Issue 11509: Section: 7.1.11.10 (amsm-ftf) Source: Naval Surface Warfare Center (Mr. Paul V. Werme, paul.werme@navy.mil) Nature: Enhancement Severity: Significant Summary: The specific set of HW Utilizations and semantics should be reviewed to remove ambiguities. In particular, the time scale over which utilizations are measured should be explicitly stated. In addition, the specific set of HW Utilizations should be reviewed to determine whether additional information is needed, e.g., 1) network data input and output values and rates. 2) Per cpu statistics, 3) per network connection statistics, 4) page faults and rates, 5) size of the process ready queue, etc... Resolution: deferred Revised Text: Actions taken: September 21, 2007: received issue Discussion: Full study of these points need more time. End of Annotations:===== m: webmaster@omg.org Date: 20 Sep 2007 22:27:50 -0400 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: Paul V. Werme Company: NSWCDD mailFrom: paul.werme@navy.mil Notification: No Specification: AMSM Section: 7.1.11.10 FormalNumber: dtc/07-05-02 Version: Beta 1 RevisionDate: 07-05-02 Page: 103 Nature: Enhancement Severity: Significant HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0; T312461; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; InfoPath.1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727) Description The specific set of HW Utilizations and semantics should be reviewed to remove ambiguities. In particular, the time scale over which utilizations are measured should be explicitly stated. In addition, the specific set of HW Utilizations should be reviewed to determine whether additional information is needed, e.g., 1) network data input and output values and rates. 2) Per cpu statistics, 3) per network connection statistics, 4) page faults and rates, 5) size of the process ready queue, etc... From: Hugues.VINCENT@fr.thalesgroup.com To: amsm-ftf@omg.org Subject: Issue 11509 Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 10:35:13 +0100 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) Issue 11509: The specific set of HW Utilizations and semantics should be reviewed to remove ambiguities. In particular, the time scale over which utilizations are measured should be explicitly stated. In addition, the specific set of HW Utilizations should be reviewed to determine whether additional information is needed, e.g., 1) network data input and output values and rates. 2) Per cpu statistics, 3) per network connection statistics, 4) page faults and rates, 5) size of the process ready queue, etc... We're still waiting for Paul Werme's review of HW Utilizations (as decided in Jacksonville). Disposition: Transferred OMG Issue No: 11509 Title: Specification of HW Utilizations Source: NSWCDD Summary: The specific set of HW Utilizations and semantics should be reviewed to remove ambiguities. In particular, the time scale over which utilizations are measured should be explicitly stated. In addition, the specific set of HW Utilizations should be reviewed to determine whether additional information is needed, e.g., 1) network data input and output values and rates. 2) Per cpu statistics, 3) per network connection statistics, 4) page faults and rates, 5) size of the process ready queue, etc... Discussion: Full study of these points need more time. Disposition: Transferred to FTF2 m: Hugues.VINCENT@fr.thalesgroup.com To: amsm-ftf@omg.org Cc: jacek.skowronek@nl.thalesgroup.com Subject: Outcome from Orlando's meeting: Issue 11509, implementer's issues Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 18:00:38 +0200 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Dear all, Please find attached two contributions from Jacek (Thales Naval Netherlands) and already presented during Orlando's meeting: - a first ppt document describes a solution for the issue 11509, - the second document is an excel sheet with a list of potential issues that still have to be double checked by Jacek but that give a good view of issues that will be posted end of October. As a reminder, the comments due date (September, 7th) is the date before which all issues must be studied and is not the date after which no new issues may be taken into acount: it's the FTF's decision. Since these issues come from an implementer, I'm going to take them into account (as new issues coming from Selex would be - if coming before Feb. 2009 because it'd be too close from the report's due date). Please comment these documents. Best regards, Hugues <> <> ISSUE11509_HW_Util.ppt AMSM_ISSUES.xls