We too were concerned about the CPU utilization of the mainframe resources,
but at the same time, did not want to bring in an RS6K to support ADSM.  We
decided that rather than try to figure out a chargeback system, and the
associated costs that go with it, we would merelytake the total charges for ru
nning ADSM, divide it by the number of users registered for use, and charge
that back to them.  The costs we are charging back are the CPU, DASD, Tape,
Liccense, and staff costs for the support staff.  To make it sweeter to get
started, we are not charging for 1996, either!.  And lastly, we don't
distinguish between servers and desktop machines when figuring costs - we
treat them both the same.  That's an advantage to the servers, but we figure
that it will average out to a given area.

By the way, IBM, even though we don't chargeback CPU individually, doesn't
mean I'm not concerned about the amount ADSM uses.  Anything you can do to
make it more efficient will certainly be appreciated.

Jerry Lawson
ITT Hartford
jlawson AT itthartford DOT com
_________________________Reply Header_________________________
Author: INTERNET.OWNERAD
Subject: ADSM Chargeback using CPU time on MVS server.
01-25-96 12:40 PM

I am looking for comments from anyone who does chargeback to their customers
using the ADSM/MVS server.

We are in the process of evaluating ADSM.  I am being asked to chargeback
based on CPU time the server uses.

My problem is that our CPU charges are high enough that I don't know if
anyone will use ADSM or not.  I don't want to post any numbers, but lets
just say that you could hire someone to mount tapes on a PC for a very long
time for what I would be charging.

Any comments?