>Failover is but one of many reasons why not using every CPU in the >book >makes sense. However, George Henke's contention is that >kneecapping CPUs is >somehow "wrong" -- that not using all the available speed is a bad idea. >Taken to its logical conclusion, not firing up every CPU in the book is >also >somehow "wrong"
>From a purely operational point of view, setting aside any pricing constraints, why would I NOT use every CP available? Why would I NOT use all the memory available? Shall we vary some memory offline now because we have too much 64-bit memory. There was a time, not too long ago, when Directors of Computer Resources would indeed vary resources like DASD and CPs offline and hold them in reserve for future growth and to avoid the needless proliferation of data, wasting of DASD and MIPS. Data, like nature, seems to "abhor a vacuum" and occupy any empty space and gobble up any spare CPU cycles just because it is there.. But that practice is fast disappearing now and, in any case, it was always a discretionary choice on the part of IT management and not an outside constraint imposed by IBM or software vendors. On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 6:16 PM, zMan <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 3:45 PM, zMan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 3:43 PM, Rick Fochtman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> ---------------------------------<snip>-------------------------------- > >> > >> Given the axioms of the discussion, it would be an entire book. The > >> contention was that IBM shipping capacity that isn't used "doesn't make > >> sense". > >> --------------------------------<unsnip>----------------------------- > >> But it makes excellent sense in the context of failure and recovery. > >> Having a spare "engine" to switch over to in the event of a failure in > the > >> primaty engine(s) can make a HUGE difference for a shop that needs to > >> maximize availability. > > > > > > Sure, and for the other reasons elaborated upon at length here. The point > > is, that seemed to be George Henke's contention. > > > > OK, too many pronouns even for me to understand my own post. Let me try > again: > > Failover is but one of many reasons why not using every CPU in the book > makes sense. However, George Henke's contention is that kneecapping CPUs is > somehow "wrong" -- that not using all the available speed is a bad idea. > Taken to its logical conclusion, not firing up every CPU in the book is > also > somehow "wrong". > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO > Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html > -- George Henke (C) 845 401 5614 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
