Legislature(2001 - 2002)
06/07/2001 03:35 PM House BUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
JOINT COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE BUDGET AND AUDIT
June 7, 2001
3:35 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Gene Therriault, Chair
Senator Randy Phillips
Senator Lyman Hoffman
Representative Hugh Fate, Vice Chair
Representative Eldon Mulder
Representative Ken Lancaster
Representative Reggie Joule
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Jerry Ward
Senator Dave Donley
Representative John Harris
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
BUDGET REQUEST FROM LEGISLATIVE FINANCE REGARDING NEW COMPUTER
SERVER
WITNESS REGISTER
DAVID TEAL, Legislative Fiscal Analyst
Legislative Finance Division
Alaska State Legislature
PO BOX 113200
Juneau, Alaska 99811
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke on behalf of the Legislative Finance
Division.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 01-6, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR GENE THERRIAULT called the Joint Committee on Legislative
Budget and Audit meeting to order at 3:35 p.m. Present at the
call to order were Senators Therriault, Hoffman, and Phillips,
and Representatives Fate, Mulder, Lancaster, and Joule.
CHAIR THERRIAULT stated that he was recently approached by Mr.
Teal from Legislative Finance Division regarding the need for an
updated computer server. Because the expenditure could exceed
$25,000, it requires prior approval of the committee. He noted
that there is money in the current operating year's budget.
Number 0125
DAVID TEAL, Legislative Fiscal Analyst, Legislative Finance
Division, Alaska State Legislature, came forth and stated that
the problem with the server is primarily its speed and lack of
performance. He said it is frustrating for the staff to sit
there and watch it "spin" while someone is on the phone wanting
an answer to a question. It takes up to three minutes, which is
too little time to start anything else and too much time to sit
there and calmly watch. He stated that [the Legislative Finance
Division] has been looking at an upgrade for about six months,
but hasn't narrowed the options down to a single choice;
however, there is a good possibility that it will cost more than
$25,000. He added that [the division] is asking for the general
authority to spend up to $50,000 on the upgrade.
CHAIR THERRIAULT stated that he knows [the division] is trying
to put more budget documents on the Internet. He asked if there
is a problem with the current server as far as putting that kind
of documentation on the Internet so that people can just go to
the web site for some of the more mundane questions.
MR. TEAL responded that the real problem right now is three
servers are running. Only one is really designed to be a
server, and it is being used as the primary database; the other
two are regular PCs (personal computers) that are being used as
servers. He stated that early in the session the programmers
were "booted" off of the server because every time they would
run something the system would "grind to a halt." There is a
third PC that supports only the web page because it was slowing
things down as well. He remarked that the new server should be
adequate to handle all three tasks, speed all of them up, and
have the capability on the web site to provide "real time"
requests.
Number 0350
SENATOR HOFFMAN asked if this would increase the speed for the
users of the web page.
MR. TEAL answered that it should increase the speed and the
capacity of reports that can be [stored].
SENATOR HOFFMAN stated that he thinks the fastest processor is
the Pentium Four; however, all [the choices on the request
provided for the members] say Pentium Three.
MR. TEAL responded that servers aren't as powerful in individual
processors, and that servers generally don't have as high a
clock speed as a desktop PC.
Number 0445
REPRESENTATIVE MULDER made a motion to approve the request for
the Legislative Finance Division to spend up to $50,000 on a new
server system. There being no objection, the request was
approved.
VICE CHAIR FATE asked if it is better to have one strong, high-
performance server than two less powerful servers.
MR. TEAL answered yes, the separation on the development from
the database itself has caused some problems because the servers
have to communicate back and forth to make sure they are using
the same data. Therefore, there is a "drag" on both servers.
VICE CHAIR FATE stated that on the chart [provided by Mr. Teal
for the members] it shows that the server for $8,450 far exceeds
the other servers. If the other two were linked together, it
would be about the same price as the one. He said he does not
have any idea which would give the better performance and which
would be more adequate.
MR. TEAL remarked that it is his understanding that the higher-
cost machine gives the better performance. [If there were two
servers], part of the problem with the performance would be that
the duties might be split. Therefore, one would be for
development and one for production, in which case both would be
slower.
Number 0601
REPRESENTATIVE JOULE asked whether, as more demands are put on
the system, [the division] has accommodated for future growth so
that there won't be [another request] in a few years.
MR. TEAL responded that [the division] is looking into that. He
stated that in a staff meeting two options were discussed:
upgrading the server to something that is very fast or upgrading
the [PCs]. All staff said they would keep their three-year-old
[PCs]; they just wanted more speed on the reports. He stated
that the server they have now is about a year and a half old,
and he doesn't know how long a new server would last. He added
that this is not the most expensive server they could get, and
it won't have quite the performance [of a more expensive model],
but he thinks [the division] will get three to five years out of
it.
Number 0760
SENATOR PHILLIPS asked where and how [the division] is going to
purchase [the servers].
MR. TEAL answered that he thinks those in DP (date processing)
are favoring Dell.
SENATOR PHILLIPS asked if they are buying Outside or in-state,
and suggested getting the best deal in-state.
MR. TEAL replied that [the division] does go through the
standard state purchasing [procedures].
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the Joint
Committee on Legislative Budget and Audit meeting was adjourned
at 3:47 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|