On 03/27/2014 06:56 PM, Tom Ross wrote: >> Tom, =20 >> >> I have a question on your comment about offloading XML to specialty engines >> . To quote: >> >> >>> Also, offloading to specialty processors does not change total CPU usage, >>> and does not improve performance or throughput. It could change >>> how much you pay to run it. >> >> My standard engines are kneecapped at about half power. Wouldn't offloading >> the XML processing to a specialty engine allow the XML work to run at ful= >> l speed, therefore improving both performance and throughput? > Interesting, I am not sure what 'kneecapped' is, but I suppose your engines > are slowed down by getting a discount on price or something? When that > happens we don't do the same for the specialty processors? > Sorry if that is a dumb question :-) > > Cheers, > TomR >> COBOL is the Language of the Future! << > > Correct. For recent Enterprise mainframes the specialty engines always run a full hardware speed, while the speed of all GP engines is possibly degraded based on purchased MSU capacity. The hardware max combined MSU rating for the general purpose engines (which influences both software and hardware costs) can be upgraded/downgraded in discrete steps, and so that those discrete steps will not be huge given the currently very fast CPU engines, this is done by a combination of how many general purpose engines are enabled and how fast all the general purpose engines are allowed to run. Depending on where you are MSU-wise and how big of jump you take, an upgrade might actually give you fewer enabled GP engines, but with engine speed increased enough to give a net gain in capacity..
I suspect the use of "kneecapped" to describe a reduced-speed engine is user-derived rather than official IBM terminology. -- Joel C. Ewing, Bentonville, AR [email protected] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
