>>> On 2/10/2017 at 03:58 PM, Charles Mills <[email protected]> wrote: > Everything I know about Linux administration could be engraved on the back of > a postage stamp but I would think that if one were a pure Linux sort of > person then one would almost certainly use kvm for Rockhopper virtualization,
That is going to depend on just how hard you want to push your hardware. z/VM can support a whole lot more virtual machines than KVM can on any given mainframe box. I and various other people have repeatedly tried to get IBM to stop publicizing how many virtual machines can run on a fully loaded z13 with no indication of what hypervisor needed to be used for that. z/VM would have a hard time hitting that oft quoted 8,000 number. KVM as it stands today wouldn't even come close. (Note that I expect KVM to continue to improve in this area, but I'm talking about "today.") The people who are responsible for both z/VM and KVM on z are trying to do the right thing by positioning KVM as the "entry level" hypervisor for mainframe customers that don't have access to z/VM skills but do have Linux expertise. I don't know how many people are listening to them. Certainly IBM marketing isn't. > rather than learning another two OS's (counting CMS as an OS, which it is in > a sense). If one were coming from Linux on z/VM, one would probably not want > to give up all of the CMS niftiness. CMS is indeed an operating system. Early on it used to be able to run independently of z/VM, but that is no longer true. Mark Post ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
