> From:    Mike Shorkend <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: Running on CP or IFL ?
> Is anybody doing that? Running Linux natively in an LPAR?
> If yes, why?

There are some applications (*cough* SAP *cough*) that demand every single 
cycle you can give them and still want more. VM does add a (small) resource 
overhead. That's the usual reasoning.

Another reason is accounts where IBM had spent a lot of time and money 
convincing the customer that VM was "not strategic" or  "going away real soon" 
and their IBMers (and/or customer execs) don't want to lose significant face by 
bringing it back. That reason is common in a lot of Asian customers, Japan in 
particular, although there's a lot of that still perking around in the US 
customer base too (inexperienced salescritters selling what they get the 
biggest bonus for, and not understanding what VM is or does, and getting no 
education about that from anyone). 

LPAR mode is also common in "just testing" installs -- most sites with z/OS 
have a play/testing LPAR already defined, and sticking Linux in that 
"temporarily" can sometimes sneak it in under the radar.

Otherwise, Marcy's stating the obvious -- the improvements in manageability and 
supportability for Linux in a VM environment quickly pay for any extra capacity 
or licenses needed to run VM. In almost every case, production use of LPAR mode 
for Linux is a gigantic PITA, and to be avoided if in any way possible.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
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 more information on Linux on System z, visit
http://wiki.linuxvm.org/

Reply via email to