ca.portal.admin

CPU Increase in 16.0

Discussion created by ca.portal.admin on Sep 25, 2005
Dear Listers -

We went into production 2 weeks ago with Release 16.0 - SP2 from Release
14.1.

Since then, our stats are showing a 10% increase in CPU within the
production CV.
The lion's share of the increase has been in System Mode CPU, although
we have seen a slight increase in User Mode CPU, as well.

Some of the postings I've reviewed say CPU was a wash going to 16.0.
C.A. says it should be a wash.

So, I am thinking that something got set or reset during the upgrade.
I'll be dipped if I can find it.

We use multitasking, but my understanding is that there isn't a whole
lot of tuning that can go on here....anything different with
multitasking?
All user programs are defined as MPMODE ANY.
All programs are defined as NODYNAMIC except for those that have
multiple versions.
All programs are defined as NOPROTECT and we have PROTECT on at the
system level.
We are not using the high performance storage protection feature (we get
a warning at startup that tells us so).
We have no SYSLOCKS overflow.
Our line definitions are a mix of COMPACT / NOCOMPACT and DEFRESP /
EXPRESP..... anything change here?
For ADSO, record compression is OFF and Storage Mode is Calculated.
We have PERFMON and are collecting application and interval statistics
to the IDMS log....anything change here?
We do use a special loadlist and not SYSLOAD, which searches loadlib
first.

Did anyone have a similar experience with 16.0 or am I alone?
If you did see an increase, did you find what was responsible?
What else should I be checking?

Thank You all for any direction you can provide.
Jon Gocher
This communication is intended for the use of the recipient to which it is addressed, and may contain confidential, personal and or privileged information. Please contact us immediately if you are not the intended recipients of this communication, and do not copy, distribute, or take action relying on it. Any communication received in error, or subsequent reply, should be deleted or destroyed.

"
IDMS Public Discussion Forum
IDMS-L@LISTSERV.IUASSN.COM
SMTP
IDMS-L@LISTSERV.IUASSN.COM
IDMS-L@LISTSERV.IUASSN.COM
SMTP








Normal

Normal
Re: CPU Increase in 16.0
"Thanks Chris.
Multiple Enclave is OFF at the system level.
C.A. has asked us to change queue depth for multi-tasking from 2 to 3.
I'll let the list know if anything we try helps.

Thanks.
Jon Gocher

Quoting ""Wood, Chris"" <Chris.Wood@GOV.AB.CA>:
Jon,

We are not using multitasking so I cannot comment about that but 16.0
introduced Multiple Enclave support if you are running under LE and
have
DC-COBOL. It should be OFF at the system level and ON at the program
level unless you changed it. I have not heard of the affects of this
setting on the List.

Chris Wood
Alberta Department of Energy
CANADA

-----Original Message-----
From: IDMS Public Discussion Forum
[mailTo:IDMS-L@LISTSERV.IUASSN.COM]
On Behalf Of Jon R. Gocher
Sent: September 25, 2005 9:32 AM
To: IDMS-L@LISTSERV.IUASSN.COM
Subject: CPU Increase in 16.0

Dear Listers -

We went into production 2 weeks ago with Release 16.0 - SP2 from
Release
14.1.

Since then, our stats are showing a 10% increase in CPU within the
production CV.
The lion's share of the increase has been in System Mode CPU,
although
we have seen a slight increase in User Mode CPU, as well.

Some of the postings I've reviewed say CPU was a wash going to 16.0.
C.A. says it should be a wash.

So, I am thinking that something got set or reset during the upgrade.
I'll be dipped if I can find it.

We use multitasking, but my understanding is that there isn't a whole
lot of tuning that can go on here....anything different with
multitasking?
All user programs are defined as MPMODE ANY.
All programs are defined as NODYNAMIC except for those that have
multiple versions.
All programs are defined as NOPROTECT and we have PROTECT on at the
system level.
We are not using the high performance storage protection feature (we
get
a warning at startup that tells us so).
We have no SYSLOCKS overflow.
Our line definitions are a mix of COMPACT / NOCOMPACT and DEFRESP /
EXPRESP..... anything change here?
For ADSO, record compression is OFF and Storage Mode is Calculated.
We have PERFMON and are collecting application and interval
statistics
to the IDMS log....anything change here?
We do use a special loadlist and not SYSLOAD, which searches loadlib
first.

Did anyone have a similar experience with 16.0 or am I alone?
If you did see an increase, did you find what was responsible?
What else should I be checking?

Thank You all for any direction you can provide.
Jon Gocher
This communication is intended for the use of the recipient to which
it is addressed, and may contain confidential, personal and or
privileged information. Please contact us immediately if you are not
the intended recipients of this communication, and do not copy,
distribute, or take action relying on it. Any communication received
in error, or subsequent reply, should be deleted or destroyed.
"
IDMS Public Discussion Forum
IDMS-L@LISTSERV.IUASSN.COM
SMTP
IDMS-L@LISTSERV.IUASSN.COM
IDMS-L@LISTSERV.IUASSN.COM
SMTP








Normal

Normal
IDMS 14.1 vs CICS TS 3.1
"hello all,
while waiting to migrate my last set of idms production environments from
14.1 to 15.0, the question has arisen - if CICS TS 3.1 gets installed in
this last environment before IDMS 15.0, will there be a problem with CICS
TS 3.1 running against IDMS 14.1 (sp3) ??? has anyone ran or is running
this configuration??


thanks,
Chris Hoelscher
IDMS & DB2 Database Administrator
Humana Inc
502-580-2538
choelscher@humana.com




The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain CONFIDENTIAL material. If you receive this material/information in error, please contact the sender and delete or destroy the material/information.

"
IDMS Public Discussion Forum
IDMS-L@LISTSERV.IUASSN.COM
SMTP
IDMS-L@LISTSERV.IUASSN.COM
IDMS-L@LISTSERV.IUASSN.COM
SMTP








Normal

Normal
Re: Linked-to dialogs in PerfMon reports
"Kay - The PerfMon statistics are task statistics and as such include all the
DB+DC work done by every program called during task execution. The only way
that a linked to or invoked dialog will show up in the task stats separately
from the higher level dialog is if it does a mapout - since the task ends
for the pseudo-converse. Even then there is a ""gotcha"" - in your perf mon
options you can specify whether the dialog that gets control after the
pseudo-converse will be named in the task stats, or the dialog that does the
mapout. This of course doesn't help for any dialogs that don't do a display
that have been linked to during task execution (for example linked to ""sub
routines"").

Which way you want this set up can be important - and it's based on how your
applications are designed. Let's say you nominate the dialog that does the
display to be recorded in the stats - and the response processes that do
updating have a ""fast"" execution mode and pass control to the next response
after updating - then the dialog that does the display may show a lot of IO,
including page writes, even if it is a retrieval only dialog - and may even
do no database work - perhaps just providing a ""prompt"" to the user - it may
even be a menu. This would seriously skew your understanding of the stats.
In this case it would be better to specify the dialog that gets control
after the pseudo-converse - in this way the dialog whose response process
does all the work during the task will correctly be credited with the work.

The only other way to get information about individual dialogs is through
ADS dialog statistics - but I doubt you'd want to turn those on in
production.

HTH - cheers - Gary

Gary Cherlet
Justice Technology Services
Telephone +61 (0)8 8226 5199
Facsimile +61 (0)8 8226 5311
Mobile +61 (0)41 333 1613
MailTo:cherlet.gary@saugov.sa.gov.au

This e-mail message and any attachments are qualified as follows:
Addressing: If you have received this e-mail in error, please advise by
reply e-mail to the sender. Please also destroy the original transmission
and its contents.
Confidentiality: This e-mail may contain confidential information which
also may be legally privileged. Only the intended recipient(s) may access,
use, distribute or copy this e-mail.
Individual Views: Unless otherwise indicated, the views expressed are those
of the sender, not Justice Technology Services.
Computer Viruses: It is the recipient's responsibility to check the e-mail
and any attached files for viruses.

Outcomes