All, We are revisiting this scenario pretty seriously. I originally posted this back in April of this year. Has anyone done this yet? What was the performance like? David Boyes responded back then with some very impressive numbers. I'm wondering if he would mind passing along any additional comments?
Our cost case is based primarily on cost avoidance, without this change, we will be forced to upgrade the traditional mainframe side within 12 -18 months for capacity. We have done a 3 year financial plan, and even after investing in the technology, training etc, it appears to be a $200,000 savings in that time frame, assuming we can forestall the upgrade and the associated hardware/software upgrade fees. We want to grow the DB2 environment considerably by converting the applications running on 20+ instances of INFORMIX running on AIX to DB2 on Linux on a z/800. If we can do this, the savings more than doubles based on the retirement of the INFORMIX license charges, even if we need to add an additional IFL. Of course there is a lot of FUD running around with the DBA's right now because this is a new idea for them. Now that we are getting more serious on this idea, they will be getting involved, but I want to give them some confidence that this is being done today and is a viable situation. Any feedback, or pointers to Whitepapers, etc would be helpful. Dave David Boyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: Linux on 390 Port <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 04/04/2003 08:51 AM Please respond to Linux on 390 Port <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc Subject Re: Thoughts on DB2... I'm just finishing up a cost case for a similar environment, and the numbers look very good if you can live with some of the technical restrictions. As others have said, there are limits on the size of the databases supported by UDB, however with the ability to run multiple copies of UDB in the VM system, this is not necessarily a show-stopper if you distribute individual tables to separate databases. The setup for DRDA over TCP is pretty straightforward, and the use of hipersockets is actually a very nice setup for this type of operation. The cost savings is pretty dramatic -- in the case I'm working on, reducing the size of a z/OS partion by 1 standard engine and enabling similar workloads on 2 new IFLs reaps a cool $350K savings in the first year (by the time you include the reduction in z/OS licensing and the corresponding reduction in ISV prices for a smaller z/OS machine footprint, you're talking about real money). Is it technically perfect? Not yet. Still, $350K/yr will buy a lot of remediation for the current problems. -- db David Boyes Sine Nomine Associates > -----Original Message----- > From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > Dave Jousma > Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 2:34 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Thoughts on DB2... > > > All, > > On our traditional mainframe system, we are running a > z/800-001 that is > maxed out on CPU. We are trying to figure out ways to relieve this > without buying another GP engine, and pay the big software costs. > > What I'm wondering is would it be possible, and if so, how smart would > it be to try and move our DB2 workload to a Linux/390 server, and then > have all the "traditional" mainframe apps access it remotely? Is this > a path worth looking at? > > The reason I ask, is that and IFL bundled with z/VM is pretty > cheap, and > and I could utilize hipersockets. > > Waddya all think? > > Dave > > __________________________________________________________ > Dave Jousma > Lead Systems Administrator - Information Technology > Spartan Stores, Inc. > PO Box 8700 > Grand Rapids, MI 49518 > (616) 878-2883 > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
