Re: RE: WebSphere on NT vs. AS/400

["Phil Groschwitz" <phil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think the key is you need L2 Cache.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Naughton" <mnaughton@juddwire.com>
To: <WEB400@midrange.com>
Cc: <web400@midrange.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 5:11 PM
Subject: Re: RE: WebSphere on NT vs. AS/400


> Thanks, Michael & Joe -- you've made me feel more comfortable about going
> with this option (and signs point to this being our direction).
>
> I've read some horror stories from others about the install procedure,
> though -- basically, about how hard it is to find out all the things you
> need to know, and how if you mess something up it can be a pain to fix. Do
> you recommend any resources for providing some guidance, or are there
> things you found helpful?
>
> Also, a general question to the list: we've got a 9406-720 with 512 GB of
> memory and 85 GB storage (65% used). Besides running green-screen apps,
> we've got a Domino server loaded onto it. Any recommendations for whether
> we need to upgrade anything before loading WAS?
>
> Thanks very much!
>
> WEB400@midrange.com writes:
> >I used WebSphere on NT for about two weeks.  I wasn't comfortable with
> >the response time or the environment, and as soon as possible I got it
> >running on my AS/400.  I've had no problems with it whatsoever on the
> >three AS/400s I've used (a model 150, a model 170 and now a model 270).
> >My only concern with using it on a production machine is that, like any
> >other development environment, you can hog resources - it's possible,
> >without too much effort <grin>, to create looping servlets that just suck
> >down your CPU.
> >
> >On the other hand, WebSphere has been very good about letting me shut
> >down the server hard and bring it back up.  If something hangs and the
> >server doesn't want to end, I can always ENDSBS QEJBSBS *IMMED and then
> >start it back up again.
> >
> >Joe Pluta
> >Pluta Brothers Consulting, Inc.
> >847-359-2657
> >
> >
> >---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
> >From: mcrump@sgcontainers.com
> >Reply-To: WEB400@midrange.com
> >Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 09:46:59 -0500
> >
> >>
> >
> >Mike,
> >
> >I would agree with him for the most part.  For testing and becoming
> >familiar
> >there is very little risk for your production machine.  We are actually
> >just
> >starting to use WAS Advanced 3.5 on one of our production boxes.....I'll
> >admit
> >I'm still pretty much a neophyte at all of this.  But I think the install
> >and
> >configuration of WAS can be pretty granular with little impact to your
> >existing
> >environment.
> >
> >Michael Crump
> >Saint-Gobain Containers
> >1509 S. Macedonia Ave.
> >Muncie, IN  47302
> >(765)741-7696
> >(765)741-7012 f
> >(800)428-8642
>
>
>
> Mike Naughton
> Senior Programmer/Analyst
> Judd Wire, Inc.
> 124 Turnpike Road
> Turners Falls, MA  01376
> 413-863-4357 x444
> mnaughton@juddwire.com
>
> +---
> | This is the WEB400 Mailing List!
> | To submit a new message, send your mail to WEB400@midrange.com.
> | To subscribe to this list send email to WEB400-SUB@midrange.com.
> | To unsubscribe from this list send email to WEB400-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator:
david@midrange.com
> +---
>
>

+---
| This is the WEB400 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to WEB400@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to WEB400-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to WEB400-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---