• Subject: Antwort: Re: Performance tuning suggestions
  • From: "NORBERT GROENE (GIS)" <Norbert_Groene@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 18:57:08 +0000


I can't agree to your opinion.

I was working with an adequate sized 310 and a good sized 530. 80 percent of
the jobs were communication jobs.
The communication equipment was well designed with 128 k and 64 k lines and an
average usage of 25 percent.

We started on both machines with QPFRADJ = '3' and very soon went back to '0',
as we never got a proper response for the remote jobs. This changed heavily
with adjusting manually.

The machines ran under release V3R1 and V3R7, I've not tried it on any
V4-release, so maybe it has changed now, but why should I give it a try, as
adjusting an adequate sized machine manually looks not this difficult to me.
So why should I take the risk of complains of the users just to find out,
whether IBM has finally solved the problems with the automatic performance
adjustment  ?

BTW, I don't think one should buy oversized machines just because he can afford
from the prizes of the new models and to keep one flag in the machine as IBM

Mit freundlichen Grüßen / best regards
Norbert Gröne

GIS Gesellschaft fuer    Norbert_Groene@GISH.DE
InformationsSysteme mbH    DEGISNGR at IBMMAIL

Tel. 0511-78643-16    0172-5429180
Hans-Boeckler-Str. 20    30851 Langenhagen
IBM GP-Nr. 373518
| 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

This thread ...

Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page