If shared console the only requirement, you can accomplish it with *basic*
sysplex: CTC connections only, no CF required. We run one sysplex that way.
.
.
JO.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
626-302-7535 Office
323-715-0595 Mobile
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"R.S."
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
LTIBANK.COM.PL> To
Sent by: IBM [email protected]
Mainframe cc
Discussion List
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject
.EDU> Re: SMCS ... was something else
entirely.
12/02/2007 05:21
AM
Please respond to
IBM Mainframe
Discussion List
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
.EDU>
Ted MacNEIL wrote:
>> Sysplex is good thing from availability point of view, but it consumes
more resources and costs you CPU cycles.
>
> The CPU cost for SYSPLEX is 1-3% of the physical processors involved.
> I don't think that is expensive.
>
> The real cost is the CF(s) and set up time.
IMHO it's more. Some IBMer (sysplex specialist) told me about 5%. His
smile suggested the value is censored by marketing. My *very limited*
experience rather confirm 5+% than 1-3.
Of course, regardless of the above, we still have cost of HW resources
and set up, *and* management.
IMHO much too much to justify consoles only.
--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
