Date:         Mon, 2 Aug 2010 09:43:23 +0200
Reply-To:     Andre Wielki <wielki@INED.FR>
Sender:       "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         Andre Wielki <wielki@INED.FR>
Subject:      Re: Is 9.2 THAT much faster than 9.1.3
Comments: To: Ken Barz <zrab123@COMCAST.NET>
In-Reply-To:  <4C8755F728A548A681C5520F2C068C42@Shavano>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

  ???   What did you mean, Ken, with rocks?
What i have observed is that at start in matter of ods graphics it is very slow i suppose to bring in memory
a jave process but i am not sure about.
Then of course after, you obtain quick results.

Andre

Le 02/08/2010 02:59, Ken Barz a écrit :
> And SAS/Graph 9.2 ROCKS!
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gregg Snell" <sas@DATASAVANTCONSULTING.COM>
> To: <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Sent: Sunday, August 01, 2010 6:39 PM
> Subject: Re: Is 9.2 THAT much faster than 9.1.3
>
>
>> Art,
>>
>> Even the non-server computers now have multi-core cpu that take advantage
>> of
>> the multi-threading built-in to many SAS procedures.
>>
>> Interestingly, though, is that WPS, at least with sorting, is actually
>> faster than SAS 9.2!  It certainly is much less expensive than SAS on
>> server
>> platforms (10x less first year, 5x less subsequent years).
>>
>> Regards,
>> Gregg
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: SAS(r) Discussion [mailto:SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of
>> Arthur
>> Tabachneck
>> Sent: Sunday, August 01, 2010 7:07 PM
>> To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
>> Subject: Is 9.2 THAT much faster than 9.1.3
>>
>> I've been meaning to ask this question for some time now thus, given that
>> no one is posting today, thought this would be an excellent time to
>> address the matter.
>>
>> For a number of years I always had to preface my comparison posts with the
>> fact that I was running 9.1.3 on a 4-processor server.
>>
>> However, over the last couple of years, people running 9.2 in non-server
>> environments, have been reporting much quicker processing times than I can
>> achieve.
>>
>> Is 9.2 THAT much faster than 9.1.3 or am I missing something?  Conversely,
>> if the faster processing is due to dual processors, are dual processors
>> covered by the standard work station license?
>>
>> I'm asking as we'll be upgrading to 9.2, soon, and I've got to decide
>> whether to stick with a server environment or get a 15-non-server-user
>> license and, possibly, upgrade our computers.
>>
>> As always, any feedback would be appriciated!
>>
>> Art
>

--
    André WIELKI
    INED (Institut National d'Etudes Démographiques)
    Service Informatique
    133 Boulevard Davout      75980 Paris Cedex 20
    mél : wielki@ined.fr      tél :  33 (0) 1 56 06 21 54