Re: AI System Services on z/OS 3.1 - is a CF really mandatory?
On Tue, 21 Nov 2023 19:01:15 -0500, Tony Thigpen wrote: >What is required to set up a CF LPAR? Is there a document I can look at? > >Tony Thigpen > Hi Tony, The PR/SM Planning Guide has the details on how to use the HMC to define a CF LPAR. Each processor has their own PR/SM Planning Guide, this is the one for 3931 https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/systems-hardware/zsystems/Z16M-A01?topic=library-prsm-planning-guide This is the chapter on CF planning, there is also one for CF definition. https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/systems-hardware/zsystems/Z16M-A01?topic=considerations-coupling-facility-planning It's also a topic in the HCD manual. Each z/OS release has its own HCD manual. This is the chapter in the one for v3.1 that deals with defining CF components https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/3.1.0?topic=configuration-defining-coupling-facility-components-in-sysplex This chapter of Setting Up A Sysplex gives an overview of defining a CF once you've got the LPAR available. https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/3.1.0?topic=facility-defining-coupling cheers, Peter -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: AI System Services on z/OS 3.1 - is a CF really mandatory?
What is required to set up a CF LPAR? Is there a document I can look at? Tony Thigpen Scott Chapman wrote on 11/20/23 9:01 AM: Just to add to the point about "or general purpose engine". A CF LPAR doing relatively little activity for a non-critical work can run just fine on a shared GP engine, assuming you have some available capacity. The CF LPARs don't generally consume much CPU, if they're not being driven by intensive data sharing. Unlike ~30 years ago when sysplex first came out, things like thin interrupts and sub-capacity pricing as well as faster CPUs means that it is plausible today to run CF LPARs on GPs. The most extreme case I've seen has 3 z/OS LPARs and 2 CF LPARs running on a single sub-capacity engine. Obviously a very small environment, and not a configuration I'd recommend, but it functions. But I do think there might be performance advantages available to some customers who don't have CF LPARs defined today if they just would stand up a small CF LPAR running on a GP. But it requires some effort to configure and manage. Scott Chapman On Mon, 20 Nov 2023 06:32:08 +, Timothy Sipples wrote: The z/OS AI Framework requires EzNoSQL, EzNoSQL requires VSAM Record-Level Sharing (RLS), and VSAM RLS requires a Coupling Facility (internal or external) running on either a CF or general purpose engine. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: AI System Services on z/OS 3.1 - is a CF really mandatory?
> On 21 Nov 2023, at 8:20 pm, Scott Chapman > <03fffd029d68-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > I think the better question is why does EzNoSQL require RLS? Probably makes > it easier because they don't have to handle different sharing issues, but it > seems possible that some might be interested in using the EzNoSQL API from a > single task without sharing implications. I haven’t used it but from reading the brief docs EzNoSQL is a z/OS implementation of a key/value JSON document store that uses VSAM KSDS as the store. It’s similar to MongoDB or SAP HANA in functionality which are both hugely popular on distributed systems. The marketing materials mention using Sysplex for consistency and performance. MongoDB, Aerospike, SAP HANA etc all have huge in-memory caches for scalability. EzNoSQL uses Sysplex services to implement a straight-through cache and persistent storage that can scale horizontally. IBM makes a point of stating that there are no programming requirements to handle eventual consistency which can be an issue with distributed systems that adhere to the CAP theorem. > Of course I don't know how interested people are in general in EzNoSQL. It looks decent but IBM needs to provide better documentation. > > Scott Chapman > > > On Mon, 20 Nov 2023 17:28:17 -0600, Peter Bishop > wrote: > >> Also, given it's just SMF data being used here, surely there's a way for >> z/OS to process that without VSAM RLS and EzNoSQL (?). Perhaps they are >> using "ported" code, i.e. not native to z/OS, for the AI inferencing part >> and hence must have EzNoSQL and thus VSAM RLS. > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: AI System Services on z/OS 3.1 - is a CF really mandatory?
I think the better question is why does EzNoSQL require RLS? Probably makes it easier because they don't have to handle different sharing issues, but it seems possible that some might be interested in using the EzNoSQL API from a single task without sharing implications. Of course I don't know how interested people are in general in EzNoSQL. Scott Chapman On Mon, 20 Nov 2023 17:28:17 -0600, Peter Bishop wrote: >Also, given it's just SMF data being used here, surely there's a way for z/OS >to process that without VSAM RLS and EzNoSQL (?). Perhaps they are using >"ported" code, i.e. not native to z/OS, for the AI inferencing part and hence >must have EzNoSQL and thus VSAM RLS. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: AI System Services on z/OS 3.1 - is a CF really mandatory?
On Mon, 20 Nov 2023 17:02:16 +0100, Radoslaw Skorupka wrote: >I see other solution: special price for ICF engine used for AI. >It can be just a price or yet another acronym for specialty processor - >maybe IAI? :-) Yes, I was thinking along the same lines. It seems a shame to force such a significant cost associated with ICFs on users who only want to "move with the times". Also, given it's just SMF data being used here, surely there's a way for z/OS to process that without VSAM RLS and EzNoSQL (?). Perhaps they are using "ported" code, i.e. not native to z/OS, for the AI inferencing part and hence must have EzNoSQL and thus VSAM RLS. > > >W dniu 20.11.2023 o 15:01, Scott Chapman pisze: >> Just to add to the point about "or general purpose engine". A CF LPAR doing >> relatively little activity for a non-critical work can run just fine on a >> shared GP engine, assuming you have some available capacity. The CF LPARs >> don't generally consume much CPU, if they're not being driven by intensive >> data sharing. >> >> Unlike ~30 years ago when sysplex first came out, things like thin >> interrupts and sub-capacity pricing as well as faster CPUs means that it is >> plausible today to run CF LPARs on GPs. The most extreme case I've seen has >> 3 z/OS LPARs and 2 CF LPARs running on a single sub-capacity engine. >> Obviously a very small environment, and not a configuration I'd recommend, >> but it functions. >> >> But I do think there might be performance advantages available to some >> customers who don't have CF LPARs defined today if they just would stand up >> a small CF LPAR running on a GP. But it requires some effort to configure >> and manage. >> Agreed, this is the stumbling block that many smaller clients face, apart from the cost of the capacity required, be it ICF or CP. It is an onerous task for many, but perhaps there is now an impetus to do it where there wasn't previously. Best regards, Peter -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: AI System Services on z/OS 3.1 - is a CF really mandatory?
I forgot about CBP processors - you can see it on many HMC panels, but they do not exist. :-) W dniu 20.11.2023 o 17:02, Radoslaw Skorupka pisze: I see other solution: special price for ICF engine used for AI. It can be just a price or yet another acronym for specialty processor - maybe IAI? :-) Of course IBM should not forget to use different names in HMC, marketing slides, etc. (zIIP = IIP, zAAP = AAP = IFA, ICF means both processor and LPAR, etc. ) -- Radoslaw Skorupka Lodz, Poland -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: AI System Services on z/OS 3.1 - is a CF really mandatory?
I see other solution: special price for ICF engine used for AI. It can be just a price or yet another acronym for specialty processor - maybe IAI? :-) Of course IBM should not forget to use different names in HMC, marketing slides, etc. (zIIP = IIP, zAAP = AAP = IFA, ICF means both processor and LPAR, etc. ) -- Radoslaw Skorupka Lodz, Poland W dniu 20.11.2023 o 15:01, Scott Chapman pisze: Just to add to the point about "or general purpose engine". A CF LPAR doing relatively little activity for a non-critical work can run just fine on a shared GP engine, assuming you have some available capacity. The CF LPARs don't generally consume much CPU, if they're not being driven by intensive data sharing. Unlike ~30 years ago when sysplex first came out, things like thin interrupts and sub-capacity pricing as well as faster CPUs means that it is plausible today to run CF LPARs on GPs. The most extreme case I've seen has 3 z/OS LPARs and 2 CF LPARs running on a single sub-capacity engine. Obviously a very small environment, and not a configuration I'd recommend, but it functions. But I do think there might be performance advantages available to some customers who don't have CF LPARs defined today if they just would stand up a small CF LPAR running on a GP. But it requires some effort to configure and manage. Scott Chapman On Mon, 20 Nov 2023 06:32:08 +, Timothy Sipples wrote: The z/OS AI Framework requires EzNoSQL, EzNoSQL requires VSAM Record-Level Sharing (RLS), and VSAM RLS requires a Coupling Facility (internal or external) running on either a CF or general purpose engine. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: AI System Services on z/OS 3.1 - is a CF really mandatory?
Just to add to the point about "or general purpose engine". A CF LPAR doing relatively little activity for a non-critical work can run just fine on a shared GP engine, assuming you have some available capacity. The CF LPARs don't generally consume much CPU, if they're not being driven by intensive data sharing. Unlike ~30 years ago when sysplex first came out, things like thin interrupts and sub-capacity pricing as well as faster CPUs means that it is plausible today to run CF LPARs on GPs. The most extreme case I've seen has 3 z/OS LPARs and 2 CF LPARs running on a single sub-capacity engine. Obviously a very small environment, and not a configuration I'd recommend, but it functions. But I do think there might be performance advantages available to some customers who don't have CF LPARs defined today if they just would stand up a small CF LPAR running on a GP. But it requires some effort to configure and manage. Scott Chapman On Mon, 20 Nov 2023 06:32:08 +, Timothy Sipples wrote: >The z/OS AI Framework requires EzNoSQL, EzNoSQL requires VSAM Record-Level >Sharing (RLS), and VSAM RLS requires a Coupling Facility (internal or >external) running on either a CF or general purpose engine. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: AI System Services on z/OS 3.1 - is a CF really mandatory?
Peter Bishop wrote: >it seems from the manual linked to below that you must have a CF to run >EzNoSQL in order to use the new AI Framework feature of z/OS 3.1, for >example to have AI-powered WLM batch initiators which is the first use case >given. Most of my customers would baulk at spending for ICFs, so this is a >real blow if it's actually the case. >Is it really true that you must have a CF for AI on z/OS 3.1? Say it ain't >so, IBM, please! >https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/3.1.0?topic=installation-hardware-software- >requirements The z/OS AI Framework requires EzNoSQL, EzNoSQL requires VSAM Record-Level Sharing (RLS), and VSAM RLS requires a Coupling Facility (internal or external) running on either a CF or general purpose engine. Certain software components included in the z/OS AI Framework might not require EzNoSQL and can be useful on their own, but for the AI-driven WLM batch initiators feature I can’t see how you’d avoid the EzNoSQL requirement at least currently. — Timothy Sipples Senior Architect Digital Assets, Industry Solutions, and Cybersecurity IBM zSystems/LinuxONE, Asia-Pacific sipp...@sg.ibm.com -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
AI System Services on z/OS 3.1 - is a CF really mandatory?
Hi everyone, it seems from the manual linked to below that you must have a CF to run EzNoSQL in order to use the new AI Framework feature of z/OS 3.1, for example to have AI-powered WLM batch initiators which is the first use case given. Most of my customers would baulk at spending for ICFs, so this is a real blow if it's actually the case. Is it really true that you must have a CF for AI on z/OS 3.1? Say it ain't so, IBM, please! https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/3.1.0?topic=installation-hardware-software-requirements Kind regards, Peter -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
