Re: Performance Manager (V3R2)

Hank,

In a message dated 98-01-11 20:11:10 EST, you write:

> I guess I shouldn't be surprised about the reaction to my simple question.
but
>  I am. Performance tuning is a very touchy issue. It's kept me employed for
>  quite a while, but I always feel edgy about whether I could be doing a
better
>  job for my clients. I would guess from the reactions I've seen here that
there
>  is no consensus on what constitutes that better job. [Yes, I know the
>  reaction: if the clients aren't complaining...

Very true.  It's been over a year, but we've had some rather lively
discussions on performance here before.  If I recall correctly, the only
concensus we ever reached was "it depends".  With the enhanced minimum
configurations, QPFRADJ effectively handles larger and larger systems, but
still not the largest.  The tools themselves _STILL_ eat a huge amount of
resources -- as I stated before, the collection tools still come for free
(unless something has changed) and I prefer queries against the collection
files rather than PT/400.

Different things work for different people in different situations.  When you
have a box that varies in size from a "mega-PC" to a small mainframe, the
latter is to be expected.  You also have people carrying biases from the /38
and older AS/400's that are no longer applicable to the new systems.  However,
I still firmly believe that _NO_ automated system can take the place of a
human being that knows what they are doing...

JMHO,

Dean Asmussen
Enterprise Systems Consulting, Inc.
Fuquay-Varina, NC  USA
E-Mail:  DAsmussen@aol.com

"I can't imagine why anyone would _need_ more than 640Kb of memory or 30Mb of
hard drive on a personal computer."  -- Bill Gates, author, "The Road Ahead"
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to "MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com".
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---