My mistake. The OP did says "keep costs down". Which the MACHINE
directive will not do. It would only keep the CPU used by the HATS guest
from exceeding a single IFL. The only way to "keep the costs down" (i.e.
software licensing fees) is to remove an IFL entirely. I don't think
that having multiple z/VMs in separate LPARs would reduce the software
cost either.
One of my main complaints about licensing by number of processors or
"power" of the processor is this. The HATS license (and most others)
will be the same given the same hardware configuration, even if it only
use 5% of the CPU resource (with the other 95% being used by in-house
applications). I would prefer a "consumption" license based on usage. Or
perhaps a base license price for the product, irrespective of the
processor, then an "add on" cost for normally scheduled maintenance,
then perhaps a "per incident" cost for ad-hoc support. But people would
complain about that as well, I guess.
--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
HealthMarkets
Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage
Administrative Services Group
Information Technology
This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its
content is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you
should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking any action
based on it, is strictly prohibited.
-----Original Message-----
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 10:39 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: IFL's, VM, Suse, OH MY...
Note that although this works from a technical point of view,
from a product licensing point of view, it likely would not. Vendors
tend to be very picky when it comes to money, and would likely only be
happy if the product was running in an LPAR with one IFL assigned to it.
If the vendor is not too familiar with mainframes, I wouldn't be
surprised to have them insist it be installed on a z9 equipped with only
1 IFL.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of McKown, John
Sent: November 21, 2007 11:32
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: IFL's, VM, Suse, OH MY...
Correct.
USER HATS
MACHINE ESA 1
... other stuff
will define a z/VM guest called HATS which only has a single CPU
assigned to it.
ref:
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/hcsg0b20/3.2.
35
--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
HealthMarkets
Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage
Administrative Services Group
Information Technology
This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its
content is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you
should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking any action
based on it, is strictly prohibited.
-----Original Message-----
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian France
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 10:27 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: IFL's, VM, Suse, OH MY...
John,
Yes, HATS run on MainFrameLinux using WAS. So, do I
understand you in that I can assign two IFL's to my VM, and most of my
MFL's could have access to both IFL's except for the MFL that runs HATS?
I somehow assign a cpu to it in my USER DIRECT statements?
At 11:03 AM 11/21/2007, McKown, John wrote:
If HATS runs on Linux, then you could have a dedicated
Linux guest for HATS. And in z/VM, you could assign a single virtual CPU
to that Linux instance. That would restrict the HATS Linux system to run
on a single CPU at a time (might switch from CPU to CPU, but only use
one).
--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
HealthMarkets
Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage
Administrative Services Group
Information Technology
This message (including any attachments) contains
confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose,
and its content is protected by law. If you are not the intended
recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that
any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking
any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.
-----Original Message-----
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [
mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> ] On
Behalf Of Brian France
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 10:00 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: IFL's, VM, Suse, OH MY...
Folks,
I've done about a 45 minute search and I think my
answer is that I'd have to run multiple VM's per frame but wanted to
ensure I was right. My management wants to run some product called HATS
on our VM/MFL world. We recently upgraded from our z/890's with 1 IFL
each to z9BC's with 2 IFL's each. I guess to keep costs down they want
to run on one IFL this HATS worlds so the question to me was can I run a
single VM with BOTH IFL's allocated but alot the HATS world only 1 IFL.
Is this possible with VM config parms or some other way like maybe my
HMC which I just thought of but haven't looked at yet. I know we have to
lic Suse for more engines. Just more interested in is it even doable.
THANX!!!!
Brian W. France
Systems Administrator (Mainframe)
Pennsylvania State University
Administrative Information Services - Infrastructure/S
YSA RC
Rm 25 Shields Bldg., University Park, Pa. 16802
814-863-4739
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first
invent the universe."
Carl Sagan
Brian W. France
Systems Administrator (Mainframe)
Pennsylvania State University
Administrative Information Services - Infrastructure/S
YSA RC
Rm 25 Shields Bldg., University Park, Pa. 16802
814-863-4739
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first
invent the universe."
Carl Sagan
________________________________
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or
entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or
privileged material. Any review retransmission dissemination or other
use of or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by
persons or entities other than the intended recipient or delegate is
strictly prohibited. If you received this in error please contact the
sender and delete the material from any computer. The integrity and
security of this message cannot by guaranteed on the Internet. The
Sender accepts no liability for the content of this e-mail or for the
consequences of any actions taken on basis of the information provided.
The recipient should check this e-mail and any attachments for the
presence of viruses. The sender accepts no liability for any damage
caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail. This disclaimer is the
property of the TTC and must not be altered or circumvented in any
manner.
