On Tue, 2003-06-10 at 09:13, McKown, John wrote:
> I have a general administration / setup question for people who are running
> multiple Linux/390 systems under z/VM. Do all your Linux instances use the
> same virtual addresses for things like DASD, regardless of the actual device
> address?

Yes.  It may vary by site, but I like to set up a scheme where, for
example, 150 is /, 151 is swap, 152 is /usr, 153 is /opt, and 154 is
/usr/local, where any guest may or may not have a 153 or 154 depending
on what it needs to do and whether it needs its own DASD for it (I'm
also a big fan of sharing /usr read-only).

> Or do you find it "better" to make the virtual DASD address match
> the actual device address? I'm tending towards making all Linux/390
> instances use the same set of virtual DASD addresses, which are not even
> related to the "real" DASD addresses. I think this would be easier to
> maintain and "clone" new instances.

It is.

>  Do you even try to make the Linux DASD
> addresses "look like" the actual device numbers, or do you simply have a
> range of virtual DASD addresses that you assign to physical devices. I'm
> using MDISK statements for Linux DASD. Basically, so far, I give each
> instance (OK, I only have one so far), the entire device OTHER THAN the
> first cylinder. Sorry, but I don't trust the Linux administrator to not
> destroy the DASD label, so this protects it from any mistakes. Oh, I'm the
> OS/390 and z/VM (new) sysprog. I am familar with Linux on Intel and did help
> the Linux administrator set up the initial Linux/390 system because she is
> not s390 literate. And I had actually done a SuSE s390 install at home under
> Hercules/390. So I was the "expert".

This is what I do.  I don't generally like dedicated DASD; let VM manage
it, is my usual advice.  The nice thing about VM is that you *don't*
have to care about the physical devices; pick a range you like, and I
tend to think you should pick a range that isn't even close to the real
DASD range, so you know, just from the device address/site convention,
that you're talking Linux filesystems on minidisks.

Adam

Reply via email to