The historic reason for not running VM under VM (for production) was
that you lost the hardware assists.
But the hardware assists are gone anyway.

Are you talking about:

LPAR > z/VM > z/VM > VSE?

Sure, it is doable.  And you can still have good (not great)
performance.  As long as you have sufficent CPU, and memory.

Is this a long term thing?  Or just a short term, conversion, type of
thing?

I've done some 30+ VM installations/conversions.  Really, there isn't
much to it.  The last major hurdle I've hit, was going to VM Version 2. 
It hit some CMS based applications fairly hard.  Other than that, VM
conversions have been rather boring.

Is this a service bureau kind of thing?  Where one client want to be
insulated from all other clients?  That is a reason for VM under VM. 
But then it leads to the question, why not LPAR?  We no longer have
BASIC mode.  

Do they need to cycle their VM or major componets (tcpip, VTAM, SFS,
RSCS, etc) that might effect others?  That is a reason for their own VM.
 It is easier to have their own VM then to duplicate all services that
they need to cause outages for.

On a modern box, the only major thing that can't be shared between
LPARs is bus and tag channels.  

But if they don't have something "unique" in their VM system, they will
be happer to run their VSE second level instead of third level.

Tom Duerbusch
THD Consulting

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3/28/2006 11:53 AM >>>
We are consolidating two data centers. Both data centers run ZVM and
VSE/ESA. I happen to be at the "home" data center with the hardware
and
the host zvm system.

The data center being relocated is keeping its network infrastructure,
its operator staff, a few tape drives, and its users where they sit
today.

The data center being located wants its own ZVM under ZVM system.
Technically I don't agree. On the other hand, maybe it' not a
technical
issue. If it's not a technical issue, what business reasons exist to
support running a ZVM under ZVM environment?

I'm sure there are others who have faced this dilemma in the past. How
did you resolve it?

I'd like to hear technical reasons why it's a bad idea to run ZVM
under
ZVM in production or why it's a good idea. Business reasons pro and
con
are welcome as well. 

The facts need to speak for themselves, not emotions.

Any comments are welcome.

Regards,
_______________________
Jim Hughes
"Impossible is just an opinion."

Reply via email to