mark taylor wrote:
> Hamie, IMHO WLM and Performance are not too terms that bode together
> well ... Does your system become so overloaded that it hangs ? or one
> process hogs all the cpu time leaving other processes waiting for cpu
> ? if the answer to those 2 questions is no, then leave WLM off. It
> should only be used as a work around to a badly specc'd server for
> workload. If on the other hand you get all 4 cpu's constantly on >
> 85%, then good luck with your config or buy faster / more cpu ...
>

None of the above. The box is well speced (in fact there are 5x 4
processor p630's (@ 1.4GHz IIRC)). The WLM is there because it's a
shared box, and the people who use it will get the performance they have
paid for.

What we don't want is for them to get BETTER performance & so develope
an unreasonable expectation that this is becuase of the wonderful code
etc rather than getting a free ride that shall come to a halt at some
stage. nor do we want them to choke the CPU for other people on the box
who have paid to have the headroom.

WLM appears to work fine (We use it for limiting CPu uage by things like
Patrol, and for boxes that have multiple instances of note on them)
until you get a lot of short lived processes that have sub-second
executaion times at which point it seems to roll up its toes & choke the
performance down to a constant 10-15% CPu usage no matter what the
settings...

H

> Rgds
> Mark Taylor