In article <[log in to unmask]>, Jeanette/Ken
Nutsford <[log in to unmask]> says:
>
>There have been a number of postings on the HP3000-L concerning performance
>issues in moving from MPE/iX 4.0 to MPE/iX 5.0 with the latest one today from
>[log in to unmask]
>
>This issue was raised at the MPE & Database Roundtable at IPROF'96 and Jim
>Sartain replied for HP indicating that they would investigate. The following
>message was sent to Jim Sartain to initiate further action.
>
>---------- Forwarded Message ----------
>
>From:   Ken Nutsford, 100026,663
>TO:     JIM R SARTAIN,  72163,441
>DATE:   3/4/96 12:51 PM
>
>RE:      Resourcing issues with MPE/iX 5.x
>
>
>Hello Jim.
>
>The theme of my questions at the MPE & IMAGE Roundtable on moving from MPE/iX
>4.0 to 5.x was maintaining throughput for our COBOL compiles. Our test compile
>which we run in stand alone mode on different HP3000 machines with different
>configurations shows that moving to MPE/iX 5.x is not just a software upgrade
>but also a hardware upgrade which includes additional memory and possibly
>additional disk capacity. The unknown factor is the amount of additional
memory
>necessary to maintain throughput at current MPE/iX levels.
>
>Our timings to date are as follows.
>
>Computer                Memory  O/S             Compile Time
>--------------  -----------     -----           --------------------
>HP3000/920      24MB    MPE/iX 4.0      22 minutes
>HP3000/922      56MB    MPE/iX 4.0        7 minutes
>HP3000/922      40MB    MPE/iX 5.0      21 minutes
>HP3000/917      32MB    MPE/iX 4.0        3 minutes
>HP3000/917      32MB    MPE/iX 5.5        8 minutes
>
>What we are looking for is information on the additional memory we would need
to
>add to the different machines to maintain the compile times under 5.x as we
now
>have with 4.0, so that we can access the cost of maintaining the status quo
with
>our development environment. For example, will the memory on the 917 need to
be
>doubled, trebled or even quadrupled?
>
>At the Roudtable session you indicated HP would be willing to look at this
issue
>with us. I know it is of concern to others who are still on MPE/iX 4.0 and do
>not want MPE/iX 5.x to impact their performance.
>
>Thanks for your support and willingness to investigate this issue for the
MPE/iX
>community.
>
>Ken Nutsford <[log in to unmask]>
 
Although I don't still have the numbers, I experienced a similar
loss of speed with compiles and other similar memory intensive
programs on my '917/LX/32MB machine (even after the "low-memory patch).
My solution was to DOUBLE the memory to 64MB, which is fairly cheap
and certainly proved to be effective.  I don't have COBOL, so I can't
say for sure what it would take to make it "fly" again, but I would
guess you would see a big improvement with 64MB. Also I noticed that
some of the 5.0 compilers use more CPU than the 4.0 versions, so
additional memory won't get that back.  Good Luck !
 
Winston K.