There seems to be a prejudice here that every shop that is doing z/Linux is
also a vm shop, and this is patently false. One of the appealing things
about a z-990 for OUR situation would be the 30 LPAR capability, as we do
not have 40,000 per engine plus maintenance there after for VM. (or
whatever the astronomical figure is), and many shops don' t have that
financial capacity either.
|---------+---------------------------->
| | Paul Hanrahan |
| | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| | obal.net> |
| | Sent by: Linux on|
| | 390 Port |
| | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| | IST.EDU> |
| | |
| | |
| | 10/09/2003 08:55 |
| | AM |
| | Please respond to|
| | Linux on 390 Port|
| | |
|---------+---------------------------->
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|
|
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| cc:
|
| Subject: Re: OT: Intel gets virtualization clue?
|
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Hi,
I'd think there'd be a desire to do proof of concept of multiple zLinux on
VM before going to LPARS if a cutomer wasn't quite sure of the benefits.
The
"purist" looks to use native VM facilities to enhance and improve what's
offered to clients rather than simply "manage" the imaged. However, sysprog
provided enhancements should server a business purpose and if the LPAR's
serve from a business perspective than why not.
The real issue is customer satisfaction from the perspective of those
providing a service or product through use of VM.
Linux on VM appears to offer many advantages in terms of a large variety of
options in the area of programming communications facilities or programs
that have to use a variety of databases.
Paul Hanrahan
-----Original Message-----
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan
Altmark
Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 8:58 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: OT: Intel gets virtualization clue?
On Thursday, 10/09/2003 at 12:38 EST, Richard Troth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Jim ... I don't like where this is going.
> But then, I'm a purist: I see what VM offers and find little value
> in "VM in the hardware" other than to sell to those customers who
> either have the rare real problem with VM support
> or the stereotypical allergy to it. (Can't make people LIKE
something.)
Consider what MPG offered: Increased performance. Moving to a more
powerful
machine plus the ability to RESERVE or LOCK guest pages helps make up for
the loss of MPG. Plus, the limit of 6 preferred guests makes it less
interesting for server consolidation, IMHO.
> I have been bothered by lack of "basic mode" for the past couple
> years. Maybe this is not a problem, since I hear few customers
> complaining. But then perhaps there just are not enough customers who
> have been "hit" by the issue like Jan has.
Intellectually, from the purist's perspective, I'm sure the loss of MPG
hurts, but the reality is that of those who run zLinux, the vast majority
run in LPARs. So, the z990 changes nothing in this respect.
> 30 LPARs is great, and probably serves a great number of customers.
> But 30 LPARs lose a whole shipload of other value that VM offers, that
> I don't need to enumerate, preaching to the choir this is.
I don't think 30 LPARs cost VM anything. I think it makes using LPARs less
painful for those times when you need one. Psychologically, 1/30th of the
machine is less impact than 1/15th. That means getting an LPAR when you
need one is easier. With HiperSockets, IEEE VLAN, and the z/VM 4.4 virtual
switch, the management of the images in those LPARs is much easier. You
can
still clone and manage content from within VM. Whether you IPL in a
virtual
machine or in an LPAR is a choice based on performance requirements.
Alan Altmark
Sr. Software Engineer
IBM z/VM Development
