I'd have to agree with Rob here. We have a limited amount of CSE here. Just xlink and only on particular volumes that contain a certain very large server that doesn't want to be down for more than reboot time and we do a lot of PORs. That has its risks too without a true shared directory.
I wouldn't wish a full implementation on a newbie. Nor a conversion later (which has got to be harder than a fresh install of CSE 2.0 (ps. I made that name up.. I know nothing ). The full implementation involves understanding each and every one of your mindisks... What you can share and what you musn't share... Example... EREP 191, DISKACNT 191, don't share those but you need one of each on each system that is read writable. You can share RSCS 191 but you want different configs... You may have to write fancy profile exec's to get what you want. The upgrade path is an unknown. You'd have to figure it's a z/VM upgrade likely. Would you also have to convert off of CSE at the exact same time and onto the new thing? Does the whole cluster need to go at once? Are you even allowed to upgrade all of your systems at once? I would think that the future thing would still require you to learn what each disk is for, but perhaps with a better way of telling the directory what you want it to be known as on which system, and avoiding some of the special coding. Hopefully it won't also make you squeeze 65,519 cyl minidisks into 65,510 cylinders. That'd be a lot of fun... We had 2 systems fully implemented but took it apart. We decided the risk of outages due to a cse systems programmer error wasn't worth it. I'm sure Jim E will advise Sunny correctly with his insider knowledge. If not, Rob can beat him up later. Marcy "This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation." -----Original Message----- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Rob van der Heij Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 2:48 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [IBMVM] Where is z/VM CSE On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 10:50 PM, Alan Altmark<[email protected]> wrote: > The things you learn while implementing CSE (any or all of it) will prove > invaluable in the transition to the "single system image" of the future: So you're really suggesting people to start doing CSE to get up to speed for a future z/VM release? Like getting PVM and RSCS installed? I see that some people started to migrate their Linux data to new volumes so that they could reserve the extra cylinders for the CSE tracks (beyond 3390-9). Or move around system data to share certain objects in the collection, dealing with the problem that default installation breaks the CRR server in CS (and that the examples on how to do it are wrong too). Sure, I see there's a lot of high-level and conceptual things that you need to address in either case. But I very much doubt you develop such insight by trying to implement CSE with current components. Maybe different when IBM would already provide guidance explaining what things will be different and how you migrate. Rob
