Gibney, Dave wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
On Behalf Of John Eells
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2018 12:49 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: z/OSMF, was How far out of date are my skills
Jousma, David wrote:
You can configure zosmf to NOT come up. There will just be some new
functions that wont work without it. I'm guessing that over time that list
will
get longer. NOTIFY=your.email.address is just one of those new thing.
<snip>
One of those new functions that won't work without it is z/OSMF Software
Management which, strategically speaking, we want to be our software
product installer in a couple of years.
What is your answer to folks like me, running severely capped for z/OS software
charging and no access to specialty engines?
And, is it very much easier now to do an initial configuration of z/OSMF than
it was when I first looked and decided that at that time, it wasn't worth my
effort? Which probably it's first release.
z/OSMF is a lot easier to configure now than it used to be. I've been
through the entire setup, and it's not bad in my opinion. The most
common sticking point seems to be security system setup. You can find
the pertinent samples in SAMPLIB with names like IZUSEC (the main one)
and IZUxxSEC, where xx is an abbrevation for the application name. For
historical reasons, Software Management's sample is named IZUDMSEC. A
rewritten configuration chapter should hit the streets soon, too, which
I think will help.
z/OSMF was rebased on WebSphere's Liberty Profile in z/OSMF V2.1, which
dramatically reduced its CPU, memory, and disk footprints. The idle CPU
consumption of the z/OSMF server is pretty low. It only chews up
significant cycles if you use it to do things. That said, you can stop
the server when you're not using it. You can also lower its priority in
WLM, but if you go *too* far in that direction, you might experience
browser timeouts if your other workloads yield high overall CPU
utilization for long-ish periods of time.
I have not done a comparative measurement of a ServerPac-based
installation and a Software Management Deployment operation CPU
consumption, but I would expect broad swaths of both to be fairly
similar. ServerPac uses GIMGTPKG to get the package, and so does
Software Management. Likewise, both use GIMUNZIP to load the files and
data sets from the GIMZIP archives.
The things that will eventually require using things unique to z/OSMF
Software Management are acquiring the package (or pointing at it, if you
don't have internet connectivity to IBM), doing the customization you
want (data set names, catalog environment, etc.), the job management
done by the final step of the ServerPac dialog, and (eventually)
managing the setup workflows that we want to have replace the ServerPac
product-specific batch jobs. If you want to model after something
existing, which I expect most will, you will also have to define the
thing to be modeled after as a "software instance" first.
It's probably worth mentioning that not all of the aforementioned
processing is zIIP-eligible. The z/OSMF proper part of it is mostly
eligible (I'd guess about 80-85%), but many of the system services used
by Software Management (DADSM, CVAF, Catalog, VSAM, etc.) are not.
Those things cost the same whether we drive them from a PLI-based ISPF
dialog or from a z/OSMF application.
--
John Eells
IBM Poughkeepsie
ee...@us.ibm.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
