|
> I appreciate your candor Joe. I'm starting to > suspect something along the same lines. When the > Rochester folks starting pointing at our applications > (which haven't changed), I know they are grasping at > straws. In every case that I'm familiar with, an increase in CPW has translated to an increase in performance, so the situation you're describing is an anomoly. With respect to your nighly billing run specifically, which went from 4 hours to nearly 9 hours, the question that comes to mind is the amount of CPU time consumed vs. the elapsed runtime. If CPU time consumed were a small fraction of elapsed runtime, that may be a clue to the bottleneck. Another question would be whether either or both of your partitians allocate a fraction of a CPU to the partition, which may cause long running jobs to be swapped in and out of the CPU on a regular basis, and a clearing of CPU cache, and lead to performance problems. Nathan Andelin. ____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
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.