On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 16:30:03 +0100, Miklos Szigetvari wrote: > For me this more or less clear. >I have here a number of collegues from NT and Unix , and they don't >understand why the 0.5% CPU time is a matter: > >/"Would somebody knowledgeable please explain to me why some host people >get their panties in a knot (I love colorful expressions!) over a few >dozen MBs and a CPU usage of 0.5%? Are there real reasons for this, or >are they simply stuck in a 1960s mindset? How much can 408 CPU-seconds >per day cost?" >/ The question really needs to be researched from a different perspective: Does this 408 CPU-seconds come from (1) a peak time of day, or (2) is it evenly distributed throughout the entire 24 hour period, or (3) is it primarily from off-peak (overnight) timeframes? If it is the first then the cost is substantially higher than it appears when just looking at raw numbers - even to their mindset. If it is the second then the cost is still relatively expensive during peak and is a (small) contributor to earlier upgrades and higher software license fees. If it is the third - using primarily unused or "mop up" cycles then it isn't so bad - even with a 1960s mindset. -- Tom Schmidt
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
