RE: New loser cost IBM i announced -- MIDRANGE-L

× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.

Agreed. I realized after posting that I had not
considered exactly what we have
going on in the background and yes,
YMMV applies.
Our production 720 screams
but it has 24 drives, maxed memory
and is a P20. When we use our
test box we cry a lot.

From: Justin Taylor <JUSTIN@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 02/14/2017 01:02 PM
Subject: RE: New loser cost IBM i announced
Sent by: "MIDRANGE-L" <midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

I think that's a YMMV situation. I'm pretty sure our P720 is a P05, and
I'd have trouble causing any noticeable lag.

-----Original Message-----
From: broehmer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:broehmer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2017 12:03 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: New loser cost IBM i announced

Actually we do a lot of billing simulations as well as hosting a backup
Domino failover. So I'd say no to that assumption. Actually, I think the
8 disk 240 config. plays into it. Most of the time peak usage pegs at
over 90% depending, of course, on what we are doing. :-)

Bill

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.