On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 16:37:36 -0600, Mark Zelden wrote: > >I'm not trying to start an argument, but performance is not about "beliefs" >or "gut feelings". It's about measurements and data / facts to back it up.
I agree completely. > >The fact is, that there is overhead in engine switching to move work >over to a specialty processor, so I'm not inclined to believe that >from a performance perspective, overall, a system would run better with a split >between zAAPs and GPs as opposed to all GPs. Is that a "belief" or is it based upon "measurements and data"? >Now, I can see that >WAS could run better since the zAAP(s) could be sitting there servicing >the java work without competition - but the rest of the system could be CPU >starved (also, remember the additional overhead if these engines are >in another book). > >So I guess my point is, putting aside software costs, it is better from an >overall system performance perspective to have all GPs. Again, is that "belief" or "measurement"? -- Tom Marchant ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
