I thought I'd posited likewise, but maybe not.
Perhaps I wasn't in the mood for the mindless platitudes(*) that would
inevitably result.
People (as in *money paying* customers) talk/think MIPS. Wrap whatever
marketing weasel words you like around it, this is what they want to
get.
+1 for Cheryl
I'm apparently one of the
few in this thread who believe in MIPS. I do that because management
believes in MIPS, and you have to give them what they want.
It's not that I don't believe in MIPS.
It's that I don't believe in the accuracy of said MIPS.
I don't trust LSPR because it has missed
I simply have to wade in here, having dealt with capacity planning since 1965.
And, yes, we did CP back then.
Regarding SI versus MI, I think the question has been answered here. But the
reason that IBM started publishing multi-image estimates is that the majority
of customers run multiple
@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: SI and MI MIPS
I actually took Hal's comment the other way, that the not very far from the
actuality was referring back to the meaningless indicator. In that case, it
really is pretty accurate.
IOW, MIPS is meaningless.
Because of:
In fairness, it -is- a number that a high
I did not mean to imply that it was -meaningful-.
Instead, in the proper context, such a number can be -useful-.
With all due respect, for what?
If it's not meaningful how can it be useful.
LSPR/zPCR have, unless it's change recently, only tested to 32 CPUs.
The rest they 'straight line' the MP
Then what I would recommend is going to the next box with the same
MIPS rating (possibly fewer processors) and be ready to upgrade with
additional processors if you have too.
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Ted MacNEIL eamacn...@yahoo.ca wrote:
I did not mean to imply that it was -meaningful-.
Ted,
That may be all well and good in your environment, but there are many in
management at many shops who want capacity boiled down to a simple number.
If you say that it is more complicated then that, then they will just use it
as yet another reason to get rid of the mainframe. If you have not
Then what I would recommend is going to the next box with the same
MIPS rating (possibly fewer processors) and be ready to upgrade with additional
processors if you have too.
Since we don't know what a MIPS rating is, how do we go to the next box?
I don't mean to be negative, but if you can't
That may be all well and good in your environment, but there are many in
management at many shops who want capacity boiled down to a simple number.
I never said I've been blessed with management more enlightened than that.
The one number is still an issue.
If you say that it is more
On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 22:58:39 +, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
I've been involved in performance/capacity since 1981, and
I've never seen an MI/SI distinction, before.
LSPR has listed separate data for a single instance of z/OS
and multiple instances for years
I'd go on to say that MIP ratings are an
Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 5:48 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: SI and MI MIPS
I share your distaste for the term. I like: Meaninless Indication of
Processor Speed'.
What's cool is that is not very far
I actually took Hal's comment the other way, that the not very far from the
actuality was referring back to the meaningless indicator. In that case, it
really is pretty accurate.
IOW, MIPS is meaningless.
Because of:
In fairness, it -is- a number that a high manager can use to reasonbly
-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: SI and MI MIPS
In fairness, it -is- a number that a high manager can use to reasonbly
quantify things.
I disagree.
The number means nothing.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access
zPCR modelling?
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Greg Shirey
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 11:58 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] SI and MI MIPS
So if management asks for a recommendation about
So if management asks for a recommendation about migrating to a new mainframe
to handle current workload, what numbers do mean something?
I don't know how to compress almost 30 years of experience in
Capacity/Configuration/Performance Management into a single reply.
But, it is a basic
zPCR modelling?
That's akin to saying a Sysprog only needs SMP/E skills.
zPCR is only as good as its input, and LSPR does not try every possible
configuration, including some they have figures for.
What is missing is extrapolated, usually linearly, which is not how the MP
effect works.
@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: SI and MI MIPS
But, it is a basic understanding of what your workload is, how the various
components interact, seasonality, tracking, constant revision of forecasts,
analysis of announcements, LSPR, zPCR, understanding of the relationships
between existing models within
That's not what I meant. Once the analysis, the understanding, and the gut
instinct have all been factored in, what numbers from IBM are meaningful to
use to specify to management which CPU will work and which one won't? Given
that MIPS ratings are meaningless, how does one talk to management
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 9:14 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: SI and MI MIPS
So if management asks for a recommendation about migrating to a new
mainframe
The Revenue forecaster for Washington has likened forecasting as driving
forward while looking in the rearview mirror.
Forecasting is more than that (trite) expression.
It's also (for example) such things as the number of transactions per ABM (and
how many new ones are installed), how many
On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 20:38:12 +, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
The evaluation, as I said in another post, is at best a guess.
In other words, there is no meaningful indicator of processor speed.
In that case, to single out MIPS as meaningless is, in itself, a
meaningless statement.
--
Tom Marchant
On 11/19/2010 1:24 PM, Tom Marchant wrote:
On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 20:38:12 +, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
The evaluation, as I said in another post, is at best a guess.
In other words, there is no meaningful indicator of processor speed.
In that case, to single out MIPS as meaningless is, in itself,
Maybe not if the 200 MSU machine is four processors at 50 msu's each.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Edward Jaffe
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 4:33 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: SI and MI MIPS
On 11/19/2010
The bottom line is that you pay for MSUs both in hardware and software
costs.
That's pretty meaningful!
Yes, it is, but it's over feet of clay. As I said in a previous post, it's
scary
that many millions are spent on meaningless numbers.
the issue is ther fact that the numbers mean next to
How does one explain a 2098-O02 SI MIPS rating and a MI MIPS rating to an
accountant much less myself?
John Donnelly
National Semiconductor Corporation
2900 Semiconductor Drive
Santa Clara, CA 95051
408-721-5640
408-470-8364 Cell
cjp...@nsc.com
John,
I guess that rather depends on why the accountant thinks it's important to
understand the difference, and whether we're really talking about
MIPS or machine capacity.
I'd comment that the overhead of running ONE operating system copy on a
piece of hardware is likely to be less than if you
...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Donnelly, John P
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:29 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: SI and MI MIPS
How does one explain a 2098-O02 SI MIPS rating and a MI MIPS rating to an
accountant much less myself?
John Donnelly
National Semiconductor Corporation
2900
I'd tell an accountant that the SI rating is for special case workloads and
can be safely ignored.
The MI rating is for a realistic workload mix.
I've been involved in performance/capacity since 1981, and I've never seen an
MI/SI distinction, before.
Are there any web references on this
Subject: Re: SI and MI MIPS
..snip
Are there any web references on this topic.
..snip
-
Ted MacNEIL
eamacn...@yahoo.ca
NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any files transmitted with it are
intended
exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. The message,
together
I share your distaste for the term. I like: Meaninless Indication of
Processor Speed'.
What's cool is that is not very far from the actuality
Actually, it is.
In fairness, it -is- a number that a high manager can use to reasonbly
quantify things.
I disagree.
The number means nothing.
And,
30 matches
Mail list logo
