While there are probably ways to do what you want, I would question the ethics of preventing the client from seeing the information rather than providing the contracted service. And by taking the step to conceal the information you may be opening up legal sanctions should there be a lawsuit.
On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 14:45:28 -0500 Avram Friedman <[email protected]> wrote: :>We run a machine with 5 LPAR defined. :>Most of the LPARS are shared by all our clients but 2 are dedicated to a single client. :> :>We are receiving complaints from the dedicated client that we are not giving them sufficient CPU :>They are obtaining data for there complaint from RMF III CPC Capacity report which uses RBCPCDB control block :> :>I am a member of the team that manages the shared LPARS and all the LPARS at the hardware level :>We would like to restrict our dedicated LPAR user from being able to look at machine wide capacity data. :> :>Please note :>Shared LPARs run CMF :>Dedicated LPAR RMF :>Dedicated LPAR team has access to the HMC for IPL only :> :>There seems to be bit settings in the RBCPCDB that indicated if the capacity data is shareable or not :> :>Any directions for taking control of this situation :> :>Avram FRIEDMAN :> :>---------------------------------------------------------------------- :>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, :>send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- Binyamin Dissen <[email protected]> http://www.dissensoftware.com Director, Dissen Software, Bar & Grill - Israel Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me, you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain. I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems, especially those from irresponsible companies. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
