Thanks Jim that is clear. Why not include V=F support for lpar mode systems? This will then need to be without i/o assist, but given the z/arch implementation v=f support could be implemted rather easy. This could be very similar to a v=v guest, but would use a z/arch real space, with offset and extent defined in the state descriptor. This way there will notr be a 2 level virtual storage. 2 levels of virtual storage used to give a performance panelty when running aix/esa under vm/xa using veoctor processors. Now this is a long time ago, but there are probably still workloads around that do have a performance issue with multiple levels of virtual storage (tpf?)
Jan Jaeger.
From: Jim Elliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: Linux on 390 Port <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Intel gets virtualization clue? Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 21:32:58 EDT
> What is the status of multiple preferred guests on z990 machines?
> iirc the z990 cannot run in basic mode, which was always a prereq > for multiple preferred guests. When running under PR/SM the MHPGF > would be taken by PR/SM. Running multiple preferred guests will > require something like 2nd level zones, unless PR/SM has changed > such that it no longer uses the MHPGF.
Jan:
Unfortunately, you loose support for V=F guests on the z990. With the complexity of the I/O subsystem (two logical channel sets, 512 channels) LPAR mode became mandatory to manage the environment. If you have images that really require the level of performance provided by V=R/V=F support, you should probably run those directly in an LPAR. With 30 LPARs, you have support for more "native" systems than before.
Jim
_________________________________________________________________ Chatten met je online vrienden via MSN Messenger. http://messenger.msn.nl/
