R.S. wrote: < Snipped >
Disclaimer: I'm not neither mainframe nor z/Linux enemy. I just try to discuss real costs or savings from using IFL. Sometimes hardware RAS can justify it, sometimes not, especially when Linux images are used for non mission-critical applications. Nowadays PC servers can be really dens-packed, can use the same (or much cheaper) SAN storage, can be well-administered en-mass. 100 Linux images mean 100 operating systems, 100 root users. On 100 PCs or single VM, doesn't matter.
I can matter matter, 100 PC's need at least 100 network connections and 100 connections to the SAN. Normaly you would have 2 network connections for each server and two connections to the SAN for redudency and performance. However, with z/VM you could share 2, 4, or even 6 LAN and SAN connections. The SAN and Networking requirement are much less with the mainframe.
Even with blade if you get a max of 14 servers in a blade center, you will still need more network connections and SAN connections.
No only that, but you would need a few more people to manage 100 physicall PC's than you would to manage 100 virtual machines. You still need the same number of people to manange the actually OS enviroment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
