I'm familiar with the discrepancy between hardware and software MSUs. IBM has put the customers in an unfortunate position of contention with software vendors.
I'm still curious about the gap between the 117 hardware MSU and the 124 MSU I measured. Is it reasonable to attribute it to PR/SM overhead like we do for MIPS? Also, has anyone ever successfully defended that hardware MSUs are for hardware sizing only and that IBM's software MSU rating is actually an appropriate measure for ISV software? Thanks for the help! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
