Re: OpenVMS.org: Marvel article and HP's press release for Marveland Alpha Retain Trust Alpha Retain Trust Alpha Retain Trust
From: jlsue (jefflsxxxz@sbcglobal.net)
Date: 04/17/03
- Previous message: norm.raphael@metso.com: "Re: DCL question - null byte in string symbol"
- In reply to: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy: "Re: OpenVMS.org: Marvel article and HP's press release for Marveland Alpha Retain Trust Alpha Retain Trust Alpha Retain Trust"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: jlsue <jefflsxxxz@sbcglobal.net> Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 22:20:00 GMT
On Wed, 16 Apr 2003 11:21:24 +0100, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy
<Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote:
>
>
>jlsue wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 Apr 2003 17:50:15 +0100, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy
>> <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>jlsue wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>Bullshit it doesn't. I don't care *how many* times you tell me. It
>>>>says specifically, in an EXACT QUOTE, that the vms upgrade gave the
>>>>28% performance increase. I have provided proof, within the article,
>>>>to support my claim. Your position is only one of conjecture based on
>>>>your own self-serving opinions.
>>>>
>>>>You can keep repeating your lies, but you can't support it with actual
>>>>data/info/quotes from the article.
>>>>
>>>
>>>So tell us what was the impact of moving from Turbolaser to GS160 !
>>
>>
>> I don't have to find or present that information because it is not
>> germane to my side of this discussion: They are happy customers.
>> The 28% improvement from the VMS upgrade is just a side issue that you
>> bring out because you can't counter it with anything meaningful.
>>
>
>Huu are you really this challenged.
>
>I asked you for references showing what performance improvements
>people got when moving from 8400/GS140 to GS160/320.
No. The discussion was that you claimed that MY experience of many
happy customers was invalid because I couldn't provide any concrete
proof that they existed.
In an effort to show that there are happy customers that I could talk
about, I researched for the publically-available wins to demonstrate
that they do exist... contrary to the arguments that you've been
making that they can't possibly exist.
>
>So what are you now claiming again ?????? You are claiming that
>the reference is for how much faster their GS system went
>when they upgraded to 7.3.
>
>Fine, lets for the sake of totally ruining your day assume
>that you are correct and that is what the reference refers to.
>
>I say ruining because if you are correct then this isn't
>a reference for how much their 8400->GS upgrade boosted
>their throughput. But thats what you origionally claimed
>to have provided with the Bank Austia reference.
No. Once again, you claimed that my experience couldn't be true since
I wouldn't give specific references of these happy customers, so I
found some for you that can be discussed.
>
>So you are now claiming that the reference you provided
>isn't a reference at all, fine.
>
>Do you get it yet. This is a rock and a hard place with
>you in the middle.
No again. I support my contention that there are happy GS customers.
That's all I'm on the hook for. If you don't agree, please reference
where.
>>
>> You would have a point if you didn't lie about my claims. I claim
>> that, in the real world, the benchmarks don't tell the whole story,
>> and that there are happy customers. But YOU claim that there can not
>> be ANY happy customers based on generic information. I did NOT claim
>> that there are no performance problems. And I gave TWO "concrete
>> examples" to support my claim. And you have nothing to counter them
>> except bland, experimental, generic benchmarks.
>>
>Bullshit, I have never claimed that there are no happy
>GS customers and I defy you to prove that I have.
>
>Why not spend a little more time thinking through your
>response and a little less time attempting to put words in my
>mouth, you will benefit.
Okay, buddy, here's a referenced article where I specifically ask you
what you want me to prove. I asked if you expected me to prove that I
have happy customers, and you replied, in short, "yes".
(I expect this url will wrap, so I'll actually include the posting at
the end of this note)
>
>> The thing is, my position is much easier to prove, and your is easier
>> to disprove. I only have to find ONE counter argument to support my
>> logical argument and disprove yours. That's why your claim is so
>> hopeless.
>>
>
>Well except that you have totally failed to prove it so
>far, suggesting that its a bit more difficult than
>it seems.
Yeah, sure. Re-read this included note from you. All I stated, and
all that I need to support, is the claim that there are happy
customers. Those two references demonstrated this fine.
> *********** Included posting below ****************8
From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy
(Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com)
Subject: Re: OpenVMS.org: Marvel article and HP's press release for
Marveland Alpha Retain Trust
View: Complete Thread (36 articles)
Original Format
Newsgroups: comp.os.vms
Date: 2003-02-27 09:12:04 PST
jlsue wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 14:01:13 +0000, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy
> <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>jlsue wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 24 Feb 2003 13:14:20 +0000, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy
>>><Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote:
>>
>>>I see, so what you're saying now is that customers should make their
>>>buying decisions based on these kinds of benchmarks?
>>>
>>>Sorry, I don't advise customers that way. We try to get their own
>>>apps benchmarked to demonstrate the value they will receive from their
>>>investment.
>>>
>>
>>But you cannot provide any actual example of this or havn't
>>been able to so far.
>>
>
>
> Exactly what am I saying that you're asking for proof on?
> Is it that "there are certainly customers who have GS160/320 servers
> who are very happy with the performance of their systems?"
>
> What? Is this claim so extraordinary that it requires proof?
>
Yes because your own engineers say that there are issues
your own benchmark results illustrate these issues and
customers on this newsgroup have benchmarked their applications
and discovered them for themselves.
At the moment the score is 5 for the argument that GS160/320s
do in fact have performance issues because of their NUMA architecture
and 0 against.
Unless that is you can substantiate your claim to never have
seen any issues with results from the benchmarks that you
apparently advise your customers to do the score will remain
as it is.
- Previous message: norm.raphael@metso.com: "Re: DCL question - null byte in string symbol"
- In reply to: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy: "Re: OpenVMS.org: Marvel article and HP's press release for Marveland Alpha Retain Trust Alpha Retain Trust Alpha Retain Trust"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
