The following message is a courtesy copy of an article that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers as well.
[email protected] (George Henke) writes: > I have since come to realize that even though MVS is more robust with more > functionality, that when all is said and done, VM is really the only "true" > operating system, because it is the only operating system that can run other > operating systems. In effect reducing MVS to the level of a CICS. re: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010d.html#58 LPARs: More or Less? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010d.html#59 LPARs: More or Less? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010d.html#60 LPARs: More or Less? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010d.html#61 LPARs: More or Less? depends on who is doing the code ... and how the information is being managed ... as evidence the MVS 15min MTBF in the disk engineering lab. this is recent post going into some detail about getting ready to release the resource manager http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010d.html#39 search engine history, was Happy DEC-10 Day above mentions having developed a bunch of automated benchmarking technologys as part of performance work at the science center. One of the things i used the automated benchmarking for was creating extreme workloads that would provoke system failures (and then reworking kernel to eliminate all cases of all failures ... this was before redoing i/o supervisor initially for disk engineering). http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#benchmark there was then a final set of 2000 benchmarks with a wide variety of workloads and configuration to calibrate & validate the resource manager (taking 3months elapsed time). part of the benhmarking technology was a modifications to something called the "performance predictor" ... the science center was doing a lot of performance monitoring and modeling work ... including workload profiling (eventually evolving into capacity planning). One of the technologies was an analytical system model done in cms\apl. This was eventually packaged for HONE so that branch people could enter customer workload and configuration information and asked "what-if" questions about changes to cusotmer workload or configuration. for the automated benchmarking, there first of the 1000 final benchmarks were selected to cover a broad range of workloads and configurations ... and all the information fed to a enhanced version of the "performance predictor" ... the modified predictor then was used to select the workload & configurations for the next 1000 benchmarks ... for each benchmark ... there would be prediction about the results ... and then after the benchmark ... the actual results were compared with the analytical/predicted results; then it would select the next combination. Part of the driver was trying to automate discovery of operational points that weren't correctly managed. another kind of robustness: http://www.nsa.gov/research/selinux/list-archive/0409/8362.shtml there are currently virtualization efforts attempting to address enormous vulnerabilities related to internet connections ... basically use virtualization for combination of exploit isolation and simplification (vulnerabilities typically proportional to complexity). Some amount of this is being referred to as "virtual appliances" ... simplified, focused environments for specific purposes. A flavor is create virtual machine with simplified operating system & browser ... allow it to do some amount of risky internet activity ... and then completely dissolve/flush it (along with any compromises). long ago and far away ... my wife had co-authored peer-coupled network architecture ... in the very early days of SNA/vtam master/slave terminal management ... which the SNA group possibly thot was threatening (this was AWP39 ... for reference pt. APPN was AWP164). She then did a stint in the JES group ... catcher for ASP turning into JES3 and did design document for single integrated JES2/JES3 product. A couple recent posts mentioning an executive con'ing her into going to POK to be in charge of loosely-coupled architecture. http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010d.html#12 The origins of CICS http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010d.html#29 search engine history, was Happy DEC-10 Day while there she created peer-coupled shared data architecture, some past posts http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#shareddata which except for IMS hot-standby saw very little update until sysplex ... which contributed to her not remaining long in the position. There were also battles with the sna organization ... regarding using (master/slave) sna for peer-coupled loosley-coupled operation. There would be temporary truces where she would be allowed to use whatever she wanted within the boundaries of the datacenter walls ... but SNA had to be used for everything that cross the datacenter boundary. -- 42yrs virtualization experience (since Jan68), online at home since Mar1970 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
