AS400 vs. NT Enterprise Server

[rhunt01]

Hello List,

I am currently researching the difference between AS/400 and NT Enterprise Servers. Right now my company has an AS/400 with the following Specs:

1600 Batch CPW
120 Interactive CPW
4 gigs Memory

I am comparing this to, let’s say, a Compaq 8-way with comparable RAM, 1.2 GHz processors, and SCSI 3 drives (or whatever is fastest at time of purchase).

I would like to solicit opinions from anyone on the list with regard to AS/400 and NT enterprise servers running XE code. I am especially interested in hearing from individuals that may consult and have experience with both servers.

I have heard that XE code actually runs better on the NT OS. Opinions?
I appreciate any time you can spare for comments.

Thanks!


Ryan Hunt
OneWorld XE; Update2; SP15.1
AS400; V4R5
DS: Win2k SP2, SQL 7.0 SP3
TSE's: Win2k(SP2) & NT4.0(SP6a) with Metaframe 1.8

 

[mtrottier]

Ryan,

I have installed a number of systems on AS400, NT and UNIX and the answer to your question is one of those “It depends”. It depends on what’s important to your organization. The choice is also less of a OneWorld Technical issue. I have not found there to be more or less OneWorld related issues from one platform to another just different ones.

Here are a few thoughts (that may be arguable):


Reliability:
If you are a 7 by 24 operation and stability/reliability is your primary concern then I would recommend the AS400. Nothing beats the AS400 for up time. You will rarely ever have to boot or IPL the system to resolve issues. NT on the other had is notoriously fragile. You will be lucky if you can go more that a week or two without having to reboot the server to resolve corrupt memory or other OS related issues. I have also had problems that could only be resolved by doing a complete reinstall of the operating system. AS400 support is also second to none. Depending on your service agreement, IBM will often know about and sometimes fix issues before you are even aware you had an issue.

Cost: (both equipment and administration)
As you know An AS400 is far more expensive than a NT box. In addition NT administrators are easier to come by than AS400 administrators. It’s unusual to find one person who can do both NT and AS400 administration so you usually end up have both in a AS400 shop.

You didn’t mention what database you would be using if you went to NT. With SQL Server or Oracle you will also need a DBA to administer the database.

Simplicity:
The number one reason for choosing NT administration is simpler than AS400. Remember though you also need a DBA.

Speed:
This one is not as clear but generally UBE execution on the AS400 will kick butt. However if your using Oracle as your database on the NT Server, UBE’s run locally and data access by the client may be a little faster simply because it doesn’t have to go through ODBC like Client Access does.

One final thought:
You may want to consider setting up a NT OneWorld Logic Server to your existing configuration where you could test and compare.

Mike


Mike Trottier
Independent CNC Consultant
Onsite and Dial-up Support
B731,B732,B733,XE
AS400,Unix,NT
Oracle,SQL
#801 557-8368

 

[DeRay_Scholz]

We must be one of the "lucky" ones, since we are running live on Windows 2000 servers (previously NT for almost 2 years) and never had to reboot them to fix phantom problems. The only time we do reboot them is for scheduled maintenance and when adding additional software or hardware.

So I don't buy the argument that Windows servers are too fragile for 24X7 shops.

DeRay Scholz
The Upper Deck Company
XE U3 SP15, Windows 2000, SQL 2000

 

[rjjump]

Hi Ryan,

I work for IBM in the JDE Competency center. Our role is to provide sizing support for Oneworld on IBM equipment. We do a lot of benchmarking and sizing/tuning tests on all of our platforms. I can't speak from a user point of view, but in the tests we run, performance is about the same on all of the platforms. You can't really judge number of users for a given test, since that really just depends on who has the biggest box or spends the most time tuning. But looking at response times, all of the platforms are about the same. I think this is a better indication of how the code runs on a given platform,and we don't see much difference. I don't think performance is a decision factor between platforms. We don't have any indication that Xe runs better under NT, than OS/400.

There are two real decision points: skills/current applications and costs. If you have a lot of NT applications or most of the people are NT oriented, or some of the other enterprise applications that you plan on implementing are NT, then Intel would be a better choice. If you have a lot of 400 skills and applications now, then the 400 is a better move.

The costs are harder to analyze. iSeries' selling feature is simplicity and lower total cost of ownership. xSeries, (intel in general), is low entry costs. There is an IDC study which might be of help http://www.ibm.com/servers/eserver/iseries/conslt/pdf/idctco.pdf

From a stability point of view, NT is getting better, but still doesn't usually compare with the iSeries, unless you have a very vanilla environment. That goes into the total cost of ownership.

If you are a larger environment, then scalability is also a factor. Even on an 8-way intel based server, you can't run as many users as you can on an iseries box.

The architecture is also generally different. With iSeries, typically growth is "vertical", as I grow I add ,more processing power to the same box. Also the configuration is simplified, since normally all the workloads, (database, application logic and batch), all run on the same box. With Intel based architecture, the growth is more horizontal, meaning you add boxes as you grow...additional app servers, etc. Also, the normal architecture is to have 1 box for database, another box for application logic and or batch...so the configuration is a little more complicated...administering more boxes vs 1, etc. Most NT shops are used to this, so it isn't too big a deal, just something to consider.

In general, I think NT is a good choice for smaller environments that are looking for a low entry cost and plan on keeping things pretty simple. For larger environments and situations where stability and total cost of ownership is a priority, then iseries is probably a better choice.

Feel free to contact me if you have any further questions. Good Luck!

 

[whits]

I agree!

Thanks,
Whit

Whit Smith
IBM Americas Advanced Technical Support Solutions Center
Dallas, TX
Phone: 817-962-4265 Fax: 817-962-8780



Robert J
Jump/Denver/IBM To: Whit Smith/Rochester/IBM@IBMUS
@IBMUS cc:
Sent by: Subject: Re: AS400 vs. NT Enterprise Server
owner-jdelist@j
delist.com


12/13/2001
11:18 AM
Please respond
to jdelist





Hi Ryan,

I work for IBM in the JDE Competency center. Our role is to provide sizing
support for Oneworld on IBM equipment. We do a lot of benchmarking and
sizing/tuning tests on all of our platforms. I can't speak from a user
point of view, but in the tests we run, performance is about the same on
all of the platforms. You can't really judge number of users for a given
test, since that really just depends on who has the biggest box or spends
the most time tuning. But looking at response times, all of the platforms
are about the same. I think this is a better indication of how the code
runs on a given platform,and we don't see much difference. I don't think
performance is a decision factor between platforms. We don't have any
indication that Xe runs better under NT, than OS/400.

There are two real decision points: skills/current applications and costs.
If you have a lot of NT applications or most of the people are NT oriented,
or some of the other enterprise applications that you plan on implementing
are NT, then Intel would be a better choice. If you have a lot of 400
skills and applications now, then the 400 is a better move.

The costs are harder to analyze. iSeries' selling feature is simplicity
and lower total cost of ownership. xSeries, (intel in general), is low
entry costs. There is an IDC study which might be of help
http://www.ibm.com/servers/eserver/iseries/conslt/pdf/idctco.pdf

From a stability point of view, NT is getting better, but still doesn't
usually compare with the iSeries, unless you have a very vanilla
environment. That goes into the total cost of ownership.

If you are a larger environment, then scalability is also a factor. Even
on an 8-way intel based server, you can't run as many users as you can on
an iseries box.

The architecture is also generally different. With iSeries, typically
growth is "vertical", as I grow I add ,more processing power to the same
box. Also the configuration is simplified, since normally all the
workloads, (database, application logic and batch), all run on the same
box. With Intel based architecture, the growth is more horizontal, meaning
you add boxes as you grow...additional app servers, etc. Also, the normal
architecture is to have 1 box for database, another box for application
logic and or batch...so the configuration is a little more
complicated...administering more boxes vs 1, etc. Most NT shops are used
to this, so it isn't too big a deal, just something to consider.

In general, I think NT is a good choice for smaller environments that are
looking for a low entry cost and plan on keeping things pretty simple. For
larger environments and situations where stability and total cost of
ownership is a priority, then iseries is probably a better choice.

Feel free to contact me if you have any further questions. Good Luck!



--------------------------
Visit the forum to view this thread at:
http://198.144.193.139/cgi-bin/wwwthreads/showflat.pl?Cat=0&Board=OW&Number=25238

+ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -+
This is the JDEList One World® / XE mailing list / forum.
Archives and information on how to SUBSCRIBE, and
UNSUBSCRIBE can be found on the JDEList Forum at
http://www.JDEList.com

JDEList is not affiliated with JDEdwards®

+ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -+

 

[rhunt01]

I just wanted to say thanks to Whit Smith, Mike Trottier, DeRay Scholz, and "rjjump". Your information regarding AS/400 and NT Enterprise Servers was both thorough and helpful with our decision making process. I appreciate the input!

Thanks again.

Ryan Hunt
OneWorld XE; Update2; SP17.1_B1
AS400; V4R5
DS: Win2k SP2, SQL 7.0 SP3
TSE's: Win2k(SP2) & NT4.0(SP6a) with Metaframe 1.8