Richard, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "sharing," in this case. Is it simply having the same DASD in the I/O gen for each LPAR, as opposed to trying to actually share the data? If the latter, don't do that, there's no means to insure data integrity. If the former, I would still advise against it. There have been problems in the past with table overflows for particular device types when there were too many devices online to the system.
Having the DASD for the Linux/390 system specified via the "dasd=" parameter doesn't guarantee that someone won't use the dynamic capabilities of the 2.4 kernel to bring a volume online and format it. Oops, there goes the payroll database. In general not a good idea all the way around. Mark Post -----Original Message----- From: Richard W. Lauck, Cornerstone Systems, Inc. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 1:45 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: S/390 RedHat Shared DASD How many are sharing DASD between Linux and OS LPARs rather than having a few volumes dedicated to the Linux LPAR?. What effects of the Linux autosensing all shared devices and causing sharing problems that IBM warns about have you seen? Is just having something like dasd=192-194,200 in the parmfile enough even though all DASD is shared between LPARs? Richard W. Lauck Cornerstone Systems, Inc. Sr. Systems Programmer IBM Certified S/390 Parallel Sysplex Systems Programmer IBM Certified S/390 Parallel Sysplex Operator IBM Parallel Sysplex Top Gun (425)489-4579 Direct - Home Office (425)453-5166 x9024 Voice Mail (425)486-4501 Home (888)505-4534 Pager
