|
midrange.com
One problem is that if you exceed the interactive cap for very long the
system will spin up the CFINT task, which will pretty much hose things up.
Your price difference between the two versions will be enough that it may
make sense for you to enlist a professional (MPG and Performance Navigator
software) to help with the decision (even if it costs a few bucks it may be
worth the reassurance). Are you working with a business partner on the
deal?
Philipp Rusch
<philipp.rusch@ne
wvision-it.de> To
Sent by: Midrange Systems Technical
midrange-l-bounce Discussion
s@xxxxxxxxxxxx <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
11/20/2006 10:15 Subject
AM Re: i5-520+ - Performance
Please respond to
Midrange Systems
Technical
Discussion
<midrange-l@midra
nge.com>
ChadB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx schrieb:
My gut feeling is that the 60/1200 will be just fine, but you should try
to
do some analysis of your interactive workload on the current 720. You should be able to get a good enough feel by just looking at the
interactive
oriented graphs available within the system monitors in Ops Navigator.
-SNIP-
Unless you REALLY need a whole ton of interactive, the Enterprise model will be a huge premium price to pay... this is worth doing the analysis
on
instead of buying the Enterprise model 'just in case'!
-SNIP-
We want to replace a model 720 with 120/240 CPW either with a 520+
Express
with 60/1200 CPW or a 520+ Enterprise with 1200/1200 CPW.
-SNIP- Hello Chad and others, now we have some numbers: Users on system overall = 168, with about 100 of them concurrently active. Our graph from performance measuring of interactive functions is going from everything between 12% to a 100%, with an average about 35-40%. We have been advised that you have to calculate abot 1-5 CPW per user, this would be a 100 CPW minimum for us. Now, if you take into account, that disk I/O and memory of a 520 are much faster than a 720, is it correct to say that the CPW-value of a 520 counts about 2-3 times as much as a 720's value ? Or is interactive CPW = interactive CPW ??? BTW, is there such a hard limitation as it used to be with the S20/S30 systems ? Unfortunately there is a huge gap between those 60 CPW and the enterprise version with the full 1200 CPW and one is not able to "just do a test-drive". So even if we could say that 60 CPW nowadays compare to the old 720's CPW values like 120 or 180 CPW this is still just enough to handle our load of today. Every little bit of extra will slow down the whole system or will it just be the interactive jobs, that suffer ? Regards, Philipp -- This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l. _____________________________________________________________________________ Scanned by IBM Email Security Management Services powered by MessageLabs. For more information please visit http://www.ers.ibm.com _____________________________________________________________________________ ForwardSourceID:NT00059F22
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.
