• Subject: Re: Did IBM finally roll out SAA with Websphere?
  • From: "Nathan M. Andelin" <nathanma@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 22:22:04 -0600

> From: "Bob Cozzi \(RPGIV\)" <cozzi@RPGIV.COM>

> Take the Webfacing tool, a very good idea. About 2 years ago
> it would have been gold! But it is still something to consider using.
> But here is the issue with webfacing. Webfacing runs applications
> as Interactive Apps. Not batch, so the line we've been fed to move
> off of Interactive and into better performing Client/Server apps
> (which use batch) doesn't seem to apply here.

We need to remember that part of the Webfacing solution runs under batch(the
part that runs under Websphere).  That begs the question, of the total CPU
time, how much is batch vs. interactive.  My estimate is that a "Webfaced"
app will use 30 times more CPU, and only 5% of that will be interactive.
Anybody have a better estimate?


| 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 ...

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].