If so, then unlikely that CMS would run on "cell blade engines", and emulation not
required. With IBM now owning platform, who did seem to have this kind of technology,
there are feasible options that would actually be marketable.
Quay, Jonathan (IHG) wrote:
It is my understanding that IBM intends to integrate Cell Blade engine
(e.g. playstation 3) technology into the z/Series ecosystem. This would
seem to me to be the place where massively parallel high intensity cpu
workload would live in the not so far flung future.
-----Original Message-----
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Barton Robinson
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 10:59 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Nice idea in blog: Should we toss x86 architecture - NOT.
Ok, so reality check folks before y'all start drooling about jobs and
can think you can
run 47000 windows servers under VM. In Linux we learned that running
compiled code
"natively" on "z", megahertz is megahertz and a CPU intensive task would
always run faster
on Intel than on "z" (until we got z9 and z10). And that is "native"
meaning the programs
were compiled to run on z, and the operating system was compiled to run
on z.
So now, under CMS, this emulates intel. So megahertz is NOT megahertz.
With emulating an
architecture, one could easily imagine losing an order of magnitude.
Thus a windows
server that is running at 10% peak on a 4Ghz processor would consume a
z10 IFL and want
more. One does need to pay significant attention to the performance
characteristics
before thinking about something like this seriously. Sorry.
Gary M. Dennis wrote:
Z/VOS is a CMS application. The glass-side user will only see Windows
via
RDC and know nothing of or about CMS or VM.
Gary
On 7/22/08 8:30 PM, "dave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Good luck, Gary. I do hope your organization can pull this
off. VM-ers need more employment possibilities....:-)
I gather from some of your previous posts to this list that
your Windows support software, z/VOS, is in fact a
sophisticated CMS-based application, that is a user would
log onto a CMS user id to start his Windows system....is my
understanding correct?
Thanks and have a good one.
DJ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary M. Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Nice idea in blog: Should we toss x86
architecture
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 13:02:33 -0500
This was our post to the zd net blog.
"Maybe we already have.
In Q1 2009 Mantissa will deliver a system that permits
unaltered Windows operating systems to run under z/VM.
Using a desktop appliance running RDC, users will be able
to connect to their virtual Windows images running in the
VM environment. Goodbye desktop hardware, remote
maintenance, high power consumption, machine order lead
time.
z/VOS began with the observation that most Windows
workstations do practically nothing 95% of the time and we
were so intrigued with the idea of being able to actually
run an intel-based operating system under IBM VM that we
never looked back. VM provided a natural platform for
development of this product.
The product has been a bear for the development group but
the thought of being able to run 3000 copies of Windows on
one System z so fascinated the team that we needed very
little additional incentive.
Let's hope IBM can ramp up System z production."
Why wait until 2016?
--. .- .-. -.--
Gary Dennis
Mantissa Corporation
On 7/22/08 11:14 AM, "Bob Heerdink"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/perlow/?p=9183
"Should we toss x86 architecture and wipe the slate with
something greene r
and more scalable?"
"Windows Server 2016 128-bit edition running virtualized
on z/VM in a gre en
datacenter, accessed via my house from a thin client
over high-speed fibe r
optic connection. I can see it now."
Hope this happens sooner than predicted,
Bob
