Re: Performance Issues on 570

I would assume to run a 570 you have to be at V5R3.
I've done many release upgrades & box swap or box upgrade in same weekend
conversion.
Sometimes there is little choice given time constraints & budget.
There have been a lot of variables listed in this problem, and it appears
from original posting that many changes have been introduced post
conversion.
Let's hope they don't start changing the applications, since that was listed
in the
original post as the one variable not changed. With all that has been
changed, I would not pin this on a particular model  and it's processors
without some proof (which we have not seen).
Jim Franz
IBM Certified Specialist

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <rob@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "Midrange Systems Technical Discussion" <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 11:30 AM
Subject: Re: Performance Issues on 570


> I don't think we've done a release upgrade the same weekend as a box swap
> since our last CISC-to-RISC upgrade.  So far, nothing but praise has been
> said about the 570.
>
> Rob Berendt
> -- 
> Group Dekko Services, LLC
> Dept 01.073
> PO Box 2000
> Dock 108
> 6928N 400E
> Kendallville, IN 46755
> http://www.dekko.com
>
>
>
>
>
> Nelson Smith <ncsmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> 08/13/2005 12:10 PM
> Please respond to
> Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> To
> Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> cc
>
> Subject
> Re: Performance Issues on 570
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Rob,
>
> What about on going to the 570? (I think I saw a post from you
> mentioning the 570, although I could be mistaken.)
>
> Doing the release upgrade and the box upgrade on the same weekend was
> not our preference, but could not be helped due to business
> constraints.  Our slowdown is not just on any one batch job, but on all
> that run for any significant amount of time.  Heck, I think I can even
> detect a slight degradation in compile times.  No "before" timing
> studies to compare that to though, just the "feel" of the machine.
>
>
> rob@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> >I don't think we have had any performance issues going from V5R2 to V5R3.
>
> >I did notice a simple qmqry that did a
> >delete from mpn where thisfield = '''this value'''
> >ran for
> >Job .../DLTMPNDUPS started on 08/11/05 at 11:36:03 in subsystem QBA
> >Job .../DLTMPNDUPS ended on 08/11/05 at 19:09:24; 16771 seconds use
> >
> >And now shows
> >Total records  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :             15162
> >Total deleted records  . . . . . . . . . . :         496044546
> >
> >Than again, with the @$#@ that happened yesterday who knows what shape
> the
> >file was in.
> >
> >Looks like that file is in serious need of RGZPFM.
> >
> >Joe was spot on with his recommendation to do a lot of performance data
> >gathering before and after a release upgrade.
> >
> >Rob Berendt
> >
> >
>
> -- 
> This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
> list
> To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
> or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
>
>
> -- 
> This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list
> To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
> or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
>
>