On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 00:54:10 +0000, Ted MacNEIL wrote: >>I don't remember MDF partitioning the cache. Indeed, part of the reason for the way the domain dispatcher was designed was to limit the effects of one doamin impacting the cache of the others. > >That's exactly what I meant. >The 5850 series came with a very large cache, that IBM used to denigrate due to LDR.
LDR? You mean the 580 series. The base machine was a 5860. The 5850 was a slower model >With each domain the cache would be allocated as a fixed amount, and was not dynamic. >So, the cache from one domain was completely isolated from another. >No impact. No, it didn't work that way. It was a kind of large cache with a higher way associavity than was common, IIRC, but cache was not dedicated to a domain and isolated from other domains. > >PR/SM shares cache among all LPARs. >MDF did not. Yes, it did. There were plenty of real differences that resulted in MDF performing better than PR/SM, but that's not one of them. -- Tom Marchant ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
