HP3000-L Archives

September 2000, Week 5

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:
Cecile Chi <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Fri, 29 Sep 2000 22:01:13 EDT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (31 lines)
In a message dated 9/29/00 11:43:17 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

<< I just received my copy of Performance News with an enclosed HP Memory
 Calculation Formula.  We have a 996/400 machine which is only supports 3.75
 GB memory on MPE/iX 6.5.  So why is this newsletter telling me I "must" have
 a minimum of 4GB? >>

These advertisements with that Memory Calculation Formula annoy me.
They are coming from a company that sells memory, of course.
Perhaps the calculations are intended for HP-UX machines - I don't know.

In Kevin Cooper's presentation at HP World, he said the absolute minimum
that HP recommends is 128 Mb, a far cry from 4 Gb.  Obviously, that 128 Mb
would be on a low-end machine with very few users, not a 996/400.  The other
measure he gave was that 6.5 itself uses slightly more memory than 6.0,
5 or 6 Mb more.  He said that if your machine is really pushing its limits,
going to 6.5 with no other change might be a good time to add a little
memory.  If your machine is not having any performance problems now,
there is no need to add memory when upgrading to 6.5.

Just about all the performance talks I've heard, and articles I've read,
suggest
that adding memory will usually help almost any performance problem, unless
there is some other identifiable cause.

This is my understanding of what I've heard.  I'm sure someone will correct
me if I mis-quoted anything.

Cecile Chi

ATOM RSS1 RSS2