I might have to look at capping if we go further down the SCRT and perhaps zNALC route, but for now, no hard capping.
Rehosing fees are likely to cost one ISV with only one JCL related product at our site a customer. -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shane Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2007 3:11 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Migration from z/800-0B1 to z9BC-703 On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 14:42 -0700, Gibney, Dave wrote: > If I f***-up, my ass is grass :) I'm hoping for some moral courage :) > > Hell, it's only 1.8 bigger and each CP is about 65% of my Uni now. zPCR > says I'm likely to avoid short CPU, but I claim to get paid to worry... O.K.,I'm going with your (purported) M-thingy numbers. That 703 reference makes no sense at all to me. Unless you are *aggressively* capping the new box (i.e. at the old MSU numbers) you couldn't possibly have a problem. If similar target weights and all those M-thingies, life's a breeze. If you *are* capping, why the extra processors (in the LPAR) ???. Shane ... :confused: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
