Eric Bielefeld writes:
>I really think one of the biggest reasons for not
>running web applications on the mainframe is the high
>software costs.
Leaving aside the critical facts that the software world has changed, that
software <> full costs, and that no IT activity is free (in a full cost
sense), Jim Marshall's idea (Web serving from a mainframe in a disaster)
shouldn't cause *any* increase in IBM software charges. There's no
additional (IBM software) charge for mainframe disaster workload, is there
(assuming VWLC or most other xxLCs)? Jim's idea seems very smart to me.
You may also choose to deploy Web serving into lower service classes,
depending on your needs, so conceivably production use wouldn't raise
anything either. ("Whitespace" is free.)
There's also the fact that proximity matters. That is, moving Web activity
closer to the backend often results in workload efficiencies for both
sides. For example, DB2 and z/OS have less work to do -- consume less CPU
-- if they're servicing requests originating from within the same LPAR
versus outside, over the local area network.
- - - - -
Timothy Sipples
IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect
Specializing in Software Architectures Related to System z
Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan and IBM Asia-Pacific
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
