>
> Jim, I too initially thought he didn't want to apply the TR. I reread

it.

>
>
> He does want to apply the TR. He was just under the impression that it
> wasn't included on the cume. It is, IBM's just behind on their
> documentation. I've submitted web feed back that they get the cover
> letter for TR6 updated to show the PTF's are now on a cume.
>
> Rob Berendt
> --
> IBM Certified System Administrator - IBM i 6.1 Group Dekko Dept 1600

Mail

> to: 2505 Dekko Drive
> Garrett, IN 46738
> Ship to: Dock 108
> 6928N 400E
> Kendallville, IN 46755
> http://www.dekko.com
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Jim Oberholtzer<midrangel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion<midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> Date: 05/15/2013 11:02 AM
> Subject: Re: Cumulative PTF w/o Technology Refresh
> Sent by:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> Kurt,
>
> I agree with your partners request, I would make the same one. That
> said, if you have seen no improvement, I suspect a different problem
> than PTFs. Is this an LPAR box? Was the LPAR profile changed to use
> the extra processor? Is there a high limit on the processor that is
> less than (I think two based on your description) the number of
> processors you had before adding one?
>
> Yes, you can apply the cumulative and then go back and apply the group
> for the TR later; But I highly suggest that in addition to the
> Cumulative you apply the following list of groups as well:
> PTF Group Text
> SF99710 CUMULATIVE PTF PACKAGE C3037710
> SF99709 GROUP HIPER
> SF99708 GROUP SECURITY
> SF99705 HARDWARE AND RELATED PTFS
> SF99701 DB2 FOR IBM I
> SF99627 7.1 ELECTRONIC SERVICES GROUP PTF
> SF99572 JAVA
> SF99368 IBM HTTP SERVER FOR I
> SF99367 TCP/IP PTF
> SF99366 PRINT PTFS
> SF99362 BACKUP RECOVERY SOLUTIONS (even if you don't use
> BRMS this is where all the save/restore PTFs are)
> SF99145 PERFORMANCE TOOLS (if you have them)
>
> The TR is SF99707 TECHNOLOGY REFRESH
>
> The HIPER, and Hardware ones are the ones I would find most important in
> this case, however if your taking the time to apply any Group you might
> just as well get the entire batch. I'm not sure why you would not
> want the TR group as well, unless there is something in the cover letter
> that leads you to believe there is going to be a problem.
>
> Jim Oberholtzer
> Chief Technical Architect
> Agile Technology Architects
>
>
> On 5/15/2013 9:49 AM, Anderson, Kurt wrote:

> > So we've been really bad about PTFs. Our IBM BP is asking that we

apply

>
>
> PTFs because after getting an additional core activated (from 1 to 2)
> we've noticed 0 improvement on the system.

> > So we finally ordered a cumulative PTF and we're looking at applying

it.

>
>
> But then I thought, "What about technology refreshes?" It doesn't
> appear that the cume comes with a TR on it. Cume: C3037710

> >

>
>

http://www-912.ibm.com/systems/electronic/support/s_dir/sline003.nsf/PSP%20Number%20View/SF98035

>
>
>

> >
> > Are we safe to apply the Cume w/o a TR and then later investigate

> applying a Technology Refresh?

> >
> > Thanks,
> > Kurt Anderson
> > Sr. Programmer/Analyst
> > CustomCall Data Systems, a division of Enghouse Systems Ltd