Re: Performance solutions through hardware

Been on hols for a week, so reply is late.:(

Mike Gillette wrote:

> If in fact the AS/400 is source of your performance bottleneck, it may be as
> much a workload mix issue as it is a horsepower issue.  The 9406/640 is
> primarily an interactive CPU and suffers under heavy batch processing.  The
> new 7XX models and the older E-Custom Servers are tuned to give the BPCS
> user an adjustable CPW mix between Batch and Interactive.  This has resulted
> in superior performance than what users have experienced with the "Classic"
> AS/400 like your 640.

Mike I am very interested in knowing what an Interactive CPU is as opposed to a
Batch CPU.
Our batch load is not great, or is my definition of BATCH vs INTERACTIVE
something which no longer
applies to the new IBM computers.
I am perplexed as to how hardware can solve a problem that is inherently a
software issue.

To be precise,
if a programmer reads an entire file sequentially to update a record
rather than using a logical file to get to just the record that needs updating
how will changing the CPU fix the problem.

I am in the dark, I cannot understand how certain jobs take as long as they do
on the 9406/640.
Certain jobs just scream along, others seem to dissapear up a black hole, and
occasionally appear and to an update.
Call me paranoid, but this smacks of 'wait loops' to me, not that I would ever
suggest IBM would ever do anything like
that (does anyone remember a thing call a PCJX or Junior, never mind, its just a
red herring).
My first job was with a S3M15 so I' ve been about a while and I thought I knew a
thing or 2 but  this stuff is like
the X-Files to me, or am I paranoid again.  Frank




+---
| This is the BPCS Users Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to BPCS-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to BPCS-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to BPCS-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner: dasmussen@aol.com
+---