HP3000-L Archives

December 2000, Week 2

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Doug Becker <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Doug Becker <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 14 Dec 2000 08:12:20 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (27 lines)
Ah, yes. Reporting to management again? It's time again to explain rainbows to earthworms.

What I did was showed our ("I don't know what you do") Director pretty Java Charts on my PC (the same ones you can learn how to do for yourself on my web site at www.mind-set.com). After that he didn't want to learn any more so the question of cpu vs elapsed time never came up.

Don't know.

Maybe you can convince them that MPE iX is so fast that it compresses elapsed time into much shorter bursts of cpu time.
They probably are so stupid that they just might accept it, coming from a "mysterious" technologist.
Be certain in any event, that they get too much information so they won't ask again.
Or when they forget (most VPs have an attention span of 30 seconds and a memory to match), you can remind them of the excutiating truth you abused them with the first time.

_______________________________________________
Gary Sielaff wrote:

>>> Gary Sielaff <[log in to unmask]> 12/13 2:30 AM >>>
When you "report" a group..... what does the cpu seconds signify
exactly?   Yes, 'CPU SECONDS' is a good answer but what part
of a normal transaction would this consist of?  In other words my
boss says "They were connected for 2 hours but they only used
14 cpu seconds, so out of that 2 hours they only did about one
transaction, or lookup in this case."  
I am trying to explain that they were probably busy most of the
2 hours.
Am I clear as mud or what???????????/
Anybody??????????
Gary Sielaff

ATOM RSS1 RSS2