[Search for users]
[Overall Top Noters]
[List of all Conferences]
[Download this site]
| Title: | DECmcc user notes file. Does not replace IPMT. |
| Notice: | Use IPMT for problems. Newsletter location in note 6187 |
| Moderator: | TAEC::BEROUD |
|
| Created: | Mon Aug 21 1989 |
| Last Modified: | Wed Jun 04 1997 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 6497 |
| Total number of notes: | 27359 |
3527.0. "FREE LUNCH FOR PERFORMANCE STATS!" by CAADC::GALVIN (Mic Galvin, MCI Team) Mon Aug 10 1992 15:22
DECmcc Performance Data Reports
Hi. Well, I've got until the end of this week to come up with some
performance figures on DECmcc. Does anyone know of a document that has
been released recently on this topic?
I'm not set on the "type" of data I'm looking for, what comes to
mind are things like: What overhead is realized on a target node when
an MCC Station is monitoring it? What happens to the CPU & Memory
Utilization on a target node?
We've been using the MONITOR Utility, and a test script that the
customer wrote, MAILSIM, which simulates MCImail activity on a
system/cluster.
Our MCC platform is:, VMS 5.4-3, 64mg Memory, 2 RF71s, 2 Custom
AMs, 1 Custom FM, and TSAM, oh yes... and BMS V1.2.
I'm looking for really generic statements, referring to DECnet
activity or whatever... I should add I've got Event Logging Sink
turned on, and want to do a comparison report on what the performance
is like with and without multiple ALARMS turned on.
I'm buying lunch for the best pointers/documents, etc.
thanks,
/Mic
| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 3527.1 | Use of DECmcc could rely on Performance data | MSBCS::DOLAN | | Tue Aug 11 1992 14:40 | 39 |
|
This request below from Phil Bernstein for DECmcc repository performance
information has been passed on to me in the last couple of days so I'd be
very interested in any DECmcc performance data that is available.
The ACCESSWORKS project initially decided to develop
AM's for our management requirements however, a new organization (DB tools)
has become involved in the project and the issue is being rethought. I'm sure
performance will need to be addressed extensively. This is just the
beginning.
I can't imagine a VMS marketing
report being so unbalanced in its report - perhaps phil is just passing
on the negative and the report was more balanced...let's hope so!!!.
lynn dolan (ACCESSWORKS - dtn 293-5132)
From: CRL::PHIL "Phil Bernstein" 8-AUG-1992 09:34
To: databs::jmsmith
CC: crl::phil
Subj: DECmcc performance
John,
Have you run any performance experiments on the DECmcc repository?
If so, I'm interested in the numbers. If not, it's probably smart
to do this early. Overall, DECmcc has a reputation for being slooooow.
E.g., extracted from a recent VMS Marketing report:
"DECmcc performance poor... Version 1.2"
"DECmcc is our future, its not user friendly, and requires too many
resources to provide a reasonable response time."
-- Phil
|