Hi, On 08.11.2017 16:42, Alan Altmark wrote: > On Wednesday, 11/08/2017 at 03:17 GMT, Philipp Kern <p...@philkern.de> > wrote: >> I idly wonder how actual utilization of IFLs looks like in the field. >> It's clear to me that CPs run hot because otherwise you're wasting >> moneys. I.e. if overcommitment is just a fact of life like it is in the >> cloud. > I don't follow you, Philipp. The software and hardware cost metrics > around IFLs are based on how many you have, so having consistently unused > IFLs is costing you money, just as having consistently unconsumed MSUs on > the CP side of the machine drives up the cost of z/OS & Friends.
I thought unused CP capacity was literally costing OpEx whereas IFLs would be CapEx? If it's both OpEx, then yes, agreed. (And I suppose originally there might have been deals about giving some IFLs with upgrades? ;-) Kind regards and thanks Philipp Kern ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu 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/
