RE: IFS Performance -- MIDRANGE-L

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005, Evan Harris wrote:

my perspective on the consolidation issue is that it is as much about reducing head count and [therefore] on-going costs rather than being solely concerned with up front capital costs. Viewed from this perspective an iSeries would still be a better solution than an additional linux box as the linux box is likely to need an additional administrator (in most cases), as well as all the additional power, asset tracking etc etc. and all the other overheads of just having a different box.

Agreed that this is the advantage of consolidation. Fewer machines = fewer things to keep track of

Server sprawl as manifested by Windows servers is what consolidation is aimed at slowing/preventing/eliminating (take your pick). In your example (i.e. using Linux) you have swapped one OS for another and retained the problem.

To me using linux instead instead of Windows gives a lot of advantages beyond simply swapping OSes. But that's for another day.

I will grant you that Linux may make having additional servers more manageable as compared to NT and also that just consolidating for the sake of it is not the answer to this or any particular problem, I'm just pointing out that raw performance is not the sole driver behind the consolidation push.

I agree with this well balanced statement. In general, I feel that consolidation is a good thing and try to do so whenever possible. My point is that if a given system is to succeed at consolidation it can't lose the performance edge. An iSeries is not cheap and getting enough machine to match the file serving performance of a linux box while still giving the required performance for your database applications is very expensive. If after making such an expense and the machine does not match the file serving performance of the el cheapo linux box the users will naturally feel like that money was wasted. If I were the decision maker and I spent all this money and performance was worse I'd be mad! I might take some consolation in the administrative costs I'd be saving, but I'd probably always have in the back of my mind the thought that throwing a linux box in the mix would get me back the performance I wanted.

To sum up: consolidation is good. But if everything runs slower no one is going to want it.

James Rich

It's not the software that's free; it's you.
        - billyskank on Groklaw

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 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].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.