> -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thompson, Steve (SCI TW) > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 2:07 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Just another example of mainframe costs. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Craddock, Chris > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 12:29 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Just another example of mainframe costs. > <snip> > Yes I do know the difference and I know it's not an apples to apples > comparison. The point is that the drives for these cheap and > cheerful PC > wing-dings are the same and you can actually buy out of the box RAID > solutions for not a lot of dough. There is some uniqueness in the mf > solution, but the raw hardware cost doesn't go close to explaining the > price customers pay. Can you say gouging boys and girls? > <SNIP> > > Perhaps it is gouging, perhaps not. The RVA in question must meet the > FICON/ESCON protocols. It must also do error correction/detection. It > must also support multi-pathing, controller behavior, etc.
Our SAN boxes do this on Fibre Channel as well. Hum, I am not sure about the multipathing. From some discussion on the z/Linux forum about FCP (Fibre Channel) I think it is supported. In any case, the "open" DASD are still cheaper per megabyte that the exact same boxes which are Ficon (with ECKD emulation). > > All of those things have some costs. That's why SCSI devices cost more > than [E]IDE (or so the disk vendors tell me). > > And going back to the squatty box boys/girls ROFLMAO routine, the next > time you do a D/R test, who actually recovers? And if they do recover, > do they recover at a known point in time (synchronized with the other > platforms so that you don't have a secondary disaster)? Or > did they say > something about how they run 24x7 while the mainframe has to have a > batch window? [Which happens to be a design choice, not specifically a > mainframe forced behavior.] This is also a very good point here as well. The Windows people simply cannot restore their entire environment in the time frame given on the equipment that we subscribe to. They tend to test 2 or 3 related applications and after 2 years they say that they have now "piece meal" restored all their applications, so they know that they can restore all of them in a real disaster. But they have no idea how long it would take. And they cannot prove that their testing is valid in a complete restoration. > > Don't forget to remind management when a squatty box fails in > the middle > of the day that the mainframe is STILL running. And if you > ever have to > have a power supply replaced on the mainframe (concurrent > maint), don't > forget to remind management of that fact -- NO Down Time (what the "Z" > is supposed to refer to is Zero down time if I remember correctly). Some of our BIG squatty boxes (Unisys E7000) also have redundant power. But I don't know if it is hot swappable. I think that it is. The biggest "WOW!" that ever happened here was when we had an OSA die. The second OSA took up the slack automatically, with absolutely NO interruption to service. The end users never even knew, their session transparently routed over to the second OSA. The LAN people were totally stunned. Some of their critical servers have two NICs, but if one fails, the users on that NIC are disrupted. > > And like I used to say when I was still doing systems > programming for a > living -- The mainframe's biggest attraction is BOREDOM. It is a tool > that does what it needs to do, all day with very little maintenance. > > The biggest attraction for the squatty boxes is their ability to > generate excitement with NO WARNING. Right now, even as I > type this, one > of my co-workers is experiencing that excitement. Not only did a boot > drive fail, but the power supply burned up right after > swapping drives! > And no, the problem child machine did not have RAID. > > So what's worth more to a business, a cheap box that fails with no > warning, or a more expensive box that runs for 3-5 years with PLANNED > down time? > > Later, > Steve Thompson -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged and/or confidential. It is for intended addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal offense. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
