>> On Fri, 8 Sep 2006 09:49:56 -0700, "Gill, Geoffrey L." <GEOFFREY.L.GILL AT 
>> SAIC DOT COM> said:


> I'd like to get some input on what others see on their port
> utilization during heavy network traffic. With 350+ systems backing
> up to a single TSM server I'm curious as to why we see only about
> 50% utilization on the GIG port with max scheduled sessions set to
> 95. Sessions run extremely long compared to when they were on the
> old system.


You've gotten several data points about GigE utilization; but they
mostly told you what you already knew: your network can go faster than
that.

What are _all_ the changes you made between the old system and the
new?  What is the disk topology underneath?  What is the database
topology?

In a nutshell, where do you see the bottleneck being now?

CPUs approach irrelevance when your big job is I/O.  What are the two
hardware platforms?  How many adapters, attached to how many disks?
Different types?  Same?


My knee-jerk suggestion is "Database commit contention".  When folks
move up in hardware, they often "optimize" their database on newer
bigger disk, which can lead to too few DB volumes to keep up with the
transaction rates to which they're accustomed.


But that's a wild-ass guess, because we don't know much about your
system.



- Allen S. Rout