Author: Robert Sample
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2016 7:20 pm (GMT 5.5)
You STILL have not explained what you are comparing against -- if you mean they are using more CPU than they used to, you need to explicitly say that -- we are not mind readers and psychic day was yesterday.
And, as you found out with File Aid, merely changing from one unload utility to another may NOT decrease CPU time -- the new utility may use the same or more CPU time so merely changing unload utilities is unlikely to help much. And "best" utility is a very subjective evaluation -- someone may say best is lowest EXCP count while someone else says best is lowest CPU time and so forth.
First, you need to quantify things -- if you're talking about a job going from 15 CPU seconds to 20 CPU seconds, there's not much chance you're EVER going to be able to reduce CPU usage enough to make a difference, and you have already wasted more company money worrying about it than you're likely to recover in the next several years. If you are talking about a substantial increase such as going from 250 to 500 seconds, then you need to find out WHY the increase occurred. If the data base size doubled, then yes that could mean twice as much CPU time to unload the data.
The bottom line is that you are asking a very fuzzy question, you are not explaining what you want nor why you see it as a concern, and now you're starting to complain about the responses you ARE getting. I suggest locking this topic as a waste of EVERYBODY'S time, based on what you've said so far.
_________________
TANSTAAFL
The first rule of code reuse is that the code needs to be worth re-using.
"We should forget about small efficiencies, say about 97% of the time: premature optimization is the root of all evil." -- Donald Knuth
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2016 7:20 pm (GMT 5.5)
| Quote: |
| all the jobs are running longer and consuming more CPU. |
And, as you found out with File Aid, merely changing from one unload utility to another may NOT decrease CPU time -- the new utility may use the same or more CPU time so merely changing unload utilities is unlikely to help much. And "best" utility is a very subjective evaluation -- someone may say best is lowest EXCP count while someone else says best is lowest CPU time and so forth.
First, you need to quantify things -- if you're talking about a job going from 15 CPU seconds to 20 CPU seconds, there's not much chance you're EVER going to be able to reduce CPU usage enough to make a difference, and you have already wasted more company money worrying about it than you're likely to recover in the next several years. If you are talking about a substantial increase such as going from 250 to 500 seconds, then you need to find out WHY the increase occurred. If the data base size doubled, then yes that could mean twice as much CPU time to unload the data.
The bottom line is that you are asking a very fuzzy question, you are not explaining what you want nor why you see it as a concern, and now you're starting to complain about the responses you ARE getting. I suggest locking this topic as a waste of EVERYBODY'S time, based on what you've said so far.
_________________
TANSTAAFL
The first rule of code reuse is that the code needs to be worth re-using.
"We should forget about small efficiencies, say about 97% of the time: premature optimization is the root of all evil." -- Donald Knuth