🚀 go-pugleaf

   Hmmm, another "interaction" with management.  I have proposed
that our site implement a "background batch" queue, and charge
certain users of that queue at a discounted rate.  This sort of
queue would run with a priority less than interactive.  In fact
I suggested a "long" and "fast" version of this queue type, with
priorities of 2 and 3 (relative to 4 for interactive users).
   There is a fear that if these queues are allowed to continue
to run while the system is busy with interactive users, that the
interactive users will be adversely affected.  I have argued that
any such effect will be minor to the magnitude of being not
detectable to 99% of interactive users.  Obviously, if I'm right
and can "prove" myself, (a) I face no batch queue management
hastles, and (b) we can effectivel utilize "NULL" job cycles
(and generate income from them) during the day.
   My question to the wizards:  "Is our management's fear in
any way justified?"  What can I do to alleviate the fear if in
fact it IS justified?  I'm aware of the ways that queues can be
controlled.  But we have *other* systems here whose interactive
performance IS (apparently) affected by batch (CYBER/NOS to be
specific).  Is VMS being tarred with the same brush unfairly?
   I know.  Another very general question requiring a specific
answer (I try not to ask "easy" questions).  Thanks to all who
I'm sure will reply.  Brent.
--
Brent Sterner                                    ***********************
Lord Protector,  d i g i t a l  Systems          *                     *
Computing & Communications Services              *   ...this space     *
Natural Sciences Building                        *   for rent...       *
The University of Western Ontario                *   Apply within.     *
London, Ontario, Canada  N6A 5B7                 *                     *
Telephone (519)661-2151 x6036                    ***********************
Network     <BRENT@uwovax.UWO.CDN>  ! VAX 8600
            <A105@UWOCC1.BITNET>    ! IBM 4341