ADSM-L

Re: VM or MVS Adstar DSM?

1993-10-12 11:49:22
Subject: Re: VM or MVS Adstar DSM?
From: Brent Stilley <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1993 09:49:22 CST
On Tue, 12 Oct 1993 10:18:30 EDT Steve Moore said:
>>  We installed WDSF a few months ago and we're now planning on
>>converting to ADSM.
>>
>>  My system manager is favouring moving over from WDSF under VM
>>to ADSM under MVS.
>>
>>  Any problems with this, or comments from those who've gone down
>>the same path?  Thanks.
>
>I would like to piggyback on Anthony's VM to MVS Adstar conversion question.
>Here at Miami we are trying to determine which platform to install Adsm
>on.  The majority of our projected clients are using TCP/IP.  On VM we
>have FAL but no tape management system.  On MVS we have a tape
>management system but we need to install HAL.  This is a difficult
>decision to make without experience with the product.  Any comparative
>comments on installation, performance and usability charateristics
>on VM/MVS would be appreciated.  I will order the Adsm Implementation
>Examples for performance information.  I am oh so happy that I found
>this list.  Thanks in advance for any comments.

One observation we've made via some informal FTP benchmarks is that IBM's
MVS TCP/IP seems to outperform the VM version considerably - even when
all the VM tasks are given *all* the system's dispatching preferences.

I suspect this is due to the single threaded nature of CMS machines.

Brent Stilley,  Oklahoma State University, 113 Math Sciences, Stillwater, 74078
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>