HP3000-L Archives

November 2001, Week 3

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:
Re: 7.0 Performance hit?
From:
Christian Lheureux <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
[log in to unmask]
Date:
Tue, 20 Nov 2001 11:11:09 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (61 lines) 
Cecile wrote :

> I was expecting to see a performance hit with 7.0, but our MRP runs
> were worse than I expected.
>
> HP3000/960, running MPE/iX 6.0: 180 minutes
> (running alone)
>
> HP3000/969(3.75 Gb memory), running MPE/iX 6.0: 51 minutes
> (other jobs running)
>
> HP3000/N220 (4.5 Gb memory), running MPE/iX 7.0: 155 minutes
> (running alone)
>
> The N-class box is supposed to replace the 960; I guess it
> will do that.
> It will be interesting to see what happens to MRP when the 969 is
> upgraded to 7.0
>
> Cecile Chi

Several factors should be considered :

- Are all the runs manipulating the same data ? The same amount of data ?
The same data structures ?
- How many CPUs does your 969 have ?
- What are your runs exactly doing ? Read-only ? Read/update ? Adds ?
- How much free space on each box ?
- How fragmented is your disk space on all systems ?
- How fragmented are your data files (i.e. how many extents, and how spread
are the extents ?)
- How are data/index files implemented ? Separate spindles ?
- What about storage ? HP-IB ? HP-FL ? SCSI/SE ? F/W ? HVD ? LVD ?

Here are a few performance indices :

- 960 = 1.9
- N400-220 = 9.0
- 969/100 (one-way) = 5.2
- 969/420 (four-way) = 21.5

In other words, we may or may not have comparable propositions. I would tend
to think that 7.0 has a performance hit, but, from the technical data I've
had, i would expect a very moderate perf hit.

In other words, a careful look should be taken at these runs. There may be
some misunderstanding or lack of knowledge of something (Hardware config ?
Disk space management ?). Or there may be a real perf hit (I'm not ruling it
out flatly), but it has to be proved. There are lots of tools to assist you
: HP's Glance Plus and Glane Plus Pak, SPT (for individual processes - but
that may be moot since I assume the same code is used on all three boxes),
PerfView (uses Scope as a collection tool), and third party tools like SOS
and the complete Lund stuff (not an endorsement, just a mention).

HTH

Christian "loves to do perf stuff" Lheureux

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

ATOM RSS1 RSS2