On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 00:48:29 -0500, Alan Altmark <[email protected] > wrote:
>On Wednesday, 12/17/2008 at 05:26 EST, Michael >MacIsaac/Poughkeepsie/i...@ibmus wrote: > >> -) Install a z/VM system onto DASD with the *highest* 5 addresses we >have (we >> install onto 3390-3s). Use the default labels of 540RES, 540SPL, ... >> -) Immediately shut this system down and never IPL it again - this is >the >> "golden image" (OK, "never" is a strong word - later you may want to p ut >an RSU >> on it). >> >> -) Clone the 5 volumes to the target DASD (we use FLASHCOPY. Any disk >copy tool >> should work assuming you have access to both source and target disks) >> -) IPL the RES volume from the first target DASD in the correct LPAR - >you >> should not run into the problem I describe above since these DASD have >lower >> addresses > ><cough> Please update your SYSTEM CONFIG on the new RES volume to defin e >those high addresses as Offline_at_IPL. > >> Relabelling the system volumes is tricky. > >Note that FLASHCOPY now includes a LABEL option. And if you don't have FLASHCOPY, use DDR starting at cylinder 1 and afterwards use CPFMTXA to label and allocate cylinder 0 appropriately, (which is a good reason *not* to use cylinder 0 on spool volumes since it would preclude doing this). Once that's done it's easy enough to update the PARM disk and directory o n the cloned volumes with the new labels before you IPL it. No 1st level VM system should use the default DASD labels from the instal l process (or the same labels as another LPAR). Once you do that, it doesn't matter what addresses you use for production or new installs because you'll never have a label conflict. The labels of a golden image can stay the defaults and the addresses are irrelevent. Likewise, labels/addresses for any clones of the golden image are not a problem since they should be DEDICATEs to virtual machines anyway. Any clone you want to make a 1st level system you do the work to change the labels. Brian Nielsen
