On Thu, 12 Jun 2003, Jim Sibley wrote: > John Summerfiled wrote: > > >Hmm. Seems to me that zBoxes are dropping like flies;-) > > >I was at an IBM presentation the other day, where they were talking > >about MTBF of decades. > > The high MTBF numbers people quote for zSeries is for zSeries Hardware plus > zOS. zOS has a lot of hardware recovery code to take appropriate action > when a redundant "part" fails (cp, memory, subchannel, device). For Linux > on zSeries, its a goal to be achieved. ;-)
That is not the environment we were learning about. There were no zBoxes on display, and AFAIK zOS didn't get mentioned. There was a session on Linux Virtual Servers, and I assume zVM has pretty much the same resilience as zOS. OTOH, the MTBF _I_ care about is the number that applies to _my_ system, whether virtual or real. > > But then again, if you don't have UPS, your MTBF is as good as your power > company! I guess in that case you don't care enough;-) -- Cheers John. Join the "Linux Support by Small Businesses" list at http://mail.computerdatasafe.com.au/mailman/listinfo/lssb
