How do I justify an investment in Cache?
Hi. We have disk 2105 - F20 with 5,2 tera of storage and 4 Giga cache size by cluster we want to come to 8 Giga in every cluster but the increase of Cache Storage is very expensive... Now, my chief says to me ... it improves the performance of the machine if we have the cache doubles ..?how can we quantify it? Thanks. -- 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
Re: How do I justify an investment in Cache?
Adding cache to an existing storage processor without an identified performance problem you will solve is going to be hard to justify and amounts to brain surgery on your existing box that has some amount of risk. Tools http://www.intellimagic.net like RMF MAGIC and DISK MAGIC can actually show you what is happening now and what would change if you added that cache and it may not be what you would expect. There may be other tools that can do this kind of thing but those are the ones I am aware of. I think the 2105 is a dead end at this point. You would probably be better off to spend time trying to bring in a DS8000. http://www.ibm.com/systems/storage/disk/ds8000/ The performance and functional improvements from 2105 to 2107 are dramatic. You will likely get much more benefit spending the money that way than adding cache to a previous generation storage processor. Cache is just one element of performance and the next generation includes improvements in all aspects of the storage processor architecture. You might be able to get IBM to run a DISK MAGIC study for you to show you the result of adding that cache or replacing your 2105 with 2107 technology. We are pushing the 2105's off the floor as quickly as we can migrate the data to 2107 on both open and z/OS. I am sure other DASD vendors would say replace the 2105 with my model xyz which would also be a valid proposition. The point is don't spend money on old technology bring in current and get more bang for the buck no matter what vendor you use. Best Regards, Sam Knutson, GEICO System z Performance and Availability Management mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (office) 301.986.3574 (cell) 301.996.1318 Think big, act bold, start simple, grow fast... -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alvaro Quintupray B. Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 9:03 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: How do I justify an investment in Cache? Hi. We have disk 2105 - F20 with 5,2 tera of storage and 4 Giga cache size by cluster we want to come to 8 Giga in every cluster but the increase of Cache Storage is very expensive... Now, my chief says to me ... it improves the performance of the machine if we have the cache doubles ..?how can we quantify it? Thanks. This email/fax message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of this email/fax is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all paper and electronic copies of the original message. -- 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
Re: How do I justify an investment in Cache?
Sam, I could say replace a 2105 with a 9980 (-2 generation) and get better performance, but that would a bit too naughty on the list :-) Ron -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Knutson, Sam Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 7:44 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] How do I justify an investment in Cache? Adding cache to an existing storage processor without an identified performance problem you will solve is going to be hard to justify and amounts to brain surgery on your existing box that has some amount of risk. Tools http://www.intellimagic.net like RMF MAGIC and DISK MAGIC can actually show you what is happening now and what would change if you added that cache and it may not be what you would expect. There may be other tools that can do this kind of thing but those are the ones I am aware of. I think the 2105 is a dead end at this point. You would probably be better off to spend time trying to bring in a DS8000. http://www.ibm.com/systems/storage/disk/ds8000/ The performance and functional improvements from 2105 to 2107 are dramatic. You will likely get much more benefit spending the money that way than adding cache to a previous generation storage processor. Cache is just one element of performance and the next generation includes improvements in all aspects of the storage processor architecture. You might be able to get IBM to run a DISK MAGIC study for you to show you the result of adding that cache or replacing your 2105 with 2107 technology. We are pushing the 2105's off the floor as quickly as we can migrate the data to 2107 on both open and z/OS. I am sure other DASD vendors would say replace the 2105 with my model xyz which would also be a valid proposition. The point is don't spend money on old technology bring in current and get more bang for the buck no matter what vendor you use. Best Regards, Sam Knutson, GEICO System z Performance and Availability Management mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (office) 301.986.3574 (cell) 301.996.1318 Think big, act bold, start simple, grow fast... -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alvaro Quintupray B. Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 9:03 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: How do I justify an investment in Cache? Hi. We have disk 2105 - F20 with 5,2 tera of storage and 4 Giga cache size by cluster we want to come to 8 Giga in every cluster but the increase of Cache Storage is very expensive... Now, my chief says to me ... it improves the performance of the machine if we have the cache doubles ..?how can we quantify it? Thanks. This email/fax message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of this email/fax is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all paper and electronic copies of the original message. -- 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 -- 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
Re: How do I justify an investment in Cache?
Alvaro Quintupray B. wrote: Hi. We have disk 2105 - F20 with 5,2 tera of storage and 4 Giga cache size by cluster we want to come to 8 Giga in every cluster but the increase of Cache Storage is very expensive... Now, my chief says to me ... it improves the performance of the machine if we have the cache doubles ..?how can we quantify it? IMHO you should consider other possibilities. Assuming you buy cache from IBM (not from second hand) you will pay a lot. And you still have quite old DASD box. It could be reasonable to consider purchase of something newer. You'll get more cache, faster disks, more powerful controllers... Last but not least: you will have a *choice*. Competition - that's what can decrease the price significantly. My $0.02 -- Radoslaw Skorupka Lodz, Poland -- BRE Bank SA ul. Senatorska 18 00-950 Warszawa www.brebank.pl Sd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy XII Wydzia Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sdowego, nr rejestru przedsibiorców KRS 025237 NIP: 526-021-50-88 Wedug stanu na dzie 01.01.2008 r. kapita zakadowy BRE Banku SA wynosi 118.642.672 zote i zosta w caoci wpacony. -- 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
Re: How do I justify an investment in Cache?
Sigh! - and then I go and forget to change the TO address. Apologies for those upset with blatant marketing on the list. -- 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
Re: How do I justify an investment in Cache?
You're forgiven, Ron... :-) Ron Hawkins wrote: Sigh! - and then I go and forget to change the TO address. Apologies for those upset with blatant marketing on the list. -- 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 -- 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
Re: How do I justify an investment in Cache?
snip I could say replace a 2105 with a 9980 (-2 generation) and get better Performance. /snip Ron, you're forgiven. You contributions to this list far outweigh this small slip. I concur with you analysis however, why spend money on old technology. If budgetary considerations allow, by all means spend the money on newer technology from (insert favorite vendor here). You will get better price/performance and lower maint costs. If budgetary considerations prevent replacing the old technology, by all means contact the hardware vendor for assistance in preparing the impact analysis of increasing the available cache! HTH, -- 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
Re: How do I justify an investment in Cache?
I concur with you analysis however, why spend money on old technology. If budgetary considerations allow, by all means spend the money on newer technology from (insert favorite vendor here). I tend to agree, but I have a question. What if the older technology is still under waranty/lease? Cost is not the only consideration. Contract terms are, too. BTDT. GTTS. DLI. DWTDIA! - Too busy driving to stop for gas! -- 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
