On Wednesday, 05/18/2011 at 12:07 EDT, Marcy Cortes <marcy.d.cor...@wellsfargo.com> wrote:
> I don't see LGR as a load balancing solution at all. We will continue to use > our F5 load balancers as well as the WAS IHS plugin for that effort. I see it > more for a planned outage move for things you want to move away for a while > without the reboot. An excellent assessment, Marcy. :-) LGR was not designed to replace any application-level workload balancing solutions (F5). Those balancing solutions provide the needed HA in case you lose a VM LPAR unexpectedly. LGR will let you take back control of your VM LPARs. No longer will you need to get 15 application owners to agree on a time for you to take down and service the VM system. Their servers keep running and the application monitor dashboard shows green. Oh, and I suppose there is an additional benefit in that if someone says, "*I* can relocate a server to a different rack in case it starts to overheat!" you can stick out your tongue and then say "*I* can relocate a server when I want to. My machine doesn't overheat." :-) Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 mobile; 607.321.7556 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott
