Introduction



This report consists of five parts:

 - This Introduction and a page of general run statistics.

 - A listing of the service policy which CPExpert extracted from the
   SMF Type 72 records. If the service policy was changed, CPExpert
   will list the new service policy and show the date/time the new
   policy was activated.

 - Service Policy Findings (if any).  The Service Policy Findings are
   rules in the WLM001 to WLM050 range.  These findings help identify
   problems or potential problems with the Workload Manager service
   definition.

   It is important to realize that these findings normally identify
   a POTENTIAL problem.  Your systems programming staff must decide
   whether the findings (and their associated recommendations) make
   sense in your environment.  For example, your systems programming
   staff might have deliberately selected certain parameter values.
   The values might be appropriate for your installation and your
   management objectives, even though CPExpert might produce a rule
   indicating that there is a potential problem with the parameter.

   You can disable CPExpert's checking the service definition by
   modifying the CHKPLCY guidance variable in USOURCE(WLMGUIDE).  If
   the CHKPLCY guidance variable is set to N, CPExpert will not check
   the service definition for potential problems.

 - General System Findings (if any).  The General System Findings
   are rules in the WLM050 to WLM099 range.  These findings identify
   problems or potential problems with your overall system.  For
   example, many of the rules deal with problems with the paging
   subsystem.  These findings are made only if CPExpert detected that
   a performance goal was not met and that some general system problem
   might have caused the goal to be missed.

 - Specific Findings.  The Specific Findings are rules above WLM100.
   These findings are made if CPExpert detected that a service class
   did not meet its performance goal.  In the Specific Findings,
   CPExpert attempts to isolate the reason(s) the performance goal
   was not met.

   The Specific Findings also include findings related to Cross System
   Coupling Facility (XCF) performance.  The XCF Findings are rules in
   the WLM600 to WLM699 range. These findings are made when CPExpert
   detects problems or potential problems with XCF performance.

When findings are produced by the WLM Component, please refer to the
detailed description of the rule contained in the WLM Component User
Manual.  The User Manual will describe why the finding was made, give
an assessment of the overall performance impact of the finding, and
discuss alternatives which may be implemented to solve the problem.

Thank you for using CPExpert!  We hope that it helps you analyze your
system performance under IBM's Workload Manager.

Please call Computer Management Sciences at (703) 922-7027 if you
have any questions or if you have suggestions for product improvement.

 


 
Guidance variables



        WORKLOAD MANAGER ANALYSIS, Tue, Mar 20, 2001 - SYSTEM: SYS1
                Analyzed by Version 11.2.0 of CPExpert(tm)
          (C) Copyright 2001, Computer Management Sciences, Inc.
                               PAGE: 1 - PART 1


THE FOLLOWING GUIDANCE WAS PROVIDED TO THE WLM
COMPONENT DURING THIS EXECUTION OF CPEXPERT.

SELECTSW = N               * SELECT SPECIFIC SERVICE CLASSES TO ANALYZE
SELECT1  = TPNSEVEN        * ANALYZE TPNSEVEN SERVICE CLASS
PERIOD1  = 1               * ANALYZE PERIOD 1 OF TPNSEVEN SERVICE CLASS
EXCLUDSW = N               * EXCLUDE SPECIFIC SERVICE CLASSES
EXCLUDE1 = CICSRGN         * EXCLUDE TMNSODD SERVICE CLASS
AVGRESP  = ELAPSED         * COMPUTE RESPONSE TIME BASED ON ELAPSED TIME
PHASE    = EXECUTION       * ANALYZE WORK MANAGER EXECUTION PHASE
MINTRANS = 10              * IGNORE INTERVALS WITH LESS THAN 10 TRANS.
MINSAMP  = 100             * IGNORE SRV CLASS WITH LESS THAN 100 SAMPLES
HIGHCPU  = 75              * PERCENT TO USE IN REPORTING HIGH CPU USERS
MAXVEL   = 30
MAXRESP  = 0:05:00
WLMSIG   =  0.100          * SIGNIFICANT PERCENT DEGRADATION
PERFINDX = 1.1             * PERFORMANCE INDEX-MISSED GOALS EXCEED THIS
CHKPLCY  = Y               * CHECK SERVICE POLICY
WLMDATES = 01FEB1991       * START DATE FOR DATA ANALYSIS
WLMTIMES = 08:00:00        * START TIME FOR DATA ANALYSIS
WLMDATEE = 20MAR2001       * END DATE FOR DATA ANALYSIS
WLMTIMEE = 17:59:59        * END TIME FOR DATA ANALYSIS
WLMDAT2S = 0               * DEFAULT SECOND SELECTION DATE - START
WLMTIM2S = 0               * DEFAULT SECOND SELECTION TIME - START
WLMDAT2E = 0               * DEFAULT SECOND SELECTION DATE - END
WLMTIM2E = 0               * DEFAULT SECOND SELECTION TIME - END
SHIFT    = Y               * START AND END TIMES APPLY TO A SHIFT
VERBOSE= = V=              * RESULTS: VERBOSE/CONCISE/SUMMARY/HISTORY
SYSTEM=  = SYS1=           * SPECIFY SYSTEM TO PROCESS (*ALL = ALL)
LISTRPT= = N=
HTML=Y;  = Y=Y;            * USE SAS ODS FEATURES
HTMLLINK = Y               * LINK TO CPEXPERT DOCUMENTATION
FRAME    = WLMFRAME.HTM    * USE GENERIC ODS FRAME NAME
CONTENTS = WLMCONTENTS.HTM * USE GENERIC ODS CONTENTS NAME
BODY     = WLMBODY.HTM     * USE GENERIC ODS BODY NAME
PATH     =                 * DO NOT SPECIFY PATH FOR ODS OUTPUT
COUPLE   = Y
EXCLASSW = Y
PCTSML   = 99

 


 
Summary of analysis performed



        WORKLOAD MANAGER ANALYSIS, Tue, Mar 20, 2001 - SYSTEM: SYS1
                Analyzed by Version 11.2.0 of CPExpert(tm)
          (C) Copyright 2001, Computer Management Sciences, Inc.
                               PAGE: 2 - PART 1



       SUMMARY OF WLM COMPONENT OPERATION, EXECUTED ON Fri, Jun 15, 2001




TOTAL RECORDS READ FROM MXG PDBLIB.TYPE72GO INPUT FILE:             17,132

RECORDS SELECTED BASED UPON SYSTEM/START/END CRITERIA:               1,839

REPORT CLASS RECORDS REJECTED:                                       1,497

SERVICE CLASS PERIOD RECORDS SELECTED (SELECT LOGIC):                  342

SERVICE CLASS RECORDS EXCLUDED (EXCLUDE LOGIC):                          0

RECORDS REJECTED (SYSTEM SERVICE CLASS, DISC. GOAL, SERVER, ETC.):     207

TOTAL RECORDS ANALYZED FOR POOR PERFORMANCE:                           135


RECORDS WITH PERFORMANCE WORSE THAN GOAL FOR SERVICE CLASS PERIOD:       2


TOTAL RULE RECORDS WRITTEN BY THE WLM COMPONENT:                       114

 


 
Service policy in effect during analysis



        WORKLOAD MANAGER ANALYSIS, Tue, Mar 20, 2001 - SYSTEM: SYS1
                Analyzed by Version 11.2.0 of CPExpert(tm)
          (C) Copyright 2001, Computer Management Sciences, Inc.
                               PAGE: 3 - PART 2


SYSPLEX: PLEXPROD   SERVICE POLICY: POLICY#1
POLICY EFFECTIVE:   16MAR2001:23:55:59
OPERATING SYSTEM:   OS/390 Version 2, Release 10
MXG VERSION NUMBER: 18.18

SERVICE COEFICIENTS:  CPU=1.0  SRB=1.0  MSO=0.0  IOC=0.5

SERVICE    CLASS   PERIOD                   GOAL           GOAL   CPU   CPU
 CLASS    PERIOD  DURATION  GOAL TYPE    IMPORTANCE GOAL PERCENT  MIN   MAX

P_BTCHIG     1              EX. VELOCITY     2       40%
P_BTCLOW     1              EX. VELOCITY     5       20%
P_BTCMED     1              EX. VELOCITY     4       30%
P_HRNSPN     1              EX. VELOCITY     2       40%
P_ONLHIG     1              EX. VELOCITY     2       90%
P_ONLLOW     1              EX. VELOCITY     4       60%
P_ONLMED     1              EX. VELOCITY     2       70%
P_REDLIN     1              EX. VELOCITY     2       40%
SYSSTC       1              SYSTEM TASKS     0
SYSTEM       1              SYSTEM TASKS     0
TSO          1       1200   % RESPONSE       3     0.500    90
TSO          2       2500   % RESPONSE       4   00:02.0    90
TSO          3      20000   % RESPONSE       4   00:15.0    90

The above may not be the complete definition of Service Policy POLICY#1.
If no address spaces were active in a service class, SMF Type 72 information
may not be available for the service class.  Consequently, CPExpert would
be unable to determine the service class parameters.

The above policy is listed alphabetically.  You can have the policy
ordered by service class period importance by changing the POLORDER
guidance variable.

 


 
System: *ALL, Overview of rule results

bgcolor="#D3D3D3" bordercolor="#000000">


        WORKLOAD MANAGER ANALYSIS, Fri, Mar 16, 2001 - SYSTEM: *ALL
                Analyzed by Version 11.2.0 of CPExpert(tm)
          (C) Copyright 2001, Computer Management Sciences, Inc.
                               PAGE: 4 - PART 3



                        OVERVIEW OF RULE RESULTS


                     WLM002                                 WLM005
                     ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 16MAR2001:23:56:00     X                                      X

 


 
System: SYS1, Overview of rule results



        WORKLOAD MANAGER ANALYSIS, Tue, Mar 20, 2001 - SYSTEM: SYS1
                Analyzed by Version 11.2.0 of CPExpert(tm)
          (C) Copyright 2001, Computer Management Sciences, Inc.
                               PAGE: 5 - PART 3



                        OVERVIEW OF RULE RESULTS


                     WLM058 WLM059 WLM102 WLM103 WLM107 WLM140 WLM170 WLM400 WLM602 WLM603
                     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
 20MAR2001:08:05:00                   X             X      X      X                    X
 20MAR2001:08:20:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:08:35:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:08:50:00            X                                                X      X
 20MAR2001:09:05:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:09:20:00     X                                                              X
 20MAR2001:09:35:00            X                                                       X
 20MAR2001:09:50:00            X                                                X      X
 20MAR2001:10:05:00            X                                                       X
 20MAR2001:10:20:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:10:35:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:10:50:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:11:05:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:11:20:00     X                                                              X
 20MAR2001:11:35:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:11:50:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:12:05:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:12:20:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:12:35:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:12:50:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:13:05:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:13:20:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:13:35:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:13:50:00            X                                                       X
 20MAR2001:14:05:00            X                                                       X
 20MAR2001:14:20:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:14:35:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:14:36:14
 20MAR2001:14:50:00     X                                                              X
 20MAR2001:14:51:14
 20MAR2001:15:05:00            X                                                       X
 20MAR2001:15:06:14
 20MAR2001:15:20:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:15:21:14
 20MAR2001:15:35:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:15:36:14
 20MAR2001:15:50:00     X                    X                           X             X
 20MAR2001:15:51:14
 20MAR2001:16:05:00                                                             X      X
 20MAR2001:16:06:14
 20MAR2001:16:20:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:16:21:14
 20MAR2001:16:35:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:16:36:14
 20MAR2001:16:50:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:16:51:14
 20MAR2001:17:05:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:17:06:14
 20MAR2001:17:20:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:17:21:14
 20MAR2001:17:35:00                                                                    X
 20MAR2001:17:36:14

 


 
Service policy findings



        WORKLOAD MANAGER ANALYSIS, Fri, Mar 16, 2001 - SYSTEM: *ALL
                Analyzed by Version 11.2.0 of CPExpert(tm)
          (C) Copyright 2001, Computer Management Sciences, Inc.
                               PAGE: 6 - PART 3




RULE WLM002: CONFLICT EXISTS BETWEEN SERVICE CLASS AND REPORT CLASS                               .

   The Service Policy being analyzed (Policy POLICY#1) contains a Report
   Class which conflicts with a Service Class.  This conflict could cause
   double accounting of system resources in reports which key off the
   class name.  This finding has no known effect on performance, but could
   have a HIGH IMPACT on accounting, billing, or capacity planning.  The
   following Report Class conflicts with a Service Class of the same name:

            REPORT CLASS
              TSO


RULE WLM005: VELOCITY GOAL MAY BE TOO HIGH FOR BATCH SERVICE CLASS                                .

   CPExpert noticed that P_BTCHIG Service Class (Period 1) had an execution
   velocity goal of 40.  The P_BTCHIG Service Class had the word "batch"
   in its Service Class Description.  Consequently CPExpert assumes that
   the service class consists of batch jobs.  Specifying a relatively
   high velocity goal of 40 for batch jobs may cause performance problems
   unless the batch jobs are well-behaved.  Under some circumstances, this
   velocity goal could result in 40% of the system being used by batch
   workload.  Please refer to Rule WLM005 in the WLM Component User Manual
   for a discussion of this issue.


RULE WLM005: VELOCITY GOAL MAY BE TOO HIGH FOR BATCH SERVICE CLASS                                .

   CPExpert noticed that P_HRNSPN Service Class (Period 1) had an execution
   velocity goal of 40.  The P_HRNSPN Service Class had the word "batch"
   in its Service Class Description.  Consequently CPExpert assumes that
   the service class consists of batch jobs.  Specifying a relatively
   high velocity goal of 40 for batch jobs may cause performance problems
   unless the batch jobs are well-behaved.  Under some circumstances, this
   velocity goal could result in 40% of the system being used by batch
   workload.  Please refer to Rule WLM005 in the WLM Component User Manual
   for a discussion of this issue.


RULE WLM005: VELOCITY GOAL MAY BE TOO HIGH FOR BATCH SERVICE CLASS                                .

   CPExpert noticed that P_REDLIN Service Class (Period 1) had an execution
   velocity goal of 40.  The P_REDLIN Service Class had the word "batch"
   in its Service Class Description.  Consequently CPExpert assumes that
   the service class consists of batch jobs.  Specifying a relatively
   high velocity goal of 40 for batch jobs may cause performance problems
   unless the batch jobs are well-behaved.  Under some circumstances, this
   velocity goal could result in 40% of the system being used by batch
   workload.  Please refer to Rule WLM005 in the WLM Component User Manual
   for a discussion of this issue.

 


 
System SYS1, General System Findings



        WORKLOAD MANAGER ANALYSIS, Tue, Mar 20, 2001 - SYSTEM: SYS1
                Analyzed by Version 11.2.0 of CPExpert(tm)
          (C) Copyright 2001, Computer Management Sciences, Inc.
                               PAGE: 7 - PART 4




RULE WLM058: LOCAL PAGE RESPONSE WAS SIGNIFICANTLY WORSE THAN AVERAGE                             .

   CPExpert has detected that the device response time for a local page
   data set was significantly worse than the average device response time
   for other local page data sets.  This situation usually is caused by
   overloading the path to the local page data set or by placing local page
   data sets on volumes with other data sets.  During the below intervals,
   there was a significant imbalance of page transfer times among the local
   page data sets, and at least one service class missed its performance
   goal because of delays for page-in from auxiliary storage.

                                   AVERAGE     VOLUME              VOLUME
                                  PAGE XFR    WITH POOR   PAGES   AVG PAGE
   MEASUREMENT INTERVAL             TIME      XFR  TIME   XFR'D   XFR TIME
    9:20- 9:35, 20MAR2001          0.008       PAG103       162     0.012
   11:20-11:35, 20MAR2001          0.005       PAG102       124     0.016
   14:50-15:05, 20MAR2001          0.009       PAG102       139     0.014
   15:50-16:05, 20MAR2001          0.013       PAG101       898     0.020


RULE WLM059: INSUFFICIENT LOCAL PAGE DATA SETS DEFINED FOR MIGRATION                              .

   The number of local page data sets is insufficient to allow parallel
   I/O operations for migration of pages from expanded storage to auxiliary
   storage.  If migration occurs often, defining too few local page data
   sets could have a significant impact on paging performance.  During the
   measurement intervals shown below, migration was relatively high and at
   least one service class missed its performance goal because of paging
   delays from auxiliary storage.  CPExpert suggests increasing the number
   of local page data sets.

                                 AVERAGE     LOCAL PAGE DATA     SUGGESTED
   MEASUREMENT INTERVAL      MIGRATION RATE   SETS ALLOCATED    ALLOCATION
    8:50- 9:05, 20MAR2001        11.9                 3              6
    9:35- 9:50, 20MAR2001        20.0                 3              6
    9:50-10:05, 20MAR2001        10.7                 3              6
   10:05-10:20, 20MAR2001         5.8                 3              6
   13:50-14:05, 20MAR2001         4.1                 3              6
   14:05-14:20, 20MAR2001         2.5                 3              6
   15:05-15:20, 20MAR2001        17.3                 3              6

 


 
System SYS1, Specific findings, Service Class P_ONLMED



        WORKLOAD MANAGER ANALYSIS, Tue, Mar 20, 2001 - SYSTEM: SYS1
                Analyzed by Version 11.2.0 of CPExpert(tm)
          (C) Copyright 2001, Computer Management Sciences, Inc.
                               PAGE: 8 - PART 5




RULE WLM103: SERVICE CLASS DID NOT ACHIEVE VELOCITY GOAL                                          .

   P_ONLMED (Period 1): Service class did not achieve its velocity goal
   during the measurement intervals shown below.  The velocity goal was
   70% execution velocity, with an importance level of 2.  The '% USING'
   and '%TOTAL DELAY' percentages are computed as a function of the average
   address space EXECUTING time (to exclude activity and delays not under
   WLM control). The 'PRIMARY,SECONDARY CAUSES OF DELAY' are computed as
   a function of the execution delay samples on the local system.

                         ------LOCAL SYSTEM--------
                           %    % TOTAL EXEC   PERF  PLEX PRIMARY,SECOND
   MEASUREMENT INTERVAL  USING   DELAY  VELOC  INDX   PI  CAUSES OF DELAY
   15:50-16:05,20MAR2001   3.5    2.8    55%   1.27  1.76 AUX PAGING(38%)


RULE WLM400: PAGE-IN (AUXILIARY STORAGE) WAS MAJOR PERFORMANCE PROBLEM                            .

   P_ONLMED (Period 1): Page-in from auxiliary storage was a major reason
   the service class period missed its performance goal.  Auxiliary storage
   paging caused the following delays to P_ONLMED (Period 1), shown by catego
   page-in.  The delays are relative to the EXECUTING time of the service
   class period.

                            PERCENT
                            PAGE-IN   ---PCT DELAY, BY PAGE-IN CATEGORY---
   MEASUREMENT INTERVAL      DELAY    PVT   COMM   XMEM   VIO   HIPR   ESO
   15:50-16:05,20MAR2001      2.4     2.3    0.0    0.1   0.0    0.0   0.0

 


 
System SYS1, Specific findings, Service Class TSO



        WORKLOAD MANAGER ANALYSIS, Tue, Mar 20, 2001 - SYSTEM: SYS1
                Analyzed by Version 11.2.0 of CPExpert(tm)
          (C) Copyright 2001, Computer Management Sciences, Inc.
                               PAGE: 9 - PART 5




RULE WLM102: SERVICE CLASS DID NOT ACHIEVE PERCENTILE RESPONSE GOAL                               .

   TSO (Period 1): Service class did not achieve its response goal
   during the measurement intervals shown below.  The response goal was
   90.00 percent of the transactions completing within 0.500 seconds,
   with an importance level of 3.  The percentages with the primary/
   secondary causes of delay are computed as a function of the average
   address space EXECUTING time on the local system.

                          --------LOCAL SYSTEM------
                                  TRANS     %
                          TOTAL MEETING MEETING PERF PLEX PRIMARY,SECOND
   MEASUREMENT INTERVAL   TRANS   GOAL    GOAL  INDX  PI  CAUSES OF DELAY
    8:05- 8:20,20MAR2001     22     17    77.3  4.00 0.50 UNKNOWN(78%)


RULE WLM107: RESPONSE TIME DISTRIBUTION FOR SERVICE CLASS                                         .

   TSO (Period 1): Service class did not achieve its response goal
   during the measurement intervals shown below. The response goal was
   90.00 percent of the transactions completing within 0.500 seconds.
   The below information shows the distribution of response times:

                                  --PERCENT COMPLETIONS RELATIVE TO GOAL--
                                         50-   90-  100-  110-  200-
                           TOTAL  <50%   9O%  100%  110%  200%  400% >400%
   MEASUREMENT INTERVAL    TRANS  GOAL  GOAL  GOAL  GOAL  GOAL  GOAL  GOAL
    8:05- 8:20,20MAR2001      22  68.2   9.1   0.0   4.5   4.5   4.5   9.1


RULE WLM140: SYSPLEX PERFORMANCE INDEX WAS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN LOCAL                          .

   TSO (Period 1):  The sysplex performance index for this service class
   period was significantly less than the local performance index.  One
   implication of this is that the Workload Manager might not attempt to
   improve performance of the service class period on the local system.
   Please refer to the WLM Component User Manual for a discussion of how
   the sysplex performance index and local performance index are used by
   the Workload Manager.  This finding applies to the following measurement
   intervals:

                                   PERFORMANCE INDEX
   MEASUREMENT INTERVAL            LOCAL     SYSPLEX
    8:05- 8:20,20MAR2001            4.00       0.50


        WORKLOAD MANAGER ANALYSIS, Tue, Mar 20, 2001 - SYSTEM: SYS1
                Analyzed by Version 11.2.0 of CPExpert(tm)
          (C) Copyright 2001, Computer Management Sciences, Inc.
                               PAGE: 10 - PART 5




RULE WLM170: ADDRESS SPACES WERE IDLE A SIGNIFICANT PERCENT OF TIME                               .

   TSO: The delay information presented above is based on the EXECUTION
   time of the service class (the CPU Using, Execution Delay, and Unknown
   Delay).  These percentages show the distribution of time while some
   transaction was active.  However, address spaces in the TSO Service
   Class were IDLE for a significant percent of their overall active time.
   The below information shows the percent of total active time in which
   address spaces were executing (processing transactions) or were idle,
   and the average number of Workload Manager samples per transaction.
   Please refer to Rule WLM170 in the WLM Component User Manual for a
   discussion of the implications of this finding.

                           TOTAL     PCT     PCT  AVG SAMPLES  AVG SAMPLES
   MEASUREMENT INTERVAL    TRANS  EXECUTING IDLE   PER TRANS   PER  MINUTE
    8:05- 8:20,20MAR2001      22     1.6     98.4      4.1          6.1

 


 
System SYS1, Cross System Coupling Facility (XCF) findings



        WORKLOAD MANAGER ANALYSIS, Tue, Mar 20, 2001 - SYSTEM: SYS1
                Analyzed by Version 11.2.0 of CPExpert(tm)
          (C) Copyright 2001, Computer Management Sciences, Inc.
                               PAGE: 11 - PART 5




RULE WLM602: XCF MESSAGE BUFFER LENGTH MAY BE TOO SMALL                                           .

   The XCF message buffers may be too small for the DEFAULT transport class.
   Unnecessary overhead is incurred when XCF must expand the buffers to fit
   a message.  The CLASSLEN parameter was specified as 8,124 for this
   transport class.  You should consider increasing the message length
   for this transport class or you may wish to split the transport class,
   depending upon actual message lengths.  This finding applies to the
   following RMF measurement intervals:

                           SENT    SMALL     MESSAGES   MESSAGES    TOTAL
   MEASUREMENT INTERVAL     TO    MESSAGES   THAT FIT   TOO  BIG  MESSAGES
    8:50- 9:05,20MAR2001  SYS5       152        732         87        971
    9:50-10:05,20MAR2001  SYS5       150        914         88      1,152
   16:05-16:20,20MAR2001  SYS5       327        565         88        980


RULE WLM603: XCF MESSAGE BUFFER LENGTH MAY BE TOO LARGE                                           .

   The XCF message buffer length may be too large for the TCGRS transport
   class.  XCF will fill the message buffer space too quickly when the
   specified message length is larger than most of the messages sent.
   The CLASSLEN parameter was specified as 36,796 for this transport class,
   and over 99% of the messages were less than this length.  You should
   consider decreasing the message length for this transport class or you
   may wish to split the transport class, depending upon actual message
   lengths.  This situation is not critical, since XCF did not exhaust its
   message buffer space.  The finding is produced only to alert you to a
   potential problem with storage allocation. You can suppress this finding
   by altering the PCTSML guidance variable in USOURCE(WLMGUIDE).  This
   finding applies to the following RMF measurement intervals:

                          SENT     SMALL     MESSAGES   MESSAGES    TOTAL
   MEASUREMENT INTERVAL    TO     MESSAGES   THAT FIT   TOO  BIG  MESSAGES
    8:05- 8:20,20MAR2001  SYS3   179,322          0          0    179,322
    8:20- 8:35,20MAR2001  SYS3   174,039          0          0    174,039
    8:35- 8:50,20MAR2001  SYS3   191,929          0          0    191,929
    8:50- 9:05,20MAR2001  SYS3   287,449          0          0    287,449
    9:05- 9:20,20MAR2001  SYS3   239,773          0          0    239,773
    9:20- 9:35,20MAR2001  SYS3   223,154          1          0    223,155
    9:35- 9:50,20MAR2001  SYS3   217,652          0          0    217,652
    9:50-10:05,20MAR2001  SYS3   300,195          0          0    300,195
   10:05-10:20,20MAR2001  SYS3   266,019          0          0    266,019
   10:20-10:35,20MAR2001  SYS3   272,699          0          0    272,699
   10:35-10:50,20MAR2001  SYS3   282,343          0          0    282,343
   10:50-11:05,20MAR2001  SYS3   314,223          0          0    314,223
   11:05-11:20,20MAR2001  SYS3   219,170          0          0    219,170
   11:20-11:35,20MAR2001  SYS3   199,270          0          0    199,270
   11:35-11:50,20MAR2001  SYS3   143,187          0          0    143,187
   11:50-12:05,20MAR2001  SYS3   223,570          0          0    223,570
   12:05-12:20,20MAR2001  SYS3   146,765          0          0    146,765
   12:20-12:35,20MAR2001  SYS3   170,619          0          0    170,619
   12:35-12:50,20MAR2001  SYS3   164,807          0          0    164,807
   12:50-13:05,20MAR2001  SYS3   218,410          0          0    218,410


        WORKLOAD MANAGER ANALYSIS, Tue, Mar 20, 2001 - SYSTEM: SYS1
                Analyzed by Version 11.2.0 of CPExpert(tm)
          (C) Copyright 2001, Computer Management Sciences, Inc.
                               PAGE: 12 - PART 5


                          SENT     SMALL     MESSAGES   MESSAGES    TOTAL
   MEASUREMENT INTERVAL    TO     MESSAGES   THAT FIT   TOO  BIG  MESSAGES
   13:05-13:20,20MAR2001  SYS3   217,565          0          0    217,565
   13:20-13:35,20MAR2001  SYS3   212,487          0          0    212,487
   13:35-13:50,20MAR2001  SYS3   224,934          0          0    224,934
   13:50-14:05,20MAR2001  SYS3   228,358          0          0    228,358
   14:05-14:20,20MAR2001  SYS3   144,659          0          0    144,659
   14:20-14:35,20MAR2001  SYS3   200,375          0          0    200,375
   14:35-14:50,20MAR2001  SYS3   176,564          0          0    176,564
   14:50-15:05,20MAR2001  SYS3   195,427          0          0    195,427
   15:05-15:20,20MAR2001  SYS3   130,834          0          0    130,834
   15:20-15:35,20MAR2001  SYS3   195,142          0          0    195,142
   15:35-15:50,20MAR2001  SYS3   189,010          0          0    189,010
   15:50-16:05,20MAR2001  SYS3   241,938          0          0    241,938
   16:05-16:20,20MAR2001  SYS3   278,691          0          0    278,691
   16:20-16:35,20MAR2001  SYS3   210,868          0          0    210,868
   16:35-16:50,20MAR2001  SYS3   115,181          0          0    115,181
   16:50-17:05,20MAR2001  SYS3   206,901          0          0    206,901
   17:05-17:20,20MAR2001  SYS3   115,235          0          0    115,235
   17:20-17:35,20MAR2001  SYS3   128,597          0          0    128,597
   17:35-17:50,20MAR2001  SYS3   135,253          0          0    135,253


RULE WLM603: XCF MESSAGE BUFFER LENGTH MAY BE TOO LARGE                                           .

   The XCF message buffer length may be too large for the TCJES transport
   class.  XCF will fill the message buffer space too quickly when the
   specified message length is larger than most of the messages sent.
   The CLASSLEN parameter was specified as 8,124 for this transport class,
   and over 99% of the messages were less than this length.  You should
   consider decreasing the message length for this transport class or you
   may wish to split the transport class, depending upon actual message
   lengths.  This situation is not critical, since XCF did not exhaust its
   message buffer space.  The finding is produced only to alert you to a
   potential problem with storage allocation. You can suppress this finding
   by altering the PCTSML guidance variable in USOURCE(WLMGUIDE).  This
   finding applies to the following RMF measurement intervals:

                          SENT     SMALL     MESSAGES   MESSAGES    TOTAL
   MEASUREMENT INTERVAL    TO     MESSAGES   THAT FIT   TOO  BIG  MESSAGES
    8:05- 8:20,20MAR2001  SYS5     8,611          0          0      8,611
    8:20- 8:35,20MAR2001  SYS5     7,060          0          0      7,060
    8:35- 8:50,20MAR2001  SYS5     7,386          0          0      7,386
    8:50- 9:05,20MAR2001  SYS5    22,916          2          0     22,918
    9:05- 9:20,20MAR2001  SYS5    12,260          1          0     12,261
    9:20- 9:35,20MAR2001  SYS5    12,505          0          0     12,505
    9:35- 9:50,20MAR2001  SYS5     8,944          0          0      8,944
    9:50-10:05,20MAR2001  SYS5    25,679          1          0     25,680
   10:05-10:20,20MAR2001  SYS5    15,641          1          0     15,642
   10:20-10:35,20MAR2001  SYS5     5,167          0          0      5,167
   10:35-10:50,20MAR2001  SYS5     3,243          0          0      3,243
   10:50-11:05,20MAR2001  SYS5     9,206          1          0      9,207
   11:05-11:20,20MAR2001  SYS5     6,588          2          0      6,590
   11:20-11:35,20MAR2001  SYS5     2,572          0          0      2,572
   11:35-11:50,20MAR2001  SYS5     2,032          0          0      2,032
   11:50-12:05,20MAR2001  SYS5    11,319          1          0     11,320


        WORKLOAD MANAGER ANALYSIS, Tue, Mar 20, 2001 - SYSTEM: SYS1
                Analyzed by Version 11.2.0 of CPExpert(tm)
          (C) Copyright 2001, Computer Management Sciences, Inc.
                               PAGE: 13 - PART 5


                          SENT     SMALL     MESSAGES   MESSAGES    TOTAL
   MEASUREMENT INTERVAL    TO     MESSAGES   THAT FIT   TOO  BIG  MESSAGES
   12:05-12:20,20MAR2001  SYS5     6,517          0          0      6,517
   12:20-12:35,20MAR2001  SYS5     3,402          0          0      3,402
   12:35-12:50,20MAR2001  SYS5     5,132          0          0      5,132
   12:50-13:05,20MAR2001  SYS5     5,520          0          0      5,520
   13:05-13:20,20MAR2001  SYS5    13,529          1          0     13,530
   13:20-13:35,20MAR2001  SYS5    11,058          0          0     11,058
   13:35-13:50,20MAR2001  SYS5    16,836          5          0     16,841
   13:50-14:05,20MAR2001  SYS5    16,339          5          0     16,344
   14:05-14:20,20MAR2001  SYS5    11,933          1          0     11,934
   14:20-14:35,20MAR2001  SYS5    12,569          0          0     12,569
   14:35-14:50,20MAR2001  SYS5    13,532          0          0     13,532
   14:50-15:05,20MAR2001  SYS5    13,552          0          0     13,552
   15:05-15:20,20MAR2001  SYS5    16,574          0          0     16,574
   15:20-15:35,20MAR2001  SYS5    14,450          0          0     14,450
   15:35-15:50,20MAR2001  SYS5    13,016          2          0     13,018
   15:50-16:05,20MAR2001  SYS5    21,473          0          0     21,473
   16:05-16:20,20MAR2001  SYS5    26,041          2          0     26,043
   16:20-16:35,20MAR2001  SYS5     9,974          0          0      9,974
   16:35-16:50,20MAR2001  SYS5     2,689          0          0      2,689
   16:50-17:05,20MAR2001  SYS5    12,594          8          0     12,602
   17:05-17:20,20MAR2001  SYS5     2,786          0          0      2,786
   17:20-17:35,20MAR2001  SYS5     3,529          0          0      3,529
   17:35-17:50,20MAR2001  SYS5    13,166          0          0     13,166