Dynamic Workload Capping in Mainframe Systems

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Mainframe computing systems face challenges in efficiently managing capacity limits to prioritize high-importance workloads while minimizing costs, as existing methods either underutilize resources or lead to substantial cost increases when adjusting capacity limits.

Innovation Solution

A dynamic capping system that adjusts capacity limits based on workload importance and cost factors across multiple billing entities, allowing for the sharing of processing capacity within defined limits to ensure high-importance workloads receive necessary resources without exceeding cost constraints.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If capacity limits are increased to prioritize high-importance workloads, then throughput for high-importance work is improved, but costs increase substantially

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvethroughput for high-importance workloadsVSAvoidcosts
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSLoss of energy

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements dynamic capacity limit adjustment by continuously monitoring workload importance levels and automatically modifying capacity limits in real-time. The system transitions from static to dynamic limit setting, allowing capacity limits to adapt to changing workload conditions without manual intervention, thereby optimizing throughput while controlling costs.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the parameter of capacity limits based on workload importance metrics. By adjusting the capacity limit parameter dynamically according to the importance level of workloads, the system ensures high-importance workloads receive necessary resources while preventing excessive resource allocation that would drive up costs.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Loss of energy

If capacity limits are decreased to control costs, then costs are reduced, but high-importance workloads may not receive necessary resources

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovecostsVSAvoidresource availability for high-importance workloads
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of energyVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements a feedback mechanism that continuously monitors the importance level of workloads and adjusts capacity limits accordingly. This closed-loop control ensures that when high-importance workloads are detected, capacity limits are increased to ensure adequate resource availability, while for lower-importance workloads, limits are reduced to control costs.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The patent makes capacity limits dynamic rather than static, allowing them to respond to real-time workload conditions. This dynamic adjustment ensures that resource availability for high-importance workloads is maintained while costs are controlled during periods of lower demand.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

3Device complexity

If static capacity limits are used, then system simplicity is maintained, but resource utilization is inefficient

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem simplicityVSAvoidresource utilization efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements self-service automation where the workload manager automatically monitors workload importance and adjusts capacity limits without requiring manual intervention. This self-adjusting mechanism improves resource utilization efficiency while adding minimal operational complexity, as the system serves itself by making automated decisions based on monitored conditions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Data Source

PatentEP3611620B1Cost optimization in dynamic workload capping
Publication Date: 2022.01.19 BMC SOFTWARE INC
  • EP3611620B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3611620B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3611620B1 patent drawingFigure 3~4

AI summary

A mainframe computing system (105) includes a central processor complex, a plurality of billing entities (160), each billing entity having a respective capacity limit, and a workload manager (132, 174) that schedules work requested by the plurality of billing entities on the central processor complex and tracks, by billing entity, a rolling average of millions of service units. The mainframe also includes a dynamic capping policy (142) that identifies a maximum millions of service unit (MSU) limit, a maximum cost limit, a subset of the plurality of billing entities, and, for each billing entity in the subset, information from which to determine a MSU entitlement value and cost entitlement value. The mainframe also includes a dynamic capping master (122) that adjusts the respective capacity limits of the subset of the plurality of billing entities. The workload manager schedules work within the respective capacity limits such that the central processor complex executes the work without exceeding the maximum cost limit and the MSU limit.