× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



This is a multipart message in MIME format.
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
Konrad,

You were saying that when interactive got high than batch suffered also? I
think they 'improved' the governor in future releases.  Now it should only
kill other interactive jobs, and not harm batch jobs.

Rob Berendt
--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin




Konrad Underkofler <kdunderk@hoshizaki.com>
Sent by: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com
06/06/2002 09:20 AM
Please respond to midrange-l


        To:     "'midrange-l@midrange.com'" <midrange-l@midrange.com>
        cc:
        Fax to:
        Subject:        RE: CPW? vs System Performance


Andy,

Thanks for clarifying the differing load types. We
are pretty much the classic ERP shop with heavy green
screen using a 620-2179 85cpw machine. Interactive
performance is pretty good, batch is very slow when
interactive saturates the CPU. Alot of the saturation
is due to queries and plain bad programming practices
that the ERP vendor has made (Synon 2E code!) and
tortured joins. The vendor is moving to a more client
oriented architecture but to support the legacy database
there is a substantial batch and SQL ODBC query component
(ie twice the amount of work for the same transaction).

So we have a problem that alot of the traditonal AS/400
users have faced while upgrading. Interactive CPW costs
$$$ but we still need it. Batch CPW is needed for the
increasing web and client activity. Increasing machine
capacities with the new higher performance boxes results
in tier charges on the ERP side in excess of the machine
upgrade cost.

It seems like the 270-2434 (1520) is a good match with alot
of top end performance enhancement for us, getting there is
the problem! Hopefully someday someone will find a magic
software licensing plan that enables rather than hinders
customers, the current mode with everyone trying to make
as much as they can promotes inertia.

Thanks again!

Konrad

PS We hope to never experience the joys of Domino or Websphere!

_______________________________________________
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.





As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...


Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.