[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would agree with Barbara on this. We run a mix of traditional work along
with a Domino Change Management System with about 400 registered Users and
WAS V4 in lightweight mode with about the same amount. Both applications
can kill performance to our traditional workloads on our small 2 way. The
WAS always sits at the top of the CPU usage monitor, again this is
lightweight mode not full blown WAS, with the IDMS right behind it. The
Domino application server task, at times, can dominate CPU as well.
Since we have been in a holding pattern while the bean counters basically
decide our eventual fate I have been trying to hold the line as the
production WAS environment adds Users who then navigate up through our
traditional environment into our CA/IDMS. It has been a very delicate
balancing act to see that the Production Users get service while I *try*
to get cycles to the developers on this LPAR, no we don't have a test
LPAR. If I had my druthers I would attempt to run the Unix workloads on
their own LPAR where possible to eliminate the performance anomalies to
the traditional mainframe workloads. If not possible I would load the LPAR
with zAAP's as necessary to defray the impact.
We recently also had a problem while running a batch job against a zFS
which supports our Tech's Website and PDF files. The WAS in which the
PDF's were connected to suddenly went haywire using significant CPU,
operations then cancelled and eventually had to force the WAS, then zFS
abended - all in all an ugly incident. While there is an open APAR that
matches to some degree IBM asked us to try to recreate it as the WAS dump
was not helpful. Please see OA15422 with APAR description: "LOOP IN USER
CACHE, LOOKS LIKE A HANG IN ZFS"
And as Barbara said not to disparage Steve but we have had our share of
problems with running the new workloads with the traditional ones. Of
course you can also see my rants in the archives about my WAS experiences
if this wasn't enough. I do like the new workloads as they keep me
employed at this point but they just don't seem to play well with the
traditional ones.
Patrick,
Help me learn more, here. I'm talking about hosting
a website on z/OS without WAS. It would seem that
would be even lighter weight, although I honestly
have no idea how it scales to commercial levels of
activity.
Anyone else have some experience doing this who would
share your observations?
I'm thinking: get 'em in cheap (and light) using HTTP
server; then, when needed, bring in WAS (and more hardware,
it sounds like).
Kind regards,
-Steve Comstock
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
