And if I remember correctly, when Mark joined Novell, we had this little 2 GB memory problem in VM. That would force many large zLinux shops to have production running in LPARs. They could still leave test and smaller zLinux images under z/VM.
But the 2 GB line is no longer much of a problem. Tom Duerbusch THD Consulting >>> David Boyes <[email protected]> 1/22/2009 3:07 PM >>> On 1/21/09 5:09 PM, "Mark Post" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On 1/21/2009 at 2:31 PM, David Boyes <[email protected]> wrote: > -snip- >> If I haven't said it before, I don't think there's much reason to ever >> consider LPAR deployment of Linux, but others do disagree with that view. >> I'm sure there are workloads where it would matter, but I still think the >> manageability loss dramatically overwhelms any cost advantage from omitting >> VM. > > When I first joined Novell, I was surprised to learn that the world's largest > implementation was done all in LPARs. From what I was told, that wasn't > because of the dollar cost of z/VM, but the overhead. Given the number of > processors running, I could (somewhat) understand that, but to me that says > that "people time is free" is the attitude, and that leads to another whole > set of problems. True enough. There's always exceptions, but they are just that: exceptions. Right tool, right job, and LPAR is only rarely the right tool to make Linux on Z interesting. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
