On Tue, 7 Jan 2014 17:45:35 +0100, R.S. <[email protected]> wrote:
>The following scenario: machine 2817-607 is planned to be upgraded to
>model 2817-706.
>It is CPU power upgrade in terms of MSU or MIPS, but it is also
>reduction of # of CPUs by one.
>So, in some sense it will be deactivation of one of the CPs.
>It is quite obvious that LPAR using *this one* CP only cannot survive
>the process.
>However in my understanding all LPARs using the CP should configure it
>OFFLINE (CF CPU(nn),OFFLINE) before the model conversion.
>Questions:
>1. How can I predict (know) which CPU(nn) will be deactivated?
>2. Is it safe for the LPAR (with z/OS) to deactivate the CP without CF
>CPU(nn),OFFLINE as a prerequiste?
>3. Will the model conversion proceed even if it's disruptive for some
>LPARs (a case of single CPU) ?
I'm not sure I know the answers, but you would think someone within IBM
would be able to find you someone that can give you the definitive answers
to your question. You are paying money for this upgrade, aren't you??
That being said, unless your LPAR with a single LP has a dedicated
engine, that fact that there is only 1 CP shouldn't matter. If the
upgrade is non disruptive, that LPAR should be fine. (is that what
you are asking?).
If you have any LPARs with 7 LPs configured online, config one
offline so the max is 6 LPs. Basically the same thing you have
to do when removing LPs added via OOCoD or the removal
will fail.
So here are my educated guesses assuming someone has told you
that this can be done non-disruptively (I have no experience in
this type of upgrade):
#1) Don't know if you can predict, doesn't matter as long as there are
no more than 6 LPs online to any given LPAR. PR/SM will take care of
dispatching to physical CPs that exist.
#2) Not sure I understand the question. See #1 and CF CPU(nn),OFFLINE
if there are 7 LPs on any given LPAR. If the LPAR is not running an OS
at the time and it has 7 LPs, you probably have to deactivate it, change
the profile and reactivate it or take off the LP from the SE.
#3) My guess is "no" if disruptive. It would fail just like an OOCoD
deactivation if the number of CPs would be less than the number of LPs.
However, see my comment above about a single LP. Shouldn't matter
unless it is dedicated.
--
Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS
ITIL v3 Foundation Certified
mailto:[email protected]
Mark's MVS Utilities: http://www.mzelden.com/mvsutil.html
Systems Programming expert at http://search390.techtarget.com/ateExperts/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
