WARNING: DataStage has found more CPU's on your system (12)

Post questions here relative to DataStage Server Edition for such areas as Server job design, DS Basic, Routines, Job Sequences, etc.

Moderators: chulett, rschirm, roy

Post Reply
akrzy
Participant
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 4:46 am

WARNING: DataStage has found more CPU's on your system (12)

Post by akrzy »

Hi,

How can I use DS on "bigest" system (12 CPU) than license (4 CPU)?

Anka
roy
Participant
Posts: 2598
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2003 2:05 am
Location: Israel

Post by roy »

Hi,
no you can't!
I guess it is against the whole idea of per CPU price.

it will give you those till you install a suficiant CPU license.

or work on a machine with CPU count matching bought license.
Roy R.
Time is money but when you don't have money time is all you can afford.

Search before posting:)

Join the DataStagers team effort at:
http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org
Image
akrzy
Participant
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 4:46 am

Post by akrzy »

I have some idea.
... to isolate 4 CPU ("virtual machine") and then ...
What do you think?
chulett
Charter Member
Charter Member
Posts: 43085
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 4:34 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Post by chulett »

Sure, if you can manage that it would be fine. As long as you are constraining it so that DataStage only has access to the number of CPUs you are licensed, for the warnings will stop.

For example, we all live on a HP Superdome. (man, I really wanted to put 'yellow' in there. :lol: ). It has umpty CPUs but has been broken up into several 'lpars', logical partitions that look like separate machines to anything sitting on them. The one our DataStage server sits on has 8 CPUs because that's what they licensed. Would be nice to have more, but The Powers That Be choose otherwise. :cry:
-craig

"You can never have too many knives" -- Logan Nine Fingers
roy
Participant
Posts: 2598
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2003 2:05 am
Location: Israel

Post by roy »

hmmm,
Interesting Craig (I've yet yo work with DS on HP)
does this logical partition funtion as an entirely independant machine?
with it's own configuration/IP and so on?
can anything on that logical partition not use more CPUs?
if so I think my words still stand.

not long ago one of our customers tried to restrict DS with 2 CPU license on a unisys (don't know exact hardware model) no luck there.
as long as DS sees more CPUs your in the same situation.
as I said before they tried: "go for it, though I doubt it will work"

Can you really blame anyone for this ? I think it can be well understood by all why it is so.
Roy R.
Time is money but when you don't have money time is all you can afford.

Search before posting:)

Join the DataStagers team effort at:
http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org
Image
chulett
Charter Member
Charter Member
Posts: 43085
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 4:34 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Post by chulett »

roy wrote:does this logical partition funtion as an entirely independant machine? with it's own configuration/IP and so on? can anything on that logical partition not use more CPUs? if so I think my words still stand.
Yes. Yes. No. Exactly. :wink:

In essence, they look like individual machines - IP, config, CPU, RAM, etc - which is why it works.
-craig

"You can never have too many knives" -- Logan Nine Fingers
ray.wurlod
Participant
Posts: 54607
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:52 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Post by ray.wurlod »

Ascential would counsel you to purchase licences for 12 CPUs. :twisted:
IBM Software Services Group
Any contribution to this forum is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect any position that IBM may hold.
ogmios
Participant
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2003 3:40 pm

Post by ogmios »

Version 7.5 complains on the number of CPU's but happily seems to continue working (must be a bug in the software :wink:).

We also had problems with dual-core cpu's which Ascential counts as 2 separate cpu's.

Ogmios
In theory there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.
chulett
Charter Member
Charter Member
Posts: 43085
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 4:34 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Post by chulett »

Oh, it works all right - it just that every job finishes with at least one warning. In other words, no job ever gets a plain old 'Finished' status.

Or are you saying that it works differently under 7.5?
-craig

"You can never have too many knives" -- Logan Nine Fingers
ogmios
Participant
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2003 3:40 pm

Post by ogmios »

chulett wrote:Oh, it works all right - it just that every job finishes with at least one warning. In other words, no job ever gets a plain old 'Finished' status.

Or are you saying that it works differently under 7.5?
In the version I have no warnings. But my hunch is that it's because of the dual core cpu's: the installation application sees double the amount of physical cpu's but the run-time engine doesn't seem to use the same way of finding the number of CPU's (hence warning on installation, no warning at runtime). But I'm not going to check with Ascential whether this is the case.

An idea of one of our wacky administrators was - if required - to manipulate the shared library path of DataStage so that it finds "adapted" shared libraries that return any cpu count you want :wink:

Ogmios
In theory there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.
chulett
Charter Member
Charter Member
Posts: 43085
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 4:34 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Post by chulett »

Interesting... when I was testing on one of the SuperDome lpars with "too many" cpus I got the warning during installation and during every job run. Lucky you with the 'no warnings in my jobs' problem.

Don't think I should comment on your wacky admin. :wink:
-craig

"You can never have too many knives" -- Logan Nine Fingers
ogmios
Participant
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2003 3:40 pm

Post by ogmios »

Personally I think the counting of 1 dual core cpu as 2 single core cpus by DataStage is kind of a rip off. If you look at optimal performance (read benchmarks) you will see that 1 dual-core (for Sun e.g.) has the performance of about 1.5 single core cpu's.

Ogmios
In theory there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.
shawn_ramsey
Participant
Posts: 145
Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 9:59 am
Location: Seattle, Washington. USA

Post by shawn_ramsey »

ogmios wrote:Personally I think the counting of 1 dual core cpu as 2 single core cpus by DataStage is kind of a rip off. If you look at optimal performance (read benchmarks) you will see that 1 dual-core (for Sun e.g.) has the performance of about 1.5 single core cpu's.

Ogmios
Are you talking Dual core or Hyper-threading? With the Dual Core there are actually two CPUs and with Hyper-threading there is only one and it fakes the system into thinking there are two. We have had an issue with our Windows server being hyper-threaded and getting this error and Ascential just gave us keys for twice as many processors. If it is truly a dual core then I believe that they have the right to count those as two processors since they really are.
Shawn Ramsey

"It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems just with potatoes."
-- Douglas Adams
ogmios
Participant
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2003 3:40 pm

Post by ogmios »

Are you talking Dual core or Hyper-threading?
Dual core, but I'd rather have 2 single core cpu's, then 1 dual core. Performance wise they're not the same.

Anyway Ascential sales just ask for the number of cpu's, and don't ask these "technical" questions as dual-core, single-core, hyper-threading. So some customers will be suprised by the warnings.

Ogmios
In theory there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.
chinek
Participant
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2002 10:09 pm
Location: Australia

Post by chinek »

chulett wrote:Interesting... when I was testing on one of the SuperDome lpars with "too many" cpus I got the warning during installation and during every job run. Lucky you with the 'no warnings in my jobs' problem.

Don't think I should comment on your wacky admin. :wink:
Yes it does behave this way in v7.5, the earlier versions didn't behave this way. That caused us problems because we had some job controls that would abort if there are warnings. :(
Post Reply