On Thu, 2004-06-24 at 07:39, Malcolm Beattie wrote: > Both the original question and this response are rather ambiguous. > I suspect that when Adam refers to "4 engines in an LPAR", he is > thinking of Linux running by itself (no z/VM) in that LPAR and that he > assumes the original poster means the same.
Yes, that is what I assumed. If you have z/VM and you're spreading the load among a bunch of virtual machines, 4 engines very well may make a lot of sense. However, if you're doing this, I'd still recommend that each Linux guest--unless you have a single guest that needs more than 2 real engines, in which case, consider your workload--have no more than two (virtual) engines defined. That said, if you have more than one actual processor, I would define all the guests as two-processor machines. It seems to me--and this is nothing I have any data to support, so Barton is not interested--that if you're running on multiple physical engines, two-processor Linux images generally make better use of the real resources than uniprocessor virtual images, and you get more consistent (less peaky) use of the real CPU resources. I *would* like to see some actual measurement data if anyone has some they can share. Adam ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
