How much more memory to relieve swapping?
I have some stats on a SLES9 guest's swap page-in and page-out rates but I don't think those rates alone are enough to tell me how much more memory I'd need to add to the guest to reduce/eliminate the swapping. page-in, page-out rates don't tell me whether the guest needs 2 more pages or 2000 more pages of memory. Anyone know what Linux statistics I can use to figure out how much memory to add to the guest to relieve the swapping? John Romanowski z/VM - zLinux Support NYS Office for Technology (518)485-9555 This e-mail, including any attachments, may be confidential, privileged or otherwise legally protected. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this e-mail in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, do not disseminate, copy or otherwise use this e-mail or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail from your system. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: How much more memory to relieve swapping?
Romanowski, John (OFT) wrote: I have some stats on a SLES9 guest's swap page-in and page-out rates but I don't think those rates alone are enough to tell me how much more memory I'd need to add to the guest to reduce/eliminate the swapping. page-in, page-out rates don't tell me whether the guest needs 2 more pages or 2000 more pages of memory. Anyone know what Linux statistics I can use to figure out how much memory to add to the guest to relieve the swapping? Hi John, you also have some control over how hard Linux tries to swap via: /proc/sys/vm/swappiness 0 is don't try hard to swap 100 is try very hard to swap There are a number of other controls in the vm subdirectory that can be tweaked. Mark -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: How much more memory to relieve swapping?
If I set swappiness=0 what does Linux do instead of swapping? What does swappiness=100 mean? This e-mail, including any attachments, may be confidential, privileged or otherwise legally protected. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this e-mail in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, do not disseminate, copy or otherwise use this e-mail or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail from your system. -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Perry Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 8:50 AM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: How much more memory to relieve swapping? Romanowski, John (OFT) wrote: I have some stats on a SLES9 guest's swap page-in and page-out rates but I don't think those rates alone are enough to tell me how much more memory I'd need to add to the guest to reduce/eliminate the swapping. page-in, page-out rates don't tell me whether the guest needs 2 more pages or 2000 more pages of memory. Anyone know what Linux statistics I can use to figure out how much memory to add to the guest to relieve the swapping? Hi John, you also have some control over how hard Linux tries to swap via: /proc/sys/vm/swappiness 0 is don't try hard to swap 100 is try very hard to swap There are a number of other controls in the vm subdirectory that can be tweaked. Mark -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: How much more memory to relieve swapping?
On 6/28/07, Romanowski, John (OFT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have some stats on a SLES9 guest's swap page-in and page-out rates but I don't think those rates alone are enough to tell me how much more memory I'd need to add to the guest to reduce/eliminate the swapping. page-in, page-out rates don't tell me whether the guest needs 2 more pages or 2000 more pages of memory. Anyone know what Linux statistics I can use to figure out how much memory to add to the guest to relieve the swapping? I don't think you can predict the workload behavior. The problem is that you don't really know what is being swapped out and back in. You also want to know how much is in use on the swap disk. One would expect that if you had that amount more memory, you would not have swapped and your rates would have been zero. But hysteresis in Linux memory management makes it a bit harder than this. If you have a large swap-out rate and low swap-in rate, your system is still getting rid of old stuff and makes new data. When your swap-in rate is consistently higher than the swap-out, your system may be thrashing and may be just too small for the workload. Once the average swap-out and swap-in are about the same, you have a stable situation to measure. Rob -- Rob van der Heij Velocity Software, Inc http://velocitysoftware.com/ -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: How much more memory to relieve swapping?
Romanowski, John (OFT) wrote: I have some stats on a SLES9 guest's swap page-in and page-out rates but I don't think those rates alone are enough to tell me how much more memory I'd need to add to the guest to reduce/eliminate the swapping. page-in, page-out rates don't tell me whether the guest needs 2 more pages or 2000 more pages of memory. Anyone know what Linux statistics I can use to figure out how much memory to add to the guest to relieve the swapping? It's not simple. On Intel hardware, I find that if one is using much more swap than one has in real memory, then one has a problem. But then my workload is mostly desktop stuff, and the Mozilla clan's a real pig. OTOH I used to try to rsync a Linux filesystem as a collection of files over the Internet and I found myself using several times real memory and no apparent problem with swapping. (I'm sure there would have been if anything else had been making demands). -- Cheers John -- spambait [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please do not reply off-list -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: How much more memory to relieve swapping?
Romanowski, John (OFT) wrote: If I set swappiness=0 what does Linux do instead of swapping? What does swappiness=100 mean? This does not control the actual physical rate of swapping, it controls how aggressively Linux will seek out pages for swapping in order to maintain free storage frames. Therefore swappiness=0 means that Linux will try to leave as many pages in storage as possible, and only steal pages as required. You never get something for nothing ;-) It is however worth experimenting with, and there have been a number of discussions with many opinions. Use Google to search for ideas ;-) Mark -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: How much more memory to relieve swapping?
On 6/28/07, Romanowski, John (OFT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If I set swappiness=0 what does Linux do instead of swapping? What does swappiness=100 mean? Barton says short answers are the best, so at the risk of being too brief... A higher value of swappiness means that when Linux memory management needs some free memory, it is more willing to swap out a process than to purge data in cache. The idea is that you may not want a single process to wipe out all cached data. On the other hand, you would not want to retain a lot of data in cache if that means much swapping. Most scenarios that I have seen seem to apply to desktop systems. I have not done measurements on systems where swappiness was deliberately set other than default. Rob -- Rob van der Heij Velocity Software, Inc http://velocitysoftware.com/ -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: How much more memory to relieve swapping?
On Thu, 2007-06-28 at 15:24 +0200, Rob van der Heij wrote: A higher value of swappiness means that when Linux memory management needs some free memory, it is more willing to swap out a process than to purge data in cache. The definition of swappiness is murky. The relevant code snippets and comments from the source: /* * `distress' is a measure of how much trouble we're having * reclaiming pages. 0 - no problems. 100 - great trouble. */ distress = 100 min(zone-prev_priority, priority); /* * The point of this algorithm is to decide when to start * reclaiming mapped memory instead of just pagecache. Work out * how much memory * is mapped. */ mapped_ratio = ((global_page_state(NR_FILE_MAPPED) + global_page_state(NR_ANON_PAGES)) * 100) / vm_total_pages; ... /* * Now decide how much we really want to unmap some pages. The * mapped ratio is downgraded - just because there's a lot of * mapped memory doesn't necessarily mean that page reclaim * isn't succeeding. * * The distress ratio is important - we don't want to start * going oom. * * A 100% value of vm_swappiness overrides this algorithm * altogether. */ swap_tendency = mapped_ratio / 2 + distress + sc-swappiness; ... /* * Now use this metric to decide whether to start moving mapped * memory onto the inactive list. */ if (swap_tendency = 100) force_reclaim_mapped: reclaim_mapped = 1; If the distress -- which is defined in terms of zone priorities -- reaches a certain limit, the system starts to swap. try_to_free_pages repeatedly scans the active/inactive list with a priority value that starts at 12. The priority is decreased from run to run if not enough pages can be freed. Black magic. -- blue skies, Martin. Reality continues to ruin my life. - Calvin. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: How much more memory to relieve swapping?
On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 8:39 AM, in message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Romanowski, John (OFT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have some stats on a SLES9 guest's swap page-in and page-out rates but I don't think those rates alone are enough to tell me how much more memory I'd need to add to the guest to reduce/eliminate the swapping. page-in, page-out rates don't tell me whether the guest needs 2 more pages or 2000 more pages of memory. Anyone know what Linux statistics I can use to figure out how much memory to add to the guest to relieve the swapping? Before we go too far down this road, how many pages per second are you seeing? And what are you using for your page space? VDISK? If so, I wouldn't worry too much about the paging unless it's really high, or if you're running Oracle and the SGA isn't staying resident. Linux paging, in and of itself, isn't a bad thing in a shared environment. Only if it is causing some sort of performance problem. Mark Post -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: How much more memory to relieve swapping?
Our swap disk is SAN LUNs via 4 FCP chipids. 5,000 to 25,000 swap page-in's per second sometimes and sometimes that many page-outs. It worries the customer High paging is a relative term with many relatives to consider. This e-mail, including any attachments, may be confidential, privileged or otherwise legally protected. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this e-mail in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, do not disseminate, copy or otherwise use this e-mail or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail from your system. -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Post Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 12:46 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: How much more memory to relieve swapping? On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 8:39 AM, in message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Romanowski, John (OFT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have some stats on a SLES9 guest's swap page-in and page-out rates but I don't think those rates alone are enough to tell me how much more memory I'd need to add to the guest to reduce/eliminate the swapping. page-in, page-out rates don't tell me whether the guest needs 2 more pages or 2000 more pages of memory. Anyone know what Linux statistics I can use to figure out how much memory to add to the guest to relieve the swapping? Before we go too far down this road, how many pages per second are you seeing? And what are you using for your page space? VDISK? If so, I wouldn't worry too much about the paging unless it's really high, or if you're running Oracle and the SGA isn't staying resident. Linux paging, in and of itself, isn't a bad thing in a shared environment. Only if it is causing some sort of performance problem. Mark Post -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: How much more memory to relieve swapping?
On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 1:36 PM, in message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Romanowski, John (OFT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Our swap disk is SAN LUNs via 4 FCP chipids. 5,000 to 25,000 swap page-in's per second sometimes and sometimes that many page-outs. It worries the customer High paging is a relative term with many relatives to consider. Yeah, those numbers are high enough to at least be looking at what's causing them. You'd probably be able to sustain a lot more than that if you were using VDISK for your paging space. Something to think about. If you don't already have a good performance monitor in place for z/VM and Linux, now would be a good time to make the business case for it. Mark Post -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
How much of a system for a basic web and mail server?
Recently, I had a power supply failure on the machine that, among other things, hosts hercules-390.org. That got me to thinking. (Dangerous, I know.) For various reasons, I greatly prefer to run my Internet-facing box on something other than x86 or AMD64. Currently, I use an Alpha, but those are going to fall by the wayside at some point. Someone suggested a mainframe jokingly, but as I got to thinking, the idea appealed to me. I own a couple of R/390s, but I doubt those will have enough horsepower to get the job done. I'm idly pondering trying to scare up a Multiprise 3000 somewhere, but will that be beefy enough? Alternatively, if I eat my own dogfood and run it under Hercules, how much system will I need? (My development box at this point is a dual Opteron 244 that turns about 30-40 MIPS under real workloads; I can upgrade that to a pair of Opteron 270s for reasonable dollars.) The system would be a web server using Apache 2, with no CGI at present (though I'm considering installing MoinMoin for a Hercules wiki), the CVS repository for Hercules development, and the email server for conmicro.cx. I push about 30 GB of web traffic a month, spiking to about 50 when a new release of Hercules comes out. The email server delivers about 300 messages a day, and rejects about five times that many spams. I would prefer to run Gentoo Linux on it, but since that effort appears to have fallen down, I suspect I'll run something with real packaga management with absolutely every nonessential component stripped out. (Slackware need not apply.) -- Jay Maynard, K5ZChttp://www.conmicro.cx http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net http://www.hercules-390.org (Yes, that's me!) Buy Hercules stuff at http://www.cafepress.com/hercules-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: How much of a system for a basic web and mail server?
On Nov 16, 2006, at 2:46 PM, Jay Maynard wrote: I'm idly pondering trying to scare up a Multiprise 3000 somewhere, but will that be beefy enough? You'd get about 100 MIPS per engine from one. So, yeah, very probably. They're pretty beefy boxes. Alternatively, if I eat my own dogfood and run it under Hercules, how much system will I need? (My development box at this point is a dual Opteron 244 that turns about 30-40 MIPS under real workloads; I can upgrade that to a pair of Opteron 270s for reasonable dollars.) Probably not that much. The system would be a web server using Apache 2, with no CGI at present (though I'm considering installing MoinMoin for a Hercules wiki), the CVS repository for Hercules development, and the email server for conmicro.cx. Nothing but the mail server is very intensive. If you're doing spam and virus scanning, that does eat a lot of CPU. You can probably handle the load, but when things are busy your mail is likely to be delayed. I push about 30 GB of web traffic a month, spiking to about 50 when a new release of Hercules comes out. The email server delivers about 300 messages a day, and rejects about five times that many spams. That shouldn't be too much of a problem. I would prefer to run Gentoo Linux on it, but since that effort appears to have fallen down, I suspect I'll run something with real packaga management with absolutely every nonessential component stripped out. (Slackware need not apply.) Well, I'm a big fan of Debian, but I know you have your reservations about its Free Software philosophy. Nevertheless, it provides, for me, the best foundation for a no-extraneous-stuff installation with good dependency management of anything I've tried. Etch RC1 is now available and should be installable on s390, although I have not yet tried it myself. Note that Debian is currently 31-bit, not 64-bit (that is, s390, but not zSeries--there is, however, an amd64 port), so if you want a 64-bit Linux, look elsewhere (unless you need to address more than 2GB of core, I don't know that you'd gain anything even on a 64-bit host, though). Adam -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: How much of a system for a basic web and mail server?
On Thu, Nov 16, 2006 at 03:19:14PM -0500, Adam Thornton wrote: Note that Debian is currently 31-bit, not 64-bit (that is, s390, but not zSeries--there is, however, an amd64 port), Not to mention an Alpha port, as well. I'm more than a little surprised it hasn't been built for s390x, although I would expect your employer would be one of the main forces driving such a build effort. so if you want a 64-bit Linux, look elsewhere (unless you need to address more than 2GB of core, I don't know that you'd gain anything even on a 64-bit host, though). Actually, running a 31-bit version would get me some speed under Hercules, even on an Opteron host. I had thought that the development effort had gotten away from the 31-bit versions (which is why I've got some reservations about getting a Multiprise). -- Jay Maynard, K5ZChttp://www.conmicro.cx http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net http://www.hercules-390.org (Yes, that's me!) Buy Hercules stuff at http://www.cafepress.com/hercules-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: How much of a system for a basic web and mail server?
On Nov 16, 2006, at 5:19 PM, Jay Maynard wrote: On Thu, Nov 16, 2006 at 03:19:14PM -0500, Adam Thornton wrote: Note that Debian is currently 31-bit, not 64-bit (that is, s390, but not zSeries--there is, however, an amd64 port), Not to mention an Alpha port, as well. I'm more than a little surprised it hasn't been built for s390x, although I would expect your employer would be one of the main forces driving such a build effort. There's work on it (though not so much from me/us), but, well, we do what pays the bills, and Debian hasn't really done so. so if you want a 64-bit Linux, look elsewhere (unless you need to address more than 2GB of core, I don't know that you'd gain anything even on a 64-bit host, though). Actually, running a 31-bit version would get me some speed under Hercules, even on an Opteron host. I had thought that the development effort had gotten away from the 31-bit versions (which is why I've got some reservations about getting a Multiprise). Commercially, yeah. But, heck, even in the x86-and-pals world I'm beginning to see 64-bit-only software. I will be surprised if s390x is not in Etch+1. Adam -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: How much of a system for a basic web and mail server?
Hello! Jay? For Intel X86 not the 64-bit stuff, why not Slackware? Its quite easy to install, and even easier to use. In fact I am typing this message into my Google Mail account window using KDE on what was the current before 11.0. I should also add that I'd be more then willing to contribute as much advice as you need should that become the option. Off Line of course. One of the things I like about Slackware is that you do not have to install everything or activate everything. One more thing to consider. -- Gregg C Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED] This signature was once found posting rude messages in English in the Moscow subway. On 11/16/06, Adam Thornton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 16, 2006, at 5:19 PM, Jay Maynard wrote: On Thu, Nov 16, 2006 at 03:19:14PM -0500, Adam Thornton wrote: Note that Debian is currently 31-bit, not 64-bit (that is, s390, but not zSeries--there is, however, an amd64 port), Not to mention an Alpha port, as well. I'm more than a little surprised it hasn't been built for s390x, although I would expect your employer would be one of the main forces driving such a build effort. There's work on it (though not so much from me/us), but, well, we do what pays the bills, and Debian hasn't really done so. so if you want a 64-bit Linux, look elsewhere (unless you need to address more than 2GB of core, I don't know that you'd gain anything even on a 64-bit host, though). Actually, running a 31-bit version would get me some speed under Hercules, even on an Opteron host. I had thought that the development effort had gotten away from the 31-bit versions (which is why I've got some reservations about getting a Multiprise). Commercially, yeah. But, heck, even in the x86-and-pals world I'm beginning to see 64-bit-only software. I will be surprised if s390x is not in Etch+1. Adam -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: How much $$
I would think not. The MP effect usually guarantees that 1 2-processor system is significantly less than 2 1-processor systems. The amount of lost capacity has decreased over the years, but it is still non-zero. 2 processors, running at capacity, would be about 1.8x of 1 processor. However, few people run at capacity. Even at low loads, there is an advantge to SMP because Linux is multi-threaded and I/O is asynchronous. SMP would should even help striped LVM. Even compiles can be speeded up if you can use the -j option (-j n+1, where n is the number of available processors 1. The n+1 allows cpu and I/O overlap). The more concurrent activity, the better off you are with SMP, even with the loss due to spin locking. = Jim Sibley RHCT, Implementor of Linux on zSeries Computer are useless.They can only give answers. Pablo Picasso __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
Re: How much $$
On Tuesday, 02/10/2004 at 09:17 CST, Little, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: at one time, was IBM recommending differently? i went to an introduction to z/VM several years ago and the instructor was recommending 4 virtual CPU's no matter how many real CPU's existed. He said that VM's multiprocessing capability was superior to linux so it was better to queue processes to VM. The number of virtual CPUs should not exceed the number of real CPUs. Each extra virtual CPU creates overhead that is exchanged for the advantages of parallelism. If you exceed the number of real CPUs, then the overhead is incurred, but without any advantage. Linux's n-way capabilities continue to improve. Anything you heard about Linux scalability several years ago is ancient history, only to be quoted at symposia discussing Linux - The Early Years. ;-) Alan Altmark Sr. Software Engineer IBM z/VM Development
How much $$
I see to get a Red Hat supported version for S/390 it is $15,000 US or $18,000 US. Anyone have an idea how much for the SuSE supported version? Thanks Craig
Re: How much $$
It varies according to the number of CPUs being used by Linux/390, and by the architecture. G5/G5 being the cheapest, z900/z990 the most expensive. The latest prices I have are fairly old, and in Euros. :P What machine do you have, and how many processors will be assigned? Mark Post -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kittendorf, Craig Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 12:47 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: How much $$ I see to get a Red Hat supported version for S/390 it is $15,000 US or $18,000 US. Anyone have an idea how much for the SuSE supported version? Thanks Craig
Re: How much $$
We have a 9672-R76 (G5) and currently all seven processors are s/390, no IFL. We limit the Linux LPAR to one engine. Craig -Original Message- From: Post, Mark K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 12:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: How much $$ It varies according to the number of CPUs being used by Linux/390, and by the architecture. G5/G5 being the cheapest, z900/z990 the most expensive. The latest prices I have are fairly old, and in Euros. :P What machine do you have, and how many processors will be assigned? Mark Post -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kittendorf, Craig Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 12:47 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: How much $$ I see to get a Red Hat supported version for S/390 it is $15,000 US or $18,000 US. Anyone have an idea how much for the SuSE supported version? Thanks Craig
Re: How much $$
Depends on your processor, what service level you want, and what you negotiate. Can be up to $11,000 per CPU. Give SuSE a call at (510)628-3380 Gordon Wolfe, Ph.D. (425)865-5940 VM Technical Services, The Boeing Company IMPORTANT: This email is intended for the use of the individual addressee(s) named above and may contain information that is confidential privileged or unsuitable for overly sensitive persons with low self-esteem, no sense of humor or irrational religious beliefs. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution or copying of this email is not authorized (either explicitly or implicitly) and constitutes an irritating social faux pas. Unless the word absquatulation has been used in its correct context somewhere other than in this warning, it does not have any legal or grammatical use and may be ignored. No animals were harmed in the transmission of this email, although the Kelpie next door is living on borrowed time, let me tell you. Those of you with an overwhelming fear of the unknown will be gratified to learn that there is no hidden message revealed by reading this warning backwards, so just ignore that Alert Notice from Microsoft. However, by pouring a complete circle of salt around yourself and your computer you can ensure that no harm befalls you and your pets. If you have received this email in error, please add some nutmeg and egg whites, whisk and place in a warm oven for 40 minutes. -- From: Kittendorf, Craig Reply To: Linux on 390 Port Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 9:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: How much $$ I see to get a Red Hat supported version for S/390 it is $15,000 US or $18,000 US. Anyone have an idea how much for the SuSE supported version? Thanks Craig
Re: How much $$
The last figures I have for that would be about $8,800 per year, for maintenance only. If you want problem support, that would be additional. Mark Post -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kittendorf, Craig Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 12:58 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: How much $$ We have a 9672-R76 (G5) and currently all seven processors are s/390, no IFL. We limit the Linux LPAR to one engine. Craig -Original Message- From: Post, Mark K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 12:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: How much $$ It varies according to the number of CPUs being used by Linux/390, and by the architecture. G5/G5 being the cheapest, z900/z990 the most expensive. The latest prices I have are fairly old, and in Euros. :P What machine do you have, and how many processors will be assigned? Mark Post -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kittendorf, Craig Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 12:47 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: How much $$ I see to get a Red Hat supported version for S/390 it is $15,000 US or $18,000 US. Anyone have an idea how much for the SuSE supported version? Thanks Craig
Re: How much $$
Thanks for all your help. I think that is past the point of it being considered here. Thanks, Craig -Original Message- From: Post, Mark K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 1:07 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: How much $$ The last figures I have for that would be about $8,800 per year, for maintenance only. If you want problem support, that would be additional. Mark Post -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kittendorf, Craig Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 12:58 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: How much $$ We have a 9672-R76 (G5) and currently all seven processors are s/390, no IFL. We limit the Linux LPAR to one engine. Craig -Original Message- From: Post, Mark K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 12:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: How much $$ It varies according to the number of CPUs being used by Linux/390, and by the architecture. G5/G5 being the cheapest, z900/z990 the most expensive. The latest prices I have are fairly old, and in Euros. :P What machine do you have, and how many processors will be assigned? Mark Post -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kittendorf, Craig Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 12:47 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: How much $$ I see to get a Red Hat supported version for S/390 it is $15,000 US or $18,000 US. Anyone have an idea how much for the SuSE supported version? Thanks Craig
Re: How much $$
SuSE doesn't offer maintenance anymore (directly). It is done thru their Partners. So, you can talk to their partners and perhaps get a better deal. My MP/3000 H30, no IFL, runs $4,500 a year. That is with a 10% govt discount. You, on the other hand, may end up getting charged for each 390 processor on the box. Just because you created an LPAR and put only one processor over there where you say you will run Linux only there...get the drift. They will charge you for every processor you can run it on. But a local business partner might be able to do something for you. Not that I've heard of any arrangements, but one of the main reasons to have local representation, is to make special arrangements. For me, $4,500 is well worth it. I'm a consultant, and I would end up charging a lot more to apply maintanance if I had to do it manually. The Yast Online Update (YOU), is really neat, once it is set up. Unless you need a Level 2 type support, the Linux390 listserv is much better at resolving basic problems. Tom Duerbusch THD Consulting [EMAIL PROTECTED] 02/10/04 11:47AM I see to get a Red Hat supported version for S/390 it is $15,000 US or $18,000 US. Anyone have an idea how much for the SuSE supported version? Thanks Craig
Re: How much $$
Actually, I think that the Linux people would be much more willing to listen to the I'm only going to use one processor story than zOS vendors. Just because you have an IFL doesn't limit you to running Linux only in the IFL, but they only charge you for the number of IFLs you have Robert P. Nixinternet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mayo Clinic phone: 507-284-0844 RO-CE-8-857page: 507-270-1182 200 First St. SW Rochester, MN 55905 Codito, Ergo Sum In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice, theory and practice are different. -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Duerbusch Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 12:29 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: How much $$ SuSE doesn't offer maintenance anymore (directly). It is done thru their Partners. So, you can talk to their partners and perhaps get a better deal. My MP/3000 H30, no IFL, runs $4,500 a year. That is with a 10% govt discount. You, on the other hand, may end up getting charged for each 390 processor on the box. Just because you created an LPAR and put only one processor over there where you say you will run Linux only there...get the drift. They will charge you for every processor you can run it on. But a local business partner might be able to do something for you. Not that I've heard of any arrangements, but one of the main reasons to have local representation, is to make special arrangements. For me, $4,500 is well worth it. I'm a consultant, and I would end up charging a lot more to apply maintanance if I had to do it manually. The Yast Online Update (YOU), is really neat, once it is set up. Unless you need a Level 2 type support, the Linux390 listserv is much better at resolving basic problems. Tom Duerbusch THD Consulting [EMAIL PROTECTED] 02/10/04 11:47AM I see to get a Red Hat supported version for S/390 it is $15,000 US or $18,000 US. Anyone have an idea how much for the SuSE supported version? Thanks Craig
Re: How much $$
They did for us on a 2 processor system - allowed us to buy 1 processor license. Marcy Cortes Wells Fargo Services Company -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nix, Robert P. Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 11:15 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] How much $$ Actually, I think that the Linux people would be much more willing to listen to the I'm only going to use one processor story than zOS vendors. Just because you have an IFL doesn't limit you to running Linux only in the IFL, but they only charge you for the number of IFLs you have Robert P. Nixinternet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mayo Clinic phone: 507-284-0844 RO-CE-8-857page: 507-270-1182 200 First St. SW Rochester, MN 55905 Codito, Ergo Sum In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice, theory and practice are different. -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Duerbusch Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 12:29 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: How much $$ SuSE doesn't offer maintenance anymore (directly). It is done thru their Partners. So, you can talk to their partners and perhaps get a better deal. My MP/3000 H30, no IFL, runs $4,500 a year. That is with a 10% govt discount. You, on the other hand, may end up getting charged for each 390 processor on the box. Just because you created an LPAR and put only one processor over there where you say you will run Linux only there...get the drift. They will charge you for every processor you can run it on. But a local business partner might be able to do something for you. Not that I've heard of any arrangements, but one of the main reasons to have local representation, is to make special arrangements. For me, $4,500 is well worth it. I'm a consultant, and I would end up charging a lot more to apply maintanance if I had to do it manually. The Yast Online Update (YOU), is really neat, once it is set up. Unless you need a Level 2 type support, the Linux390 listserv is much better at resolving basic problems. Tom Duerbusch THD Consulting [EMAIL PROTECTED] 02/10/04 11:47AM I see to get a Red Hat supported version for S/390 it is $15,000 US or $18,000 US. Anyone have an idea how much for the SuSE supported version? Thanks Craig
Re: How much $$
Even though you set the weights to '1' processor, do you get better throughput having 2 processors actually doing the work? |-+--- | | Marcy Cortes| | | [EMAIL PROTECTED]| | | sfargo.com | | | Sent by: Linux on | | | 390 Port| | | [EMAIL PROTECTED]| | | .EDU | | | | | | | | | 02/10/2004 01:27 PM | | | Please respond to | | | Linux on 390 Port | | | | |-+--- --| | | | To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | cc: | | Subject: Re: How much $$ | --| They did for us on a 2 processor system - allowed us to buy 1 processor license. Marcy Cortes Wells Fargo Services Company -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nix, Robert P. Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 11:15 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] How much $$ Actually, I think that the Linux people would be much more willing to listen to the I'm only going to use one processor story than zOS vendors. Just because you have an IFL doesn't limit you to running Linux only in the IFL, but they only charge you for the number of IFLs you have Robert P. Nixinternet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mayo Clinic phone: 507-284-0844 RO-CE-8-857page: 507-270-1182 200 First St. SW Rochester, MN 55905 Codito, Ergo Sum In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice, theory and practice are different. -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Duerbusch Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 12:29 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: How much $$ SuSE doesn't offer maintenance anymore (directly). It is done thru their Partners. So, you can talk to their partners and perhaps get a better deal. My MP/3000 H30, no IFL, runs $4,500 a year. That is with a 10% govt discount. You, on the other hand, may end up getting charged for each 390 processor on the box. Just because you created an LPAR and put only one processor over there where you say you will run Linux only there...get the drift. They will charge you for every processor you can run it on. But a local business partner might be able to do something for you. Not that I've heard of any arrangements, but one of the main reasons to have local representation, is to make special arrangements. For me, $4,500 is well worth it. I'm a consultant, and I would end up charging a lot more to apply maintanance if I had to do it manually. The Yast Online Update (YOU), is really neat, once it is set up. Unless you need a Level 2 type support, the Linux390 listserv is much better at resolving basic problems. Tom Duerbusch THD Consulting [EMAIL PROTECTED] 02/10/04 11:47AM I see to get a Red Hat supported version for S/390 it is $15,000 US or $18,000 US. Anyone have an idea how much for the SuSE supported version? Thanks Craig
Re: How much $$
I would think not. The MP effect usually guarantees that 1 2-processor system is significantly less than 2 1-processor systems. The amount of lost capacity has decreased over the years, but it is still non-zero. Mark Post -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of James Melin Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 2:28 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: How much $$ Even though you set the weights to '1' processor, do you get better throughput having 2 processors actually doing the work? |-+--- | | Marcy Cortes| | | [EMAIL PROTECTED]| | | sfargo.com | | | Sent by: Linux on | | | 390 Port| | | [EMAIL PROTECTED]| | | .EDU | | | | | | | | | 02/10/2004 01:27 PM | | | Please respond to | | | Linux on 390 Port | | | | |-+--- --- ---| | | | To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | cc: | | Subject: Re: How much $$ | --- ---| They did for us on a 2 processor system - allowed us to buy 1 processor license. Marcy Cortes Wells Fargo Services Company -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nix, Robert P. Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 11:15 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] How much $$ Actually, I think that the Linux people would be much more willing to listen to the I'm only going to use one processor story than zOS vendors. Just because you have an IFL doesn't limit you to running Linux only in the IFL, but they only charge you for the number of IFLs you have Robert P. Nixinternet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mayo Clinic phone: 507-284-0844 RO-CE-8-857page: 507-270-1182 200 First St. SW Rochester, MN 55905 Codito, Ergo Sum In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice, theory and practice are different. -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Duerbusch Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 12:29 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: How much $$ SuSE doesn't offer maintenance anymore (directly). It is done thru their Partners. So, you can talk to their partners and perhaps get a better deal. My MP/3000 H30, no IFL, runs $4,500 a year. That is with a 10% govt discount. You, on the other hand, may end up getting charged for each 390 processor on the box. Just because you created an LPAR and put only one processor over there where you say you will run Linux only there...get the drift. They will charge you for every processor you can run it on. But a local business partner might be able to do something for you. Not that I've heard of any arrangements, but one of the main reasons to have local representation, is to make special arrangements. For me, $4,500 is well worth it. I'm a consultant, and I would end up charging a lot more to apply maintanance if I had to do it manually. The Yast Online Update (YOU), is really neat, once it is set up. Unless you need a Level 2 type support, the Linux390 listserv is much better at resolving basic problems. Tom Duerbusch THD Consulting [EMAIL PROTECTED] 02/10/04 11:47AM I see to get a Red Hat supported version for S/390 it is $15,000 US or $18,000 US. Anyone have an idea how much for the SuSE supported version? Thanks Craig
Re: How much $$
We're back to 1 processor now. I've always defined the Linux guests with 1 virtual CPU since I had 1 real licensed. Now you've got me curious... There isn't any value to defining more than 1 virtual CPU when you only have 1 IFL is there? Marcy Cortes -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Post, Mark K Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 11:32 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] How much $$ I would think not. The MP effect usually guarantees that 1 2-processor system is significantly less than 2 1-processor systems. The amount of lost capacity has decreased over the years, but it is still non-zero. Mark Post -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of James Melin Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 2:28 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: How much $$ Even though you set the weights to '1' processor, do you get better throughput having 2 processors actually doing the work?
Re: How much $$
No advantage whatsoever. Gordon Wolfe, Ph.D. (425)865-5940 VM Technical Services, The Boeing Company IMPORTANT: This email is intended for the use of the individual addressee(s) named above and may contain information that is confidential privileged or unsuitable for overly sensitive persons with low self-esteem, no sense of humor or irrational religious beliefs. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution or copying of this email is not authorized (either explicitly or implicitly) and constitutes an irritating social faux pas. Unless the word absquatulation has been used in its correct context somewhere other than in this warning, it does not have any legal or grammatical use and may be ignored. No animals were harmed in the transmission of this email, although the Kelpie next door is living on borrowed time, let me tell you. Those of you with an overwhelming fear of the unknown will be gratified to learn that there is no hidden message revealed by reading this warning backwards, so just ignore that Alert Notice from Microsoft. However, by pouring a complete circle of salt around yourself and your computer you can ensure that no harm befalls you and your pets. If you have received this email in error, please add some nutmeg and egg whites, whisk and place in a warm oven for 40 minutes. -- From: Marcy Cortes Reply To: Linux on 390 Port Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 2:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: How much $$ We're back to 1 processor now. I've always defined the Linux guests with 1 virtual CPU since I had 1 real licensed. Now you've got me curious... There isn't any value to defining more than 1 virtual CPU when you only have 1 IFL is there? Marcy Cortes -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Post, Mark K Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 11:32 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] How much $$ I would think not. The MP effect usually guarantees that 1 2-processor system is significantly less than 2 1-processor systems. The amount of lost capacity has decreased over the years, but it is still non-zero. Mark Post -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of James Melin Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 2:28 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: How much $$ Even though you set the weights to '1' processor, do you get better throughput having 2 processors actually doing the work?
Re: How much $$
No, it is actually a detriment to performance. Mark Post -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Marcy Cortes Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 5:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: How much $$ We're back to 1 processor now. I've always defined the Linux guests with 1 virtual CPU since I had 1 real licensed. Now you've got me curious... There isn't any value to defining more than 1 virtual CPU when you only have 1 IFL is there? Marcy Cortes -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Post, Mark K Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 11:32 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] How much $$ I would think not. The MP effect usually guarantees that 1 2-processor system is significantly less than 2 1-processor systems. The amount of lost capacity has decreased over the years, but it is still non-zero. Mark Post -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of James Melin Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 2:28 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: How much $$ Even though you set the weights to '1' processor, do you get better throughput having 2 processors actually doing the work?
Re: How much $$
Good - that's what I though! Marcy Cortes Wells Fargo Services Company -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Post, Mark K Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 15:31 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] How much $$ No, it is actually a detriment to performance. Mark Post -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Marcy Cortes Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 5:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: How much $$ We're back to 1 processor now. I've always defined the Linux guests with 1 virtual CPU since I had 1 real licensed. Now you've got me curious... There isn't any value to defining more than 1 virtual CPU when you only have 1 IFL is there? Marcy Cortes -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Post, Mark K Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 11:32 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] How much $$ I would think not. The MP effect usually guarantees that 1 2-processor system is significantly less than 2 1-processor systems. The amount of lost capacity has decreased over the years, but it is still non-zero. Mark Post -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of James Melin Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 2:28 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: How much $$ Even though you set the weights to '1' processor, do you get better throughput having 2 processors actually doing the work?
Re: How much $$
at one time, was IBM recommending differently? i went to an introduction to z/VM several years ago and the instructor was recommending 4 virtual CPU's no matter how many real CPU's existed. He said that VM's multiprocessing capability was superior to linux so it was better to queue processes to VM. -Original Message- From: Post, Mark K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 5:31 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: How much $$ No, it is actually a detriment to performance. Mark Post -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Marcy Cortes Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 5:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: How much $$ We're back to 1 processor now. I've always defined the Linux guests with 1 virtual CPU since I had 1 real licensed. Now you've got me curious... There isn't any value to defining more than 1 virtual CPU when you only have 1 IFL is there? Marcy Cortes -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Post, Mark K Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 11:32 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] How much $$ I would think not. The MP effect usually guarantees that 1 2-processor system is significantly less than 2 1-processor systems. The amount of lost capacity has decreased over the years, but it is still non-zero. Mark Post -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of James Melin Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 2:28 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: How much $$ Even though you set the weights to '1' processor, do you get better throughput having 2 processors actually doing the work?
Re: How much $$
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004, Little, Chris wrote: at one time, was IBM recommending differently? i went to an introduction to z/VM several years ago and the instructor was recommending 4 virtual CPU's no matter how many real CPU's existed. He said that VM's multiprocessing capability was superior to linux so it was better to queue processes to VM. Don't know about how z/VM virtualises things, but in terms of access to real CPs the MVS guys I work with will often prefer two smaller engines to one big one. Turns out that if you have one task get away (say a failing process starts an SMF dump), *everything* stops because the runaway task consumes all the CPU resource. If you have two or more engines, at least some other workload can take place on the other engine(s). This of course is a fairly specific example, generalities may be different. ;-) I must say though that we are having some real issues in a resource-constrained single-engine LPAR, where spreading the workload across two half-engines might at least give the illusion of more headroom. Cheers, Vic Cross
