2009/6/18 van Sleeuwen, Berry <[email protected]>: > I agree that the speed of CPU is not the problem anymore. But do you > want CPU intensive load? Afaik the CPU in mainframe, even z10, is still > more expensive than an intel. So if you'd have CPU intensive loads, > would it be still cost effective to run on z? Do we still need to stay > away from these applications?
Two different things: compute intensive workload and server utilization Asymmetric encryption for example is compute intensive. But if each transaction takes 5 seconds and you only need to do that 5 times an hour, the server utilization is very low. It may still be a great candidate for the mainframe. And if you have 100 of those you can still do it on the same CPU without buying 99 extra discrete servers (apart from the fact that if you have 100 servers share the resources, you may be able to justify a cryptic card that can be shared) But there's extreme cases where things don't make sense. Like the application that was only used once a month for 30 minutes, but needed 12 CPUs during that peak... (the application got fixed so it needed less than 1 CPU for 30 minutes). Common sense and performance data gets you beyond the rules of thumb. -- Rob van der Heij Velocity Software http://www.velocitysoftware.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
