> He obviuosly does not understand the power of the > mainframe. IBM has always talked about throughput > rather than "performance" - elapsed time of any given > transaction and throughput.
Oh, I'd think he understands all too well. Most of the industry "performance" benchmarks measure things that mainframes aren't good at. It's like measuring the duration of your next trip to the grocery store in angstroms per cubic kilometer. The measurements are meaningless, or are misleading in ways that don't benefit IBM, so there's no point in expending lots of resources to compare something that won't tell you anything positive. This is long-standing IBM policy -- nothing new to see here.
