RE: CFINT - original implementation

["jt" <jt@xxxxxx>]

Jan,

Ancient history lesson inline...

| -----Original Message-----
| [mailto:midrange-l-admin@midrange.com]On Behalf Of Jan Megannon
| Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 7:52 PM

|
| When was it (CFINT) first introduced? V4R4M0?

Prior.  IIRC, prior to model 170 (which ran V4R3).  I thin' model 600's may
have been first model with split interactive/batch CPW/s but dunno for sure.

|
| It is a s/w feature, not a hardware feature?

Yep.

|
| Say it came out on the 6XX, with V4R4M0. This would then fit in with
| IBM's new billing model for performance if it came bundled, new box with
| new OS.

Others would know all the facts better, but it was introduced AS a hardware
feature, although implemented through software.  There was a lot of
confusion over WHAT THE HECK THIS CFINT JOB IS DOING sucking all the CPU, I
recall that for sure.

|
| If it is truly a s/w feature, what happened when I loaded the new
| version of OS/400 on one of my previous machines (5XX, or one of the
| other models)? I purchased that older system with no
| governor/limitation. Would the new software now impose a performance
| penalty on a box that was originally purchsed 'penalty-free'?

I would be amazed if it did, because IIRC the 500 did not have 2 different
CPW figures announced for the machine.  It depends on the announced CPW for
each model, so depends on the hardware.  (Although it was later determined
to have been implemented through software.)

|
| Depending on the replies, some customers may be p'd off!!!

In this case, you get what you pay for...  There is no decreasing of CPW by
installing a new version of OS, unless I've missed my mark pretty badly
(which has happened, on an occasion or two...;-)

jt