RE: Websphere: a resource hog? -- MIDRANGE-L

Joe, I couldn't help but notice how little CPU your RPG database I/O server
is consuming.  Some people think I'm Whacko to say that a Web interface
might be 30 times more expensive than 5250.  But these figures tend to
confirm it.  After all, what would the CPU numbers be if this were a 100%
Java solution?

On the other hand, I fully agree with your point that the new 270 models are
more than capable of serving Websphere applications.


Nathan.


> Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 15:04:12 -0500
> From: "Joe Pluta" <joepluta@PlutaBrothers.com>
> Subject: RE: Websphere: a resource hog?
>
> To my surprise, a batch server is hardly any faster than the directly
called
> RPG server.  It's about 7% faster, if that.  What's interesting is the
> breakdown in CPU usage during this time:
>
> DEFAULT_SE   QEJB        BCI    45.3
> QZRCSRVS     QUSER       PJ     26.1
> QDFTJOBD     SERVER      BCH     4.8
> PBD270W30    QTMHHTTP    BCH     3.3
>
> While I'm not exactly sure about all this, I know that the QDFTJOBD is my
> RPG server program, and PBD270W30 is my HTTP server.  QSRCSRVS is my
actual
> servlet and DEFAULT_SE is my web server instance.
>
> The trick is breaking down the latter two.  My servlet actually calls the
> methods that do the data queue management, the EBCDIC-ASCII conversion and
> the HTML formatting, so you'd think that all that activity would be in the
> QZRCSRVS job.  However, these are in jar files which are assigned to the
> default server, so are there threads that run inside the web server job?
My
> guess is that the QZRCSRVS is the one doing all the actual conversion and
> DEFAULT_SE is handling the web serving aspect, but I can't determine an
easy
> way to tell and I'm pretty burnt out right now <smile>.  If that's the
case,
> though, then over half of the overhead is in pure servlet overhead.  This
> actually makes some sense, because if that were the case, my run times
less
> web serving would be nearly identical to Nathan's ILE approach (that is,
if
> the CPW numbers really represent the representative horsepower of the
> machine).
>
> The only way for me to tell would be to create a persistent CGI program to
> do the same thing as my servers, and that's frankly a little more work
than
> I care to embark on today.  However, I think I've clearly shown that the
> model 270, at least, is a more than capable web serving platform.
>
> Joe


+---
| 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
+---