Shane sez; > Now for some heresy; one ICF should suffice. The mean time to failure of > an engine in this scenario is probably measured in units of centuries. > And what is the likelihood of the ICF going away, and the rest of the > machine staying up ??? > ZERO - or a very close approximation. <<>> > Note this is just idle (holiday) musings. Goes against all the IBM > recommendations, and you'll never get them to agree this is a viable > alternative. However in a single CEC, might be worth some consideration
Heresy or not, I basically agree with Shane. If you've got a single CEC and more than one LPAR you'd be nuts to run them as monoplexes and with an ICF a parallel sysplex inside the single box is entirely viable. There are lots of benefits including software pricing and not a lot of downside that I can see. This sort of configuration is only a modest availability risk, not an integrity risk. You're more likely to win lotto or be struck by a falling UFO than lose the CEC and in any case if you did, all of your LPARS would be down anyway. CC ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
