Re: Platform Advocacy
- From: "WM" <webmaster@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 14 Nov 2005 09:26:41 -0800
Great post, McKnight@excite. It is surprising how often folks will rely
on hearsay, consultants' opinions, and out of date data rather than
just setting up some simple benchmarks to measure their actual
environment with current product releases.
There is also often a lack of understanding in complex (typical)
environments with not only application code but also DBMS code, message
infrastructure, and perhaps transaction management involved. Often the
CPU cycles spent in, say, DB2 or Oracle are far greater than those
spent within the application's actual Java or C++ code, making the
choice of language almost irrelevant in terms of performance. And
depending on what measurement tool or techniques one uses, these
non-code cycles may be counted anything from 0 to 100% during testing,
further muddying the H2O.
WM
Why IT Doesn't Work - http://www.witdw.com
.
- References:
- Platform Advocacy (was: Re: HFS vs. zFS?)
- From: gilmap
- RE: Platform Advocacy
- From: Ray Mullins
- Re: Platform Advocacy
- From: mcknight-b-a
- Platform Advocacy (was: Re: HFS vs. zFS?)
- Prev by Date: Re: Quick HMC console question
- Next by Date: Re: Looking for a copy of Advanced Assembler Language and MVS Interfaces : For IBM Systems and Application Programmers 1999
- Previous by thread: Re: Platform Advocacy
- Next by thread: Re: Platform Advocacy
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
