Re: How far can U2 scale?

[CWNoah2]

Ross,

Actually, we just had a reason to care. We just changed from raid 5 to raid 
1+0, and wanted to determine how and where we achieved performance increase. We 
weren't interested in knowing how we compared to a museum machine, but in how 
we compared to the weekend before. We did see quite a performance increase in 
disk related functions, but it's rather difficult to quantify just how much 
faster it is overall for any given user in a normal work day.

Regards,
Charlie Noah
Inland Truck Parts

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So, assuming the Spirit was a 1x machine (I seem to recall a small DEC 1400 
(?) being a 2x - sooo many years) if the spirit could complete 10,000 
"transactions" in a quanta of time, and the new machine finishes the same task 
(approximating real world environment) in some fraction of this time, then it should 
be fairly straight forward to work out the X rating.

I seem to recall that the "omnipresent" CUBS benchmark was trying to achieve 
the same thing . they may even have some old benchmarks from a known "X 
rating" machine, allowing an approximation of modern equipment to be made --> 
not that I think anyone really cares these days, as X tends to be sufficiently 
large !

Ross Ferris
Stamina Software
Visage â an Evolution in Software Development
--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [OT] Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports

[CWNoah2]

Nah, rented it. I drive a 12 year old truck. Even it has the stupid windows 
with a mind of their own, though.

Charlie

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
And it was YOU that bought it!

m coffee... need more..

Les :-)

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 19 April 2004 11:12
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [OT] Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports


Well, let's see...  the new car automatically unlocks all the doors when I 
get in (my wife thinks the carjackers'll love that one), I have to stand on the 
brake pedal to get it to start, the window decides for itself to go all the 
way down when I just want it down a crack, and the turning radius sucks. But, 
hey, that's progress. It's new and improved.

Anyway, ignore this as the grumblings of an old codger whose coffee hasn't 
overcome the arthritis yet this morning.  ;^)

Regards,
Charlie Noah
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

[OT] Re: GUI from Mv code Re: Crystal Reports

[CWNoah2]

Well, let's see...  the new car automatically unlocks all the doors when I 
get in (my wife thinks the carjackers'll love that one), I have to stand on the 
brake pedal to get it to start, the window decides for itself to go all the 
way down when I just want it down a crack, and the turning radius sucks. But, 
hey, that's progress. It's new and improved.

Anyway, ignore this as the grumblings of an old codger whose coffee hasn't 
overcome the arthritis yet this morning.  ;^)

Regards,
Charlie Noah

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Change to the process flow is many times the impetus to replace a module or
application in the first place.  Change is not always terrible, although
feared. In truth I have found the fear to be more in the hearts of the IT
person who has tweaked the system over the past 15+ years and is insulted
that their masterpiece is being considered a dinosaur ready for replacement.
How dare they! You don't think that way when you replace your car now do
you?  You generally move into a newer improved model that outperforms the
car you left behind.  It may react a little differently, but overall the
performance is better.
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [ADMIN] The aforementioned and promised NAG about OVERQUOTING

[CWNoah2]

Well, Ray has spoken, so I guess that makes it gospel. Top posting is 
"wrong-posting", and only newbies who don't know any better do it. Speak for 
yourself, Ray - I, and many others, would rather not have to scroll down in each post 
to see the new material. I want to see it at the top, and scroll down if I 
need to refresh my memory as to the context. I am not a newby - I've been in the 
computer business for 26 years, and on the internet about as long as there was 
one (BBSs before that - top posting was quite common then, too).

I do agree that the poster should trim out non-relevant material from prior 
posts, though.

Regards,
Charlie Noah

 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

[snip]
  Without interposting, you have no idea where the reply 
fits into the thread.  If you are a reader that typically reads 
through an entire thread, when it's essentially dead, and don't mind 
the occasional reply that's out of place because somebody has their 
clock out of sync, or the time zone set incorrectly, then that's fine 
for you.  But top-posting still makes things more difficult for just 
about everybody else.

The byte flow problem, is the one that directly affects Cliff and the 
digests.  Unfortunately, 99.% of Top-Posters neglect to trim the 
quoted message to the relevant material.  That wastes huge amounts of 
bandwidth.
[snip]
There really are no valid reasons to top-post, but there are plenty 
of valid reasons to inter-post and trim the quoted material.  That's 
why it's been a flameable action on Usenet for over twenty years. 
Top-posting has only become more common in recent years because OE 
and a few other email/newsreader hybrids (that really don't do either 
well) make it tough to reply correctly and newbies are showing up 
everyday, not just in the first couple of weeks in September. 
Insisting on top-posting and not trimming the quoted material, 
especially when there's replies that have already been right-posted 
(aka inter-posted), I hate to say it, is just plain rude and self 
serving.  Please take a moment and read the material listed in the 
two links previously provided.  If you missed them, here they are 
again:

http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2000/06/14/quoting

Ray
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [ADMIN] The aforementioned and promised NAG about OVERQUOTING

[CWNoah2]

Well, Ray has spoken, so I guess that makes it gospel. Top posting is 
"wrong-posting", and only newbies who don't know any better do it. Speak for 
yourself, Ray - I, and many others, would rather not have to scroll down in each post 
to see the new material. I want to see it at the top, and scroll down if I 
need to refresh my memory as to the context. I am not a newby - I've been in the 
computer business for 26 years, and on the internet about as long as there was 
one (BBSs before that - top posting was quite common then, too).

I do agree that the poster should trim out non-relevant material from prior 
posts, though.

Regards,
Charlie Noah

 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

[snip]
  Without interposting, you have no idea where the reply 
fits into the thread.  If you are a reader that typically reads 
through an entire thread, when it's essentially dead, and don't mind 
the occasional reply that's out of place because somebody has their 
clock out of sync, or the time zone set incorrectly, then that's fine 
for you.  But top-posting still makes things more difficult for just 
about everybody else.

The byte flow problem, is the one that directly affects Cliff and the 
digests.  Unfortunately, 99.% of Top-Posters neglect to trim the 
quoted message to the relevant material.  That wastes huge amounts of 
bandwidth.
[snip]
There really are no valid reasons to top-post, but there are plenty 
of valid reasons to inter-post and trim the quoted material.  That's 
why it's been a flameable action on Usenet for over twenty years. 
Top-posting has only become more common in recent years because OE 
and a few other email/newsreader hybrids (that really don't do either 
well) make it tough to reply correctly and newbies are showing up 
everyday, not just in the first couple of weeks in September. 
Insisting on top-posting and not trimming the quoted material, 
especially when there's replies that have already been right-posted 
(aka inter-posted), I hate to say it, is just plain rude and self 
serving.  Please take a moment and read the material listed in the 
two links previously provided.  If you missed them, here they are 
again:

http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2000/06/14/quoting

Ray
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [ADMIN] The aforementioned and promised NAG about OVERQUOTING

[CWNoah2]

Well, Ray has spoken, so I guess that makes it gospel. Top posting is 
"wrong-posting", and only newbies who don't know any better do it. Speak for 
yourself, Ray - I, and many others, would rather not have to scroll down in each post 
to see the new material. I want to see it at the top, and scroll down if I 
need to refresh my memory as to the context. I am not a newby - I've been in the 
computer business for 26 years, and on the internet about as long as there was 
one (BBSs before that - top posting was quite common then, too).

I do agree that the poster should trim out non-relevant material from prior 
posts, though.

Regards,
Charlie Noah

 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

[snip]
  Without interposting, you have no idea where the reply 
fits into the thread.  If you are a reader that typically reads 
through an entire thread, when it's essentially dead, and don't mind 
the occasional reply that's out of place because somebody has their 
clock out of sync, or the time zone set incorrectly, then that's fine 
for you.  But top-posting still makes things more difficult for just 
about everybody else.

The byte flow problem, is the one that directly affects Cliff and the 
digests.  Unfortunately, 99.% of Top-Posters neglect to trim the 
quoted message to the relevant material.  That wastes huge amounts of 
bandwidth.
[snip]
There really are no valid reasons to top-post, but there are plenty 
of valid reasons to inter-post and trim the quoted material.  That's 
why it's been a flameable action on Usenet for over twenty years. 
Top-posting has only become more common in recent years because OE 
and a few other email/newsreader hybrids (that really don't do either 
well) make it tough to reply correctly and newbies are showing up 
everyday, not just in the first couple of weeks in September. 
Insisting on top-posting and not trimming the quoted material, 
especially when there's replies that have already been right-posted 
(aka inter-posted), I hate to say it, is just plain rude and self 
serving.  Please take a moment and read the material listed in the 
two links previously provided.  If you missed them, here they are 
again:

http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2000/06/14/quoting

Ray
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users