OneWorld Performance Monitoring and Monitoring Tools

Over the last few weeks our users have noticed a considerable degradation in interactive type performance. Our system configuration is as follows:
1 AS/400 Model 830 Ent. Server;
1 Deployment Server;
<10 Developer Fat Clients;
6 Citrix Servers; 150 users.

Our OCM configuration defaults the BSFNs to LOCAL and the UBEs to the AS/400. In order to locate the point of the problem we have monitored the communications lines, the Citrix servers, the Deployment server, and the AS/400.

My question is, that in all this monitoring, the only things that we are really able to look at on the AS/400 is the active jobs and CPU/memory utilization, are there other things that we should be looking at? What types of tools are others using that would help us, when a user calls and says things are slow.

There are a number of factors that can influence AS400 interactive performance, The first question I'd ask though is what has changed in the last few weeks that might be a cause of or linked to the slowdown? (more users on the system? package deployed with possible issues? esu or update applied? Client Access ODBC Changed(Block size...etc))

Another thing to look at would be your OCM Mappings, Defaulting all to local could be an issue if you do not have specific mappings for other BSFN's (especially those that are making the DB calls) A good rule of thumb is to put the DB logic as close to the DB as possible.

obviously you can also look at your as400 and tune the parameters there (memory etc..). The as400 DBMon is also a great tool to help identify potential indexing improvements.

There are also some citrix settings that can improve performance.

JDEdwards also provides the "Performance Workbench" (available on the KG to help analyze your logs and provide info on what is called,and timing.

Quick answer is that there are a number of things to look at and different tools to use but performance tuning is difficult to do "On Demand" (ie...when a user complains of slowdown) it is best handled as a planned process (Evaluate for a time period, analyze, make improvements, re-evaluate) and then done through ongoing periodic check-ups.

I'd be happy to discuss further with you, feel free to email me for follow up.

Scott

There are many things that could be slowing your system but there is one setting that can have a huge impact and one that most of my clients miss. The setting is a network setting. You need to go in and check the settings of your Ethernet Lines on the AS400 using the CHGLINETH command. Page down until you see the screen like the one I have attached. Make sure that your line speed is set to 100M and the duplex is set to *full. You don’t want the line to autosence. You may have to vary them off and back on to force the change.

Also, you will need to have someone configure ports on the switch, where the
400 is plugged in. The settings need to be the same, 100m, full duplex,
autosense off.

Check the settings on the Citrix server ODBC connections to make sure they are set the same.

If any of the settings (especially between the AS400 and the switch) aren’t set properly they end up renegotiating for each packet that is sent. I have seen performance increases as much as X10 when these settings were changed.

Mike

As a matter of interest, would you happen to have McAffee running on your
Citrix Servers?
Regards,
Kieran Fitzgerald

Hello stschatz,

Three weeks ago I moved from a 720e onV4R5 to the new "JDEdwards Server" AS/400 (iSeries 270) on V5R2 and I have had an assortment of performance changes (ok...problems). One major problem is very similar to what you described with your interactive programs. Did you find a solution? If so, would you mind sharing it?

Thanks

Ryan

Ryan, did your cpw increase or decrease when you moved from the 720 to
the 270 and do you have the same setting on your nic now as you did on
the 720 ie..100mb/full duplex?

I wish I could say that we had. We continue to work with JDE when we can
identify what applications are slow and verify that it isn't the network.
Good luck.



OneWorld Xe SP21_A1
1 AS/400 Model 830 Ent. Server
1 W2K Logic
1 W2K Deployment
6 W2K Citrix XP

Re: RE: OneWorld Performance Monitoring and Monitoring Tools

Hello coexistence_cnc,

My CPW increased. Here are some specs:

Old AS/400 (720e):
4 CPU (1600CPW)
4GB RAM
150 Interactive (approx)
30 X 8 GB drives
OS400 V4R5

New AS/400 (270):
2 CPU (2350CPW)
4.5GB RAM
0 interactive
10 X 36GB drives (10,000RPM)
OS400 V5R2 (plus SF99520 CUM updates)

With regard to the NIC, the 270 has dual NIC's. We are currently running a 10/100 NIC with the following settings:
LINK 10MB
LINESPEED 100MB
DUPLEX FULL
The only setting that is susupect is the LINK value. I am not sure if it matches the old 400 as it is gone...so I can't verify...but I think it does.
The second NIC is a GBIT, and I didn't have a capable switch at the time. I do now so I will be changing that up soon. But, I did run a sniffer and never touch the max throughput on the NIC. Daily ranges show it stays close to 10 - 20 mb/s.

Thanks
Ryan Hunt

Re: RE: OneWorld Performance Monitoring and Monitoring Tools

stschatz,

Sorry to hear that you are having the same problems I am... I am starting to wonder if it is SP21 as we are both on it. What OS/400 level are you at? I am at V5R2.

Thanks

Ryan

Re: RE: OneWorld Performance Monitoring and Monitoring Tools

Ryan,

My first reaction to your hardware changes is that you have reduced your disk arms from 36 to 10. I'd be very surprised if this was not having a major adverse effect on your performance. I run the disk arm utilization monitor in Management Central pretty constantly, and even with 45 disks it is occasionally a problem (rule of thumb is that anything over 40% is bad). So my guess is that you need more disks...

John

Re: RE: OneWorld Performance Monitoring and Monitoring Tools

Thanks John. I agree with you. I have finished tuning this new box, and under light loads, it runs faster than the previous. However, during peak periods, I think you are right about the drives bottlenecking.

I think we'll buy eight more. ;-)

Thanks

Ryan