Conference decwet::windows-nt

5765.0. "Memory Bottleneck Threshold for Alpha = MS recommendations ?" by MSE1::mse_chenis.mse.tay.dec.com::chenis (Kenneth Chenis) Mon Mar 03 1997 15:41

Short question - Should I be concerned about an
average 12 page/second count on an Alpha 2100 
being a memory bottleneck?


Long Verson - 

Does anyone know if there are updated performance threshold 
numbers for the 2100 server - as in - updated from what 
Microsoft publishes in their Opimizing Windows NT guide.

For instance - they indicate more than 5 memory pages/second
typically indicates a memory bottleneck.

Seeing as how this is a counter/second measurement - does it
make sense that the faster the processor, i/o - memory 
subsystem, etc, the higher the sustained count?  In other 
words, would thresholds like this be higher for Alpha 
processors, and/or "larger" Digital systems (2100, 4100, etc.)

If so, do we have characterization reports that indicate what
the real bottleneck thresholds are, or do we have to roll
our own based on specific hardware configurations.

Any help greatly appreciated !

Thanks,

Ken Chenis

ps - I did post this in the Sable conference, but thought
it might be appropriate here too.

            <<< MVBLAB::SYS$SYSDEVICE:[NOTES$LIBRARY]SABLE.NOTE;2 >>>
                      -< SABLE SYSTEM PUBLIC DISCUSSION >-
================================================================================
Note 2546.1      2100 / NT Memory Bottleneck Threshold Number ?           1 of 1
TARKIN::LIN "Bill Lin"                               10 lines   3-MAR-1997 19:16
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    re: MSE1::mse_chenis.mse.tay.dec.com::chenis
    
    Ken,
    
    I'm speaking entirely out of turn here, but my first impression is that
    the "memory bottleneck" about which Microsoft writes is the inadequacy
    of the AMOUNT of physical memory and not the speed of
    processors/memory.
    
    /Bill