• Subject: Re: Have you read this(jdedwardsconsult)
  • From: John Hall <jhall@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 10:05:21 -0500

I hate that thing too.

We are on a 170 that has CPW ratings (approx. so don't jump on this) of
30 interactive and 210 batch.

As long as you stay below a certain point in your interactive the whole
machine runs at 210.  If you trip the governor into action the whole
machine drops to 30 (it seems more like 3).  The governor doesn't seem
to care about how many users are logged in to screens - just how much
work they are doing.

On the plus side this means with careful programming and selection of
products that use only Batch for processing I can afford a much faster
machine. 

The downside is that if someone runs a cpu intensive program
interactively the whole system is punished.  I have been unable to find
any documentation on what actually causes the governor to kick in, what
keeps in active, etc. etc. etc.  Or even a good way to know when it is
kicking in and there is not some other problem.  I even get different
responses from different people at IBM as to what classifies at
interactive and what doesn't.  (telnet sessions etc.)

The fact that I purchased a processor that has a limiter on it doesn't
really bother me.  It's no different than buying software with x number
of users licensed.  Sure the software itself could be used by unlimited
users but I only wanted to pay for x.  In this case I actually benefit
because the batch power of this machine is/was surely in the p20 bracket
but is classified as a p10 processor group so I save on other software
costs. 

John Hall
Home Sales Co.

"Shaw, David" wrote:
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: OleBlighty [mailto:oleblighty@home.com]
> 
> P.P.S  I haven't really bought a new BMW M5.
> 
> ------------
> 
> Well, that's obvious - if you had, you'd already know that the speed limiter
> kicks in at 155, not 160. <grin>
> 
> Regarding IBM's governor, it's quite annoying that it's implemented in the way
> that it is.  For an analogy, let's continue using that BMW speed limiter.  
>Let's
> say it limits the speed to 155 - if there's one person in the car.  Put two
> people in the car and it drops to 150 - okay, that may be reasonable, extra
> weight and all that.  Go up to three people and it drops to 140 - well, maybe
> that makes sense.  Four people, 130, five people, 120 - that's starting to 
>get a
> little severe.  Then you add that sixth person, which exceeds the rated 
>capacity
> of the car - good heavens, the limiter just dropped to 30 and they cut the 
>power
> steering to boot!  THAT'S what really irritates those of us who have dealt 
>with
> it.
>
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@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 ...

Replies:

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

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2019 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].