Bankdata example using AME.
We participate in POWER7 ESP program, and as ESP we have been testing AME on LPAR’s with running live applications.
The LPAR serves as a WebSphereApplication Server, 1 CPU 6 Gb RAM.
In power6 average CPU load was 10-20%
From amepat tool.
Expansion Modeled True Modeled CPU Usage
Factor Memory Size Memory Gain Estimate
1.00 6.00 GB 0.00 KB 0% 0.00 0%
1.14 5.25 GB 768.00 MB 14% 0.00 0%
1.26 4.75 GB 1.25 GB 26% 0.00 0%
1.33 4.50 GB 1.50 GB 33% 0.00 0%
1.50 4.00 GB 2.00 GB 50% 0.15 15%
1.60 3.75 GB 2.25 GB 60% 0.24 24%
1.71 3.50 GB 2.50 GB 71% 0.33 33%
This is the result from live tests.
Kompression rate/ real storage in Gb 1 / 6 1.6 / 3,768 2 / 3 3 / 2
Increased CPU usage (%) 0 (base) 5-10 10 -20 30-40
Application transaction time POWER7 (seconds) 30 30 30 48
Compare with same application on POWER6 (No compressopn available)
Transaction time POWER6 33 33 35 40
My conclusion: The amepat tool is working, but is (in my example) the values suggested was “conservative” , my result was much better than expected
nagger 100000MRSJ3 Posts
Re: Bankdata example.2010-03-23T09:16:34ZThis is the accepted answer. This is the accepted answer.Oops the Forum has butchered the format.
It would be better to just copy the amepat report here - as I don't understand some of the data you have supplied. For example, I don't understand the Compression ratio data as you have it here.
The amepat columns suggest you have unused memory in your LPAR.
If this is the case the amepat says you can reduce memory down to 4.5 GB and Expansion Factor of 1.33 with zero CPU impact.
Which is good news.
Your transaction times are down a little.
Without knowing the GHz of the POWER6 and 7 machines that is hard to comment on.
In very general terms POWER7 is roughly the same speed core for core even at reduced GHz, its just that POWER7 has four times the number of cores and this is how we get the performance boost but it assumes you have many processes or threads.