Jeez John, I'd rather do the proof of concept on the current setup, WLM prior to plex, than go to a setup, plex, that could cause additional degradation and then maybe have to go back but I guess that's all water under the bridge at this point. I know I'm preaching to the choir but don't *they* realize there is the very real possibility that you'll use more CPU managing a plex environment with weighting than a single image? And so now you could face the possibility that some of the production work may not get done or will be delayed during heavy month end processing due to the plex setup and the guarantee to the test/development image. I have been down the month end road, super peaks with maybe 30 in ready and basically none of my bottom feeders, test/dev., getting any CPU, well 85 - 95% CPU delay, but the production batch work chugged along and finished and my onlines didn't notice any significant delays. This was on a small 2 way machine as I believe you are on also. Good luck.......
"McKown, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Zelden > Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 3:46 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Tape switching: Autoswitch vs MIM/Allocation [snip] > > > So what are you doing today to share tape between your two monoplex > systems? We only have a single monoplex today. We are splitting it in twain for political reasons. I.e. the current image will run only production work, the new image will run all development/test/q&a (nonproduction) work. It will be a basic sysplex because nobody would pony up the $173,000 USD to get a CFL for our z9BC. If interested, the reasoning goes that since we cannot get all of our work done during month-end because production soaks the CPU totally, the non-production work is be unjustly penalized. This will be "fixed" by putting the non-production work in its only LPAR on the same CEC and "weighting the LPARs appropriately". Nobody would believe me when I said that I could do this using WLM on a single image. They wouldn't even allow a "proof of concept" to see how a WLM solution might work. Yes, I'm disgusted. > > I've always liked MIA and have used it at different shops > since the early > 90s. It is simple to set up if you already have MII, but > there really is > no reason to do so since z/OS 1.2 if you are running a sysplex. > > One nice thing you can do with MIA that looks like it will be > in z/OS 1.10 > is the ability to vary devices as "overgenned". This takes > them out of the EDL. > There are also the display that tells you where a drive is > allocated, but with > only 2 systems it's sort of obvious. The "overgenned" is nice. I've used it in the past. But that alone does not seem worth the effort to implement MIA. > > Mark > -- -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
