Hello Folks @ 3000-l,

Re: nscontrol question

----------------------------------------------------Jeff Kell writes--
The flip side of this is, or at least used to be, that by specifying
a MINIMUM number of servers, these processes were 'pre-launched' by
DSDAD so that incoming connections would quickly be farmed out to the
waiting but as-yet-bound daemons.  This avoided the process creation
overhead and delay when establishing a new connection.  In Donna's
case above, I think preloading 80 VTSERVERs is very excessive, but I
have been an advocate of having a minimum value > 0 since the classic
days.

Perhaps this is no longer a "negligable" gain by having a pool of
loaded, ready-to-go daemons at hand on today's recent MPE/iX systems?

The effect is not unlike APACHE preloading child processes to handle
http requests, except that obviously the connection rate/frequency and
persistence of said connections is an order of magnitude lower.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

My feed back (with out testing to prove this) is that the feature of
having available 'reserved servers' for NS-Services is marginally if
at all useful from a performance perspective.  Remember reserved
servers are a feature from the past "MPE/VE" to be specific.
Certainly one could think of an example or corner case where reserved
servers would be useful - if one had an application or device(s) which
logged on, wrote 1 record to a file and logged off several hundred
times in a hour...  but other than a case like this I.M.H.O. I really
don't think server creation is significant when you keep in
perspective the high end performance of the 3000 today.  Not your
fathers Oldsmobile as the commercial says!

Regards,

James Hofmeister
Hewlett Packard
Worldwide Technology Network Expert Center
P.S. My Ideals are my own, not necessarily my employers.