|
pnelson@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
This box still would need to be able to run iSeries Access for the Web and do better than the one minute response times I get on my 170.
PaulI have a 10 drive 170 with 2292 processor and 512Mb memory, and have no problems with response times. As a result of your post, I did some simple tests.
Updating the database, using a browser, a single user got response times of 0.1 seconds and used 0.2% CPU time. Displaying complex web pages, generally with 2 - 4 images per page, displayed after randomly retrieving quite large numbers of (about 200- 300?) database records per page, gave response times of 0.6 seconds using 5.6% CPU time. This was moving from page to page without pausing to read them.
Both "tests" were measured using WRKACTJOB.. The web pages in both tests were virtual, with HTML/Javascript generated on the fly. I was using the "old" HTTP server for both.
I do not have a way of really loading the system. On a more basic 170, which I used to have, response times were still well sub-second.
To my mind, the 170 is a powerful box for SMB use. How many users were on line when you were getting 1 min response times? Rob Dixon www.erros.co.uk
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
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.
midrange.com
