Ingo, do you know if there's a problem with PAV devices with SuSE linux (or
redhat for that matter) in a native LPAR with ficon to shark via a switch?
|---------+---------------------------->
| | Ingo Adlung |
| | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| | m> |
| | Sent by: Linux on|
| | 390 Port |
| | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| | IST.EDU> |
| | |
| | |
| | 03/13/2002 09:13 |
| | AM |
| | Please respond to|
| | Linux on 390 Port|
| | |
|---------+---------------------------->
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|
|
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| cc:
|
| Subject: Re: PAV Support - any requirement for it ?
|
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
David,
the way we envision we could operate PAV devices would work for
different storage attachment technologies than ESCON/FICON too ... :-)
Best regards,
Ingo
**********************************************************************
Ingo Adlung,
Linux for zSeries - Strategy & Design
The box said, 'Requires Windows95 or better', ...so I installed LINUX.
David Boyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>@VM.MARIST.EDU> on 13.03.2002 12:14:39
Please respond to Linux on 390 Port <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: Linux on 390 Port <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] PAV Support - any requirement for it ?
> PAVs have been used to a great degree by DB2 on the OS/390 side of the
> zbox. I would expect that UDB on our Linux side will appreciate the
> multiple exposures as well.
As would anyone working with large aggregated arrays (think large LVMs or
md
RAID setups). Having PAV would help immensely with some I/O related
bottlenecking on such setups). Introducing something like this for
OpenFCP-attached storage would be a very useful concept.
-- db
