On 24 Feb 2008 11:37:54 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gerhard Adam) wrote: >I agree, however I'm surprised that no one has mentioned the obvious point >that needs to be considered. Chargeback shouldn't be based on usage, but >rather on the capacity that has been reserved for the anticipated load. >Every application ultimately contributes to the size of the configuration, >and serves as the basis for the capacity installed. Therefore, whether that >capacity is used or not, it indicates the resources that have been set aside >for a particular application and represents the resources which should be >charged.
That is true - unless that capacity is sub-let to other processes. Which means that processes with higher priority should be charged more than background processes. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
