Re: CISC/RISC Performance Problem Solution -- BIG DUHHHHH!

Dean wrote:

>Hey Folks,
>
>As you may recall from our last episode, our development box was changed from
>a two-way 310 to a 4-way 320.  We had programs that were once taking close to
>50% of the CPU change to taking less than 20% of the CPU and could not
>increase that allocation despite our best efforts on priority and timeslice.
> We do not have SMP installed.
>
>For those of you (like myself initially) that haven't already figured out the
>math, a non-SMP job runs on only ONE processor.  Ergo, 50% CPU utilization is
>the best that can be hoped for on a 2-way box, 25% on a 4-way.  Did I receive
>this revelation from the list?  No, but the Dynamic Priority Scheduler (among
>other) info was a BIG help on the RISC.  Did I get this information from IBM?
> No, but they were very sympathetic.  Actually, a new consultant that had
>just come off a /400 data warehousing research assignment was the source.
> Sometimes, the answer is right in front of you but you don't see it...



In a single processor situation, also make sure the pool you are playing in
has a BIG chunk of memory...

--Paul E Musselman
PaulMmn@ix.netcom.com


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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 MAJORDOMO@midrange.com and specify            *
* 'unsubscribe MIDRANGE-L' in the body of your message.  Questions      *
* should be directed to the list owner / operator: david@midrange.com   *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *