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
