🚀 go-pugleaf

Question:   Does anyone know why DECps-Data Collector (DECps-DC) is a
 prerequisite to DECps Accounting Chargeback (DECps-AC)?  It doesn't
 appear that DECps-AC touches any of the data collected by DECps-DC.

Gripes:   Also, how many folks think that the DECps-AC is pretty lame?  Here
 are a couple of issues that I see:  

 A.  Disk Usage:   Let's assume that you want to charge in units of
 blocks/day and that your charge period is one month. 

   In order to get disk usage, you need to generate an ANALYZE/DISK/USAGE
   report for each day and each disk and then append these 30+ reports to
   a single file for use by the ADVISE... command.  Please!  You don't
   need the gigabytes of information which this scenario requires.  (I
   just got a single usage report for a volume-set of two RZ23's and it
   produced close to a 2000 block USAGE.DAT file.  Muliply that by 30 and
   you have a 60000-block file for one month.  Imagine what it would be
   like if you were calculating it on "real" disk volume(s)!)

   I have a really rudimentary disk usage accounting program which
   estimates the actual usage each day by qio-ing all of the disks on the
   system and querying the diskquota for all of the uic's. This value is
   then added to a month-long running total  for each uic.  The result is
   a file containing records of each UIC with its corresponding running
   total.  (This design could be easily modified to address DECps-AC's
   issue of charging "Categories.")  It would seem that this would be a
   much more desirable approach to get this  information than the
   ANAL/DISK/USAGE method.  (Too bad I can't tell it to use my routine!:-)
   
 B.  JOB-class charging:    

   There doesn't appear to be a way to assign different prices if a
   particular job was run in batch in a specific queue or if it was 	
   run at a different priority than DEFPRI.

   You could always create separate accounting binary files which were
   generated by ACCOUNT/PRIO=x/BIN... and then use the ADVISE CHAR/CATEG
   command,  but you then won't be able to generate a single bill.

 C.  Wouldn't it be nice to have ADVISE CHARGE_BACK REPORT/USER=(...)
 or ADVISE CHARGE_BACK REPORT/UIC=[*,*]

 	Here again, you could create separate binary files using ACCOUNT/USER,
 	but why go through that intermediate steps/files?

 D.  I would have liked to see more resource pricing recommendations based on a 
 formula similar to the one in AppB of the DECps-DC user's guide.

 	That's about enough from me for now.  :-)

 		Chip Tewksbury