In a message dated 10/6/99 10:23:05 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

<<
 The connection to this thread is that the prior machine (that wasn't
 replaced because we didn't have the $150,000) was a 960 - the big brother
 of the 950.  This machine, like all HP 3000s, was of great value if it is
 what you have to run you business on - we had a peak of 170 sessions all
 doing database transactions on ours before it was replaced (we limited it
 to "just" 170 because after that it *really* got too slow to even wait
 for).  You'll have to ask (or pay) Jeff Kell to find out how you run 170
 sessions doing database transactons on a 960.  I have trouble guessing
 what ceiling our 969/120 running the same software will have - I don't
 think we'll run into it anytime soon.

 >
 > Wayne

 --
 Richard L Gambrell
 Database Administrator and
 Consultant to Computing Services at UTC
  >>

A customer of mine (not the one with the 950) ran the business-critical
systems such as manufacturing and purchasing on a 960 until about a
year ago.  The regular daytime load was 200-220 sessions and about
20 background jobs.  It finally "hit the wall" at 240 sessions, and couldn't
do anything except manage itself until someone went around and
powered off some of the PC's.  The replacement 969/220 combined the
load from two 960's and has a daytime load of close to 400 sessions
plus 30 background jobs and random batch jobs.  It doesn't even
breathe hard except when Oracle gets itself tangled up (technical
explanation from the System Manager).

The secret on the 960 was to use job-management software to
single-thread Quiz, even after it was compiled with PDQ.  At least,
that's what we think helped.

Cecile Chi