On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 12:54:54 +0200, Barbara Nitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>How fast can it be if well tuned and configured and with the best >>hardware options? > >FAST. > >There is no canned answer > >Our average GRS structure response time is less than 0.008ms. But that's GRS (almost no data transfer, cf on the same box as the lpar). The distant lpar connected to the same structure over 25km distance has an average sync response time of about 0.2ms. Asynch response time goes up to 1.1ms. > >If this application you're talking about is for customers, you can assume that response times will vary greatly, depending on how much hardware is thrown at XCF. > >Regards, Barbara Nitz >-- Barbara, Thanks for taking the time to reply. You are the only person that actually answered the qustion I asked. The rest were mainly the obvious replies assuming they actually read the question, which I suspect several did not. I'm not looking for a canned answer. I know there are a lot of factors. I just wanted to know if it was worth my while digging into XCF performance or if a couple of milliseconds was the best I would get, in which case why bother and just stick with TCPIP. >From the numbers you quote it seems it is possible for XCF to significantly outperform TCPIP, which is the question I was asking, so it is going to be worth my company's time to investigage further why our XCF response times are so poor. Thanks for your time & input. Regards, Ron MacRae. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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