Re: Use of zCX

[David Crayford]

On 26/4/22 20:29, Seymour J Metz wrote:

I mean "Are there current Z ports for those languages?".

Yes. ooRexx has the package files for download 
https://sourceforge.net/projects/oorexx/files/oorexx/4.2.0/. It only 
includes an rpm for s390x so you need to use alien to convert to a deb 
on Debian distros.




--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
kekronbekron [02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2022 11:19 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Use of zCX

Sorry, what do you mean?

- KB

--- Original Message ---
On Monday, April 25th, 2022 at 3:29 PM, Seymour J Metz  wrote:



Icon? oorexx? Perl? Perl6 (Raku)?


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
kekronbekron [02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2022 11:37 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Use of zCX

Okay, maybe I'm mixing things up.
So 'tainers are doable, assuming the program can first compile to s390x?
What about code that does CPU instruction set specific things.
How likely is the success of its compilation on s390x with minimal work.
If it's "easy", why is the IBM Z and LinuxOne Open Source list not bigger - 
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ibm.com%2Fcommunity%2Fz%2Fopen-source-software%2Fdata=05%7C01%7Csmetz3%40gmu.edu%7C4895635bc4f84c17577c08da27339c74%7C9e857255df574c47a0c00546460380cb%7C0%7C0%7C637865399868023883%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7Csdata=T9iby7JlClkVTybxiXBCI0VIrtkplMWIh1kLLeZXxCs%3Dreserved=0

- KB

--- Original Message ---
On Monday, April 25th, 2022 at 7:41 AM, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com 
wrote:




On 23/4/22 14:10, kekronbekron wrote:


Building the s390x containers is straight forward.
Again, really? (honest question).
Are there any public examples for reference?
You know, small enough that it isn't 50 million lines of code or something.

I don't want to speak for Matt but building docker images for a specific
architecture is trivial. To build a s390x container that includes native
binaries you just compile/link you programs and then build the docker
image scrom scratch and specify the --platform. See
https://secure-web.cisco.com/1RsVWbknHmIkB5knRo-X8Ne-wwMLqIvEZ8HugRK1pXz5Ylef966nE16O81t_PTZBA8VofMaJCFQRe-T54L4WVvCzGJPZWJtsqvefO4PGxVgReKWp_1yxu-NEsGD6fi4SfuVOk8Zmu-QeHOZnYqzJQJO4CcM_ECK9VDKssTGw4CY9oE1sdH_YX_gRbyKVQcH9rwXgq0ZuMlZXOKvgtf2AGqYewtLgack4HJSNMUjoR2r9smrlkqIcn62jby6kFS9Fjc-aHHycLBtcOn15_kQJ-RyPaUi1jhJ_7TztO4BhRh1GBimeHMc2V6Tc7trOeinXk_9mXkgPFneiOJr-6JBKMiTnnuK6kuMv3yQ_4d-3OAT8mVXWzW_1A_lRKPCAz7Srdzp2JRJnN_JtLEMAZIJ7cl8GiCkBOWrd9IM5LBGMUuDQ7g6RYOpO9ka4XwqO4GCok_DSE6dEZGNLzdDsP7pLQ-Q/https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.docker.com%2Fdesktop%2Fmulti-arch%2F.


- KB

--- Original Message ---
On Friday, April 22nd, 2022 at 9:49 PM, Matt Hogstrom m...@hogstrom.org wrote:


On Apr 22, 2022, at 3:42 AM, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com wrote:


If you already deliver container images that support your product that 
currently run outside z/OS, or if that’s what you plan to do, it’d be a great 
idea to add s390x compatibility to your container images so your customers have 
greater deployment flexibility. That’s usually quite easy to do.
Good advice. I would also add that if you are a vendor planning to deliver zCX 
container images then make sure you add other compatibilities just in case your 
customers don't run zCX. It could be a POC obstacle.

Building the s390x containers is straight forward. It’s the POC challenge. It’s 
like showing up with SAE tools to work on a car that is metric. Not going to be 
very useful.

Matt Hogstrom
m...@hogstrom.org
+1-919-656-0564
PGP Key: 0x90ECB270
Facebook 
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffacebook.com%2Fmatt.hogstromdata=05%7C01%7Csmetz3%40gmu.edu%7C4895635bc4f84c17577c08da27339c74%7C9e857255df574c47a0c00546460380cb%7C0%7C0%7C637865399868023883%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7Csdata=WkKjx2CHAF23ekuFm7Y8QjLvwXhqqyTtrkySMz1YOhY%3Dreserved=0
 LinkedIn 
https://secure-web.cisco.com/19EIjF3gPAVO-1Ucm1mk8vLALV1kA_wrr1ctjTr6GqBuQqBdOALNuvq8AebqxiAezp7aIkseab-pvuPhnk8LA0iGMBc9N2eYZXDxTskRDC8psM8hiJg1SRvR2WrOeJ4MDXMGnk4Vqzi93ruxtfQTITU8UPOv4HsRyRXGMupAuZO4ldnkPyQf3ZeNURTMt85S8MjFfqFJ7t2ww7nRlJ8ob9ncc4ORRbjZmfu8Ktv-_bivfjc3SvWv8GDRliUDF_zEs8qlkvh1kMG10v2sLpbOkVnwqg_5il4vvm2mEx_4lJHTZwhPZ7vBGX1PWW-YGtWnzrBEhfDhWd4djKrLFLJVnLUDizsFfCQ_KGL8YDcOQxEM3Nioe7XLFLfNM1i02l_RM0Ry3OUzBWtB0uMjVUF7kILOKC4WGKvjVC3BPUtC1YNw/https%3A%2F%2Flinkedin%2Fin%2Fmhogstrom
 Twitter 
https://

Re: Use of zCX

[Phil Smith III]

The LINUX-390 list is also archived, of course:
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-390@vm.marist.edu/


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Ed Jaffe]

On 4/26/2022 5:05 AM, kekronbekron wrote:

ESG = ?



Environmental, Social and Governance issues...


--
Phoenix Software International
Edward E. Jaffe
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
https://www.phoenixsoftware.com/



This e-mail message, including any attachments, appended messages and the
information contained therein, is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient or have otherwise
received this email message in error, any use, dissemination, distribution,
review, storage or copying of this e-mail message and the information
contained therein is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended
recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies
of this email message and do not otherwise utilize or retain this email
message or any or all of the information contained therein. Although this
email message and any attachments or appended messages are believed to be
free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system into
which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient
to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by the
sender for any loss or damage arising in any way from its opening or use.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[kekronbekron]

Found it.

LINUX-390 discussion

Linux-390 focuses on Linux on IBM Z including Linux on z/VM. To subscribe to 
the LINUX-390 discussion, send an email to:
lists...@vm.marist.edu

In the body of the email, write the following line, substituting only your name:
SUBSCRIBE LINUX-390 firstname lastname

View and search the LINUX-390 discussion archives 
(http://www2.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?linux-390).

- KB

--- Original Message ---
On Tuesday, April 26th, 2022 at 8:49 PM, Michael Watkins 
<032966e74d0f-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:


> Does anyone have a URL for the LINUX-390 list?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU On Behalf Of 
> Kirk Wolf
>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 10:11 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Use of zCX
>
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Texas Comptroller's email 
> system.
> DO NOT click links or open attachments unless you expect them from the sender 
> and know the content is safe.
>
> Very good point.
> Phil - I haven't been subscribed for a year or two to linux-390 - are they 
> discussing arch=390x docker packages as needed for zCX as well? VM/Linux vs 
> zCX? I would assume yes to both.
>
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2022, at 10:07 AM, Phil Smith III wrote:
>
> > I'm compelled to note that all of the discussion of third-party
> > product availability, difficulty (or not) of porting, etc. has been
> > rehashed over the last 20 years on the LINUX-390 list. That doesn't
> > mean it's not a valid discussion, just that joining that list will
> > likely get more detailed answers.
> >
> > --
> > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send
> > email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
>
> Kirk Wolf
> Dovetailed Technologies
> https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdovetail.com%2F=05|01|michael.watkins%40CPA.TEXAS.GOV|9357a9407d7f43a4d39408da27971f94|2055feba299d4d0daa5a73b8b42fef08|0|0|637865827534086101|Unknown|TWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D|3000|||=L7bqJzoJVj6jRnbCeyFMxEz3Votf6UStcw4UfUFDdtY%3D=0
>
> --
> 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

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[kekronbekron]

Thanks, thought you were about to suggest I somehow time travel to get to it.
Will look up that list.

- KB

--- Original Message ---
On Tuesday, April 26th, 2022 at 8:37 PM, Phil Smith III  wrote:


> I'm compelled to note that all of the discussion of third-party product
> availability, difficulty (or not) of porting, etc. has been rehashed over
> the last 20 years on the LINUX-390 list. That doesn't mean it's not a valid
> discussion, just that joining that list will likely get more detailed
> answers.
>
>
> --
> 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: Use of zCX

[Michael Watkins]

Does anyone have a URL for the LINUX-390 list?

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Kirk Wolf
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 10:11 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Use of zCX

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Texas Comptroller's email 
system.
DO NOT click links or open attachments unless you expect them from the sender 
and know the content is safe.

Very good point.
Phil - I haven't been subscribed for a year or two to linux-390  - are they 
discussing arch=390x docker packages as needed for zCX as well?   VM/Linux vs  
zCX?   I would assume yes to both.

On Tue, Apr 26, 2022, at 10:07 AM, Phil Smith III wrote:
> I'm compelled to note that all of the discussion of third-party 
> product availability, difficulty (or not) of porting, etc. has been 
> rehashed over the last 20 years on the LINUX-390 list. That doesn't 
> mean it's not a valid discussion, just that joining that list will 
> likely get more detailed answers.
>
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send 
> email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

Kirk Wolf
Dovetailed Technologies
https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdovetail.com%2Fdata=05%7C01%7Cmichael.watkins%40CPA.TEXAS.GOV%7C9357a9407d7f43a4d39408da27971f94%7C2055feba299d4d0daa5a73b8b42fef08%7C0%7C0%7C637865827534086101%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7Csdata=L7bqJzoJVj6jRnbCeyFMxEz3Votf6UStcw4UfUFDdtY%3Dreserved=0

--
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: Use of zCX

[Kirk Wolf]

Very good point.
Phil - I haven't been subscribed for a year or two to linux-390  - are they 
discussing arch=390x docker packages as needed for zCX as well?   VM/Linux vs  
zCX?   I would assume yes to both.

On Tue, Apr 26, 2022, at 10:07 AM, Phil Smith III wrote:
> I'm compelled to note that all of the discussion of third-party product
> availability, difficulty (or not) of porting, etc. has been rehashed over
> the last 20 years on the LINUX-390 list. That doesn't mean it's not a valid
> discussion, just that joining that list will likely get more detailed
> answers.
> 
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> 

Kirk Wolf
Dovetailed Technologies
http://dovetail.com

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Phil Smith III]

I'm compelled to note that all of the discussion of third-party product
availability, difficulty (or not) of porting, etc. has been rehashed over
the last 20 years on the LINUX-390 list. That doesn't mean it's not a valid
discussion, just that joining that list will likely get more detailed
answers.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Seymour J Metz]

I mean "Are there current Z ports for those languages?".


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
kekronbekron [02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2022 11:19 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Use of zCX

Sorry, what do you mean?

- KB

--- Original Message ---
On Monday, April 25th, 2022 at 3:29 PM, Seymour J Metz  wrote:


> Icon? oorexx? Perl? Perl6 (Raku)?
>
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>
> 
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
> kekronbekron [02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
> Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2022 11:37 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Use of zCX
>
> Okay, maybe I'm mixing things up.
> So 'tainers are doable, assuming the program can first compile to s390x?
> What about code that does CPU instruction set specific things.
> How likely is the success of its compilation on s390x with minimal work.
> If it's "easy", why is the IBM Z and LinuxOne Open Source list not bigger - 
> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ibm.com%2Fcommunity%2Fz%2Fopen-source-software%2Fdata=05%7C01%7Csmetz3%40gmu.edu%7C4895635bc4f84c17577c08da27339c74%7C9e857255df574c47a0c00546460380cb%7C0%7C0%7C637865399868023883%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7Csdata=T9iby7JlClkVTybxiXBCI0VIrtkplMWIh1kLLeZXxCs%3Dreserved=0
>
> - KB
>
> --- Original Message ---
> On Monday, April 25th, 2022 at 7:41 AM, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com 
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 23/4/22 14:10, kekronbekron wrote:
> >
> > > > Building the s390x containers is straight forward.
> > > > Again, really? (honest question).
> > > > Are there any public examples for reference?
> > > > You know, small enough that it isn't 50 million lines of code or 
> > > > something.
> >
> > I don't want to speak for Matt but building docker images for a specific
> > architecture is trivial. To build a s390x container that includes native
> > binaries you just compile/link you programs and then build the docker
> > image scrom scratch and specify the --platform. See
> > https://secure-web.cisco.com/1RsVWbknHmIkB5knRo-X8Ne-wwMLqIvEZ8HugRK1pXz5Ylef966nE16O81t_PTZBA8VofMaJCFQRe-T54L4WVvCzGJPZWJtsqvefO4PGxVgReKWp_1yxu-NEsGD6fi4SfuVOk8Zmu-QeHOZnYqzJQJO4CcM_ECK9VDKssTGw4CY9oE1sdH_YX_gRbyKVQcH9rwXgq0ZuMlZXOKvgtf2AGqYewtLgack4HJSNMUjoR2r9smrlkqIcn62jby6kFS9Fjc-aHHycLBtcOn15_kQJ-RyPaUi1jhJ_7TztO4BhRh1GBimeHMc2V6Tc7trOeinXk_9mXkgPFneiOJr-6JBKMiTnnuK6kuMv3yQ_4d-3OAT8mVXWzW_1A_lRKPCAz7Srdzp2JRJnN_JtLEMAZIJ7cl8GiCkBOWrd9IM5LBGMUuDQ7g6RYOpO9ka4XwqO4GCok_DSE6dEZGNLzdDsP7pLQ-Q/https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.docker.com%2Fdesktop%2Fmulti-arch%2F.
> >
> > > - KB
> > >
> > > --- Original Message ---
> > > On Friday, April 22nd, 2022 at 9:49 PM, Matt Hogstrom m...@hogstrom.org 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > > On Apr 22, 2022, at 3:42 AM, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > If you already deliver container images that support your product 
> > > > > > that currently run outside z/OS, or if that’s what you plan to do, 
> > > > > > it’d be a great idea to add s390x compatibility to your container 
> > > > > > images so your customers have greater deployment flexibility. 
> > > > > > That’s usually quite easy to do.
> > > > > > Good advice. I would also add that if you are a vendor planning to 
> > > > > > deliver zCX container images then make sure you add other 
> > > > > > compatibilities just in case your customers don't run zCX. It could 
> > > > > > be a POC obstacle.
> > > >
> > > > Building the s390x containers is straight forward. It’s the POC 
> > > > challenge. It’s like showing up with SAE tools to work on a car that is 
> > > > metric. Not going to be very useful.
> > > >
> > > > Matt Hogstrom
> > > > m...@hogstrom.org
> > > > +1-919-656-0564
> > > > PGP Key: 0x90ECB270
> > > > Facebook 
> > > > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffacebook.com%2Fmatt.hogstromdata=05%7C01%7Csmetz3%40gmu.edu%7C4895635bc4f84c17577c08da27339c74%7C9e

Re: Use of zCX

[kekronbekron]

ESG = ?

- KB

--- Original Message ---
On Tuesday, April 26th, 2022 at 3:30 PM, Matt Hogstrom  
wrote:


> I did have an interesting conversation with a customer recently where given 
> ESG they wanted to move relevant workload to zLinux because the power / VM / 
> container ratio was lower than an x86 farm to lower their carbon footprint; 
> I’m not sure if this is an edge case or not.
>
> For many Z customers they do want their supporting software on their platform 
> to ensure that they have control over those services. Again, its a personal 
> choice. My strategy is to move all functions that do not need to run in z/OS 
> available in containers on any platform the customer chooses to optimize 
> their cost on Z.
>
> Exciting times.
>
> Matt Hogstrom
> PGP key 0F143BC1
>
> > On Apr 25, 2022, at 23:29, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > On 26/4/22 01:03, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> >
> > > > Given this constraint, we try to put CPU-intensive activities (such as 
> > > > code page conversion) on the faster-executing platforms.
> > > > and for that reason zCX is very important for ISVs because it does 
> > > > offload to Ziips, provides an open technology platform and for 
> > > > customers that do not have vZM or IFLs we can deliver software easier 
> > > > using a familiar CI/CVD pipeline.
> >
> > The elephant in the room is that almost all customers will have x86 
> > platforms available and it's trivial to stand up VMs using automation such 
> > as Red Hat Ansible. I suppose it comes down to politics again. The 
> > mainframe folks at some sites may be determined to run everything on z. 
> > That's not my experience with our customers who use our streaming products. 
> > They all run Splunk, Elastic, Kafka stacks on x86 and there's practically 
> > zero chance of them moving to z. I'm not knocking zCX. I think it's a great 
> > solution and can see a lot of use cases where it makes sense both 
> > technically and economically. I'm just highly dubious that running 
> > medium/large distributed software stacks is one of them.
> >
> > > Matt Hogstrom
> > > m...@hogstrom.org mailto:m...@hogstrom.org
> > >
> > > "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by 
> > > stupidity.” - Hanlon’s Razor
> > >
> > > > > On Apr 25, 2022, at 12:44 PM, Ed Jaffe edja...@phoenixsoftware.com 
> > > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The z/OS version is not zIIP-eligible and is therefore running on 
> > > > knee-capped CPs in our environment. When running on Linux for Z it runs 
> > > > on an IFL which is fast (and SMT-threaded). The Linux for x86 version 
> > > > is also fast (and hyper-threaded). Given this constraint, we try to put 
> > > > CPU-intensive activities (such as code page conversion) on the 
> > > > faster-executing platforms.
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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
>
>
> --
> 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: Use of zCX

[Matt Hogstrom]

I did have an interesting conversation with a customer recently where given ESG 
they wanted to move relevant workload to zLinux because the power / VM / 
container ratio was lower than an x86 farm to lower their carbon footprint; I’m 
not sure if this is an edge case or not.

For many Z customers they do want their supporting software on their platform 
to ensure that they have control over those services.  Again, its a personal 
choice.  My strategy is to move all functions that do not need to run in z/OS 
available in containers on any platform the customer chooses to optimize their 
cost on Z.   

Exciting times.

Matt Hogstrom
PGP key 0F143BC1

> On Apr 25, 2022, at 23:29, David Crayford  wrote:
> 
> On 26/4/22 01:03, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>>> Given this constraint, we try to put CPU-intensive activities (such as code 
>>> page conversion) on the faster-executing platforms.
>> and for that reason zCX is very important for ISVs because it does offload 
>> to Ziips, provides an open technology platform and for customers that do not 
>> have vZM or IFLs we can deliver software easier using a familiar CI/CVD 
>> pipeline.
> 
> The elephant in the room is that almost all customers will have x86 platforms 
> available and it's trivial to stand up VMs using automation such as Red Hat 
> Ansible. I suppose it comes down to politics again. The mainframe folks at 
> some sites may be determined to run everything on z. That's not my experience 
> with our customers who use our streaming products. They all run Splunk, 
> Elastic, Kafka stacks on x86 and there's practically zero chance of them 
> moving to z. I'm not knocking zCX. I think it's a great solution and can see 
> a lot of use cases where it makes sense both technically and economically. 
> I'm just highly dubious that running medium/large distributed software stacks 
> is one of them.
> 
> 
>> 
>> Matt Hogstrom
>> m...@hogstrom.org 
>> 
>> "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.” 
>> - Hanlon’s Razor
>> 
 On Apr 25, 2022, at 12:44 PM, Ed Jaffe  wrote:
>>> 
>>> The z/OS version is not zIIP-eligible and is therefore running on 
>>> knee-capped CPs in our environment. When running on Linux for Z it runs on 
>>> an IFL which is fast (and SMT-threaded). The Linux for x86 version is also 
>>> fast (and hyper-threaded). Given this constraint, we try to put 
>>> CPU-intensive activities (such as code page conversion) on the 
>>> faster-executing platforms.
>> 
>> --
>> 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

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Matt Hogstrom]

> On Apr 25, 2022, at 11:19 PM, kekronbekron 
> <02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> 
>> If it's "easy", why is the IBM Z and LinuxOne Open Source list not bigger
> 

A significant factor from my perspective is the lack of availability of IBM Z 
hardware to the broader community as well as not enough interest in the IBM Z 
community to participate and build them.   Ubiquity being the major issue.

Matt Hogstrom
m...@hogstrom.org

I’m reading a book on anti-gravity.
I can’t put it down.



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[David Crayford]

On 26/4/22 01:03, Matt Hogstrom wrote:

Given this constraint, we try to put CPU-intensive activities (such as code 
page conversion) on the faster-executing platforms.

and for that reason zCX is very important for ISVs because it does offload to 
Ziips, provides an open technology platform and for customers that do not have 
vZM or IFLs we can deliver software easier using a familiar CI/CVD pipeline.


The elephant in the room is that almost all customers will have x86 
platforms available and it's trivial to stand up VMs using automation 
such as Red Hat Ansible. I suppose it comes down to politics again. The 
mainframe folks at some sites may be determined to run everything on z. 
That's not my experience with our customers who use our streaming 
products. They all run Splunk, Elastic, Kafka stacks on x86 and there's 
practically zero chance of them moving to z. I'm not knocking zCX. I 
think it's a great solution and can see a lot of use cases where it 
makes sense both technically and economically. I'm just highly dubious 
that running medium/large distributed software stacks is one of them.





Matt Hogstrom
m...@hogstrom.org 

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.” - 
Hanlon’s Razor


On Apr 25, 2022, at 12:44 PM, Ed Jaffe  wrote:

The z/OS version is not zIIP-eligible and is therefore running on knee-capped 
CPs in our environment. When running on Linux for Z it runs on an IFL which is 
fast (and SMT-threaded). The Linux for x86 version is also fast (and 
hyper-threaded). Given this constraint, we try to put CPU-intensive activities 
(such as code page conversion) on the faster-executing platforms.


--
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: Use of zCX

[kekronbekron]

Sorry, what do you mean?

- KB

--- Original Message ---
On Monday, April 25th, 2022 at 3:29 PM, Seymour J Metz  wrote:


> Icon? oorexx? Perl? Perl6 (Raku)?
>
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>
> 
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
> kekronbekron [02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
> Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2022 11:37 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Use of zCX
>
> Okay, maybe I'm mixing things up.
> So 'tainers are doable, assuming the program can first compile to s390x?
> What about code that does CPU instruction set specific things.
> How likely is the success of its compilation on s390x with minimal work.
> If it's "easy", why is the IBM Z and LinuxOne Open Source list not bigger - 
> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ibm.com%2Fcommunity%2Fz%2Fopen-source-software%2F=05|01|smetz3%40gmu.edu|8b2de0c8570e4ddcacff08da266cfd5c|9e857255df574c47a0c00546460380cb|0|0|637864546814298225|Unknown|TWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D|3000|||=yVw4IrKPCuNz7xrmoiDAmfCzB1SomVnalwd9dhpl8TY%3D=0
>
> - KB
>
> --- Original Message ---
> On Monday, April 25th, 2022 at 7:41 AM, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com 
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 23/4/22 14:10, kekronbekron wrote:
> >
> > > > Building the s390x containers is straight forward.
> > > > Again, really? (honest question).
> > > > Are there any public examples for reference?
> > > > You know, small enough that it isn't 50 million lines of code or 
> > > > something.
> >
> > I don't want to speak for Matt but building docker images for a specific
> > architecture is trivial. To build a s390x container that includes native
> > binaries you just compile/link you programs and then build the docker
> > image scrom scratch and specify the --platform. See
> > https://secure-web.cisco.com/1RsVWbknHmIkB5knRo-X8Ne-wwMLqIvEZ8HugRK1pXz5Ylef966nE16O81t_PTZBA8VofMaJCFQRe-T54L4WVvCzGJPZWJtsqvefO4PGxVgReKWp_1yxu-NEsGD6fi4SfuVOk8Zmu-QeHOZnYqzJQJO4CcM_ECK9VDKssTGw4CY9oE1sdH_YX_gRbyKVQcH9rwXgq0ZuMlZXOKvgtf2AGqYewtLgack4HJSNMUjoR2r9smrlkqIcn62jby6kFS9Fjc-aHHycLBtcOn15_kQJ-RyPaUi1jhJ_7TztO4BhRh1GBimeHMc2V6Tc7trOeinXk_9mXkgPFneiOJr-6JBKMiTnnuK6kuMv3yQ_4d-3OAT8mVXWzW_1A_lRKPCAz7Srdzp2JRJnN_JtLEMAZIJ7cl8GiCkBOWrd9IM5LBGMUuDQ7g6RYOpO9ka4XwqO4GCok_DSE6dEZGNLzdDsP7pLQ-Q/https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.docker.com%2Fdesktop%2Fmulti-arch%2F.
> >
> > > - KB
> > >
> > > --- Original Message ---
> > > On Friday, April 22nd, 2022 at 9:49 PM, Matt Hogstrom m...@hogstrom.org 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > > On Apr 22, 2022, at 3:42 AM, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > If you already deliver container images that support your product 
> > > > > > that currently run outside z/OS, or if that’s what you plan to do, 
> > > > > > it’d be a great idea to add s390x compatibility to your container 
> > > > > > images so your customers have greater deployment flexibility. 
> > > > > > That’s usually quite easy to do.
> > > > > > Good advice. I would also add that if you are a vendor planning to 
> > > > > > deliver zCX container images then make sure you add other 
> > > > > > compatibilities just in case your customers don't run zCX. It could 
> > > > > > be a POC obstacle.
> > > >
> > > > Building the s390x containers is straight forward. It’s the POC 
> > > > challenge. It’s like showing up with SAE tools to work on a car that is 
> > > > metric. Not going to be very useful.
> > > >
> > > > Matt Hogstrom
> > > > m...@hogstrom.org
> > > > +1-919-656-0564
> > > > PGP Key: 0x90ECB270
> > > > Facebook 
> > > > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffacebook.com%2Fmatt.hogstrom=05|01|smetz3%40gmu.edu|8b2de0c8570e4ddcacff08da266cfd5c|9e857255df574c47a0c00546460380cb|0|0|637864546814298225|Unknown|TWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D|3000|||=unm7d4SQ%2FYmEiEF4QBflWFtJDmalRXPaKNvgP7yKYPk%3D=0
> > > >  LinkedIn 
> > > > https://secure-web.cisco.com/19EIjF3gPAVO-1Ucm1mk8vLALV1kA_wrr1ctjTr6GqBuQqBdOALNuvq8Aebqxi

Re: Use of zCX

[Matt Hogstrom]

> Given this constraint, we try to put CPU-intensive activities (such as code 
> page conversion) on the faster-executing platforms.

and for that reason zCX is very important for ISVs because it does offload to 
Ziips, provides an open technology platform and for customers that do not have 
vZM or IFLs we can deliver software easier using a familiar CI/CVD pipeline.  

Matt Hogstrom
m...@hogstrom.org 

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.” - 
Hanlon’s Razor

> On Apr 25, 2022, at 12:44 PM, Ed Jaffe  wrote:
> 
> The z/OS version is not zIIP-eligible and is therefore running on knee-capped 
> CPs in our environment. When running on Linux for Z it runs on an IFL which 
> is fast (and SMT-threaded). The Linux for x86 version is also fast (and 
> hyper-threaded). Given this constraint, we try to put CPU-intensive 
> activities (such as code page conversion) on the faster-executing platforms.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Ed Jaffe]

On 4/25/2022 6:29 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:

Kirk, IIRC Node.js was one such technology.  I don’t have a lot of familiarity 
on the tech but from what I remember it was not possible to “port” the engine 
because it directly generated x86 instructions (I was told) so it basically 
compiled the code to x86.  IBM had a challenge getting it on z/OS because of 
this.  Given there is now ARM, x86, s390x I presume that the architecture has 
changed, but like I said, my information was from the sidelines.  That is not 
an easy port.


IBM did a GREAT job with the heavy lifting for node.js!

Much of our back-office infrastructure supporting our web pages and 
secure portal is written in node.js. The same programmer can write 
node.js targeted for Linux on x86, Linux for Z, and z/OS. There is no 
difference in how it's programmed, but there is a difference how it 
performs.


The z/OS version is not zIIP-eligible and is therefore running on 
knee-capped CPs in our environment. When running on Linux for Z it runs 
on an IFL which is fast (and SMT-threaded). The Linux for x86 version is 
also fast (and hyper-threaded). Given this constraint, we try to put 
CPU-intensive activities (such as code page conversion) on the 
faster-executing platforms.



--
Phoenix Software International
Edward E. Jaffe
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
https://www.phoenixsoftware.com/



This e-mail message, including any attachments, appended messages and the
information contained therein, is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient or have otherwise
received this email message in error, any use, dissemination, distribution,
review, storage or copying of this e-mail message and the information
contained therein is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended
recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies
of this email message and do not otherwise utilize or retain this email
message or any or all of the information contained therein. Although this
email message and any attachments or appended messages are believed to be
free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system into
which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient
to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by the
sender for any loss or damage arising in any way from its opening or use.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Neale Ferguson]

There are a ton at https://hub.docker.com/u/clefos


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Matt Hogstrom]

Kirk, IIRC Node.js was one such technology.  I don’t have a lot of familiarity 
on the tech but from what I remember it was not possible to “port” the engine 
because it directly generated x86 instructions (I was told) so it basically 
compiled the code to x86.  IBM had a challenge getting it on z/OS because of 
this.  Given there is now ARM, x86, s390x I presume that the architecture has 
changed, but like I said, my information was from the sidelines.  That is not 
an easy port.

Matt Hogstrom
m...@hogstrom.org

How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg?  Four. 
Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.
- Abraham Lincoln

> On Apr 25, 2022, at 9:08 AM, Kirk Wolf  wrote:
> 
> It's pretty good  (s390x linux software), but it seems to me that this is not 
> without some friction:
> 
> - OSS sometimes has compile paths that take advantage of x86 instructions for 
> optimization, e.g. SSE.  Nearly all of the time there is a C path, but that 
> doesn't mean that the code will perform well in all cases.
> 
> - pre-built repositories/packages/container images for arch=s390x are often 
> harder to find other than the main distro stuff.   Maybe this is getting 
> better; my experience with it is not totally current.
> 
> - will vendors with proprietary closed source software support arc=s390x 
> packages (and for zCX, container images)?  Many, but certainly not all.
> 
> 
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2022, at 12:11 AM, David Crayford wrote:
>> On 25/4/22 11:37, kekronbekron wrote:
>>> What about code that does CPU instruction set specific things.
>>> How likely is the success of its compilation on s390x with minimal work.
>> 
>> About 100% likely. Linux is Linux is Linux. IBM have ported all the 
>> compiler tool-chains such a GCC, LLVM/Clang etc. In the case of LLVM, 
>> it's used to build other compilers and runtimes such as Rust, Swift, 
>> Golang etc. You can cross-compile if you don't have access to Linux on Z 
>> but then you wouldn't have tested it :)
>> 
>> 
>>> If it's "easy", why is the IBM Z and LinuxOne Open Source list not bigger 
>>> -https://www.ibm.com/community/z/open-source-software/
>> 
>> I have no doubt there's a lot more available then what's listed in that 
>> community. It's awesome that IBM have ported LuaJIT to s390x. It should 
>> be possible to port that to z/OS and then OpenResty and Kong. 
>> https://github.com/linux-on-ibm-z/LuaJIT/blob/v2.1/src/vm_s390x.dasc
>> 
>> --
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>> 
> 
> Kirk Wolf
> Dovetailed Technologies
> http://dovetail.com
> 
> --
> 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: Use of zCX

[Kirk Wolf]

It's pretty good  (s390x linux software), but it seems to me that this is not 
without some friction:

- OSS sometimes has compile paths that take advantage of x86 instructions for 
optimization, e.g. SSE.  Nearly all of the time there is a C path, but that 
doesn't mean that the code will perform well in all cases.

- pre-built repositories/packages/container images for arch=s390x are often 
harder to find other than the main distro stuff.   Maybe this is getting 
better; my experience with it is not totally current.

- will vendors with proprietary closed source software support arc=s390x 
packages (and for zCX, container images)?  Many, but certainly not all.


On Mon, Apr 25, 2022, at 12:11 AM, David Crayford wrote:
> On 25/4/22 11:37, kekronbekron wrote:
> > What about code that does CPU instruction set specific things.
> > How likely is the success of its compilation on s390x with minimal work.
> 
> About 100% likely. Linux is Linux is Linux. IBM have ported all the 
> compiler tool-chains such a GCC, LLVM/Clang etc. In the case of LLVM, 
> it's used to build other compilers and runtimes such as Rust, Swift, 
> Golang etc. You can cross-compile if you don't have access to Linux on Z 
> but then you wouldn't have tested it :)
> 
> 
> > If it's "easy", why is the IBM Z and LinuxOne Open Source list not bigger 
> > -https://www.ibm.com/community/z/open-source-software/
> 
> I have no doubt there's a lot more available then what's listed in that 
> community. It's awesome that IBM have ported LuaJIT to s390x. It should 
> be possible to port that to z/OS and then OpenResty and Kong. 
> https://github.com/linux-on-ibm-z/LuaJIT/blob/v2.1/src/vm_s390x.dasc
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> 

Kirk Wolf
Dovetailed Technologies
http://dovetail.com

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Matt Hogstrom]

I would mention as well that cross compiling from an x86 to generate s390x also 
works well.  Today I use a MacBook Pro with the M1xPro (ARM) processor.  The 
days of heavy porting are in almost every case I’ve seen a compile away and not 
a “porting” exercise.

Matt Hogstrom
m...@hogstrom.org


Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

— Dylan Thomas, “Do not go gentle into that good night"

> On Apr 25, 2022, at 1:11 AM, David Crayford  wrote:
> 
> On 25/4/22 11:37, kekronbekron wrote:
>> What about code that does CPU instruction set specific things.
>> How likely is the success of its compilation on s390x with minimal work.
> 
> About 100% likely. Linux is Linux is Linux. IBM have ported all the compiler 
> tool-chains such a GCC, LLVM/Clang etc. In the case of LLVM, it's used to 
> build other compilers and runtimes such as Rust, Swift, Golang etc. You can 
> cross-compile if you don't have access to Linux on Z but then you wouldn't 
> have tested it :)
> 
> 
>> If it's "easy", why is the IBM Z and LinuxOne Open Source list not bigger 
>> -https://www.ibm.com/community/z/open-source-software/
> 
> I have no doubt there's a lot more available then what's listed in that 
> community. It's awesome that IBM have ported LuaJIT to s390x. It should be 
> possible to port that to z/OS and then OpenResty and Kong. 
> https://github.com/linux-on-ibm-z/LuaJIT/blob/v2.1/src/vm_s390x.dasc
> 
> --
> 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: Use of zCX

[Matt Hogstrom]

Matt agrees with you David.  The only issue I’ve run into is sourcing some of 
the other software in a precompiled form.  That said, Postgres for example, was 
strightforward to grab the source, build and package.  Linux is what we had 
hoped back in the 90’s that Open Edition would have been :) 

Matt Hogstrom
m...@hogstrom.org


"I no longer wish to belong to the kind of club that accepts people like me as 
members."
- Groucho Marx

> On Apr 24, 2022, at 10:11 PM, David Crayford  wrote:
> 
> On 23/4/22 14:10, kekronbekron wrote:
>>> Building the s390x containers is straight forward.
>> Again, really? (honest question).
>> Are there any public examples for reference?
>> You know, small enough that it isn't 50 million lines of code or something.
> 
> I don't want to speak for Matt but building docker images for a specific 
> architecture is trivial. To build a s390x container that includes native 
> binaries you just compile/link you programs and then build the docker image 
> scrom scratch and specify the --platform. See 
> https://docs.docker.com/desktop/multi-arch/.
> 
> 
>> 
>> - KB
>> 
>> --- Original Message ---
>> On Friday, April 22nd, 2022 at 9:49 PM, Matt Hogstrom  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
 On Apr 22, 2022, at 3:42 AM, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com wrote:
 
> If you already deliver container images that support your product that 
> currently run outside z/OS, or if that’s what you plan to do, it’d be a 
> great idea to add s390x compatibility to your container images so your 
> customers have greater deployment flexibility. That’s usually quite easy 
> to do.
 Good advice. I would also add that if you are a vendor planning to deliver 
 zCX container images then make sure you add other compatibilities just in 
 case your customers don't run zCX. It could be a POC obstacle.
>>> 
>>> Building the s390x containers is straight forward. It’s the POC challenge. 
>>> It’s like showing up with SAE tools to work on a car that is metric. Not 
>>> going to be very useful.
>>> 
>>> Matt Hogstrom
>>> m...@hogstrom.org
>>> +1-919-656-0564
>>> PGP Key: 0x90ECB270
>>> Facebook https://facebook.com/matt.hogstrom LinkedIn 
>>> https://linkedin/in/mhogstrom Twitter https://twitter.com/hogstrom
>>> 
>>> 
>>> “It may be cognitive, but, it ain’t intuitive."
>>> — Hogstrom
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> 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
> 
> --
> 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: Use of zCX

[Dave Jones]

ooRexx for sure.
DJ

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Seymour J Metz]

Icon? oorexx? Perl? Perl6 (Raku)?


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
kekronbekron [02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2022 11:37 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Use of zCX

Okay, maybe I'm mixing things up.
So 'tainers are doable, assuming the program can first compile to s390x?
What about code that does CPU instruction set specific things.
How likely is the success of its compilation on s390x with minimal work.
If it's "easy", why is the IBM Z and LinuxOne Open Source list not bigger - 
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ibm.com%2Fcommunity%2Fz%2Fopen-source-software%2Fdata=05%7C01%7Csmetz3%40gmu.edu%7C8b2de0c8570e4ddcacff08da266cfd5c%7C9e857255df574c47a0c00546460380cb%7C0%7C0%7C637864546814298225%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7Csdata=yVw4IrKPCuNz7xrmoiDAmfCzB1SomVnalwd9dhpl8TY%3Dreserved=0

- KB

--- Original Message ---
On Monday, April 25th, 2022 at 7:41 AM, David Crayford  
wrote:


> On 23/4/22 14:10, kekronbekron wrote:
>
> > > Building the s390x containers is straight forward.
> > > Again, really? (honest question).
> > > Are there any public examples for reference?
> > > You know, small enough that it isn't 50 million lines of code or 
> > > something.
>
>
> I don't want to speak for Matt but building docker images for a specific
> architecture is trivial. To build a s390x container that includes native
> binaries you just compile/link you programs and then build the docker
> image scrom scratch and specify the --platform. See
> https://secure-web.cisco.com/1RsVWbknHmIkB5knRo-X8Ne-wwMLqIvEZ8HugRK1pXz5Ylef966nE16O81t_PTZBA8VofMaJCFQRe-T54L4WVvCzGJPZWJtsqvefO4PGxVgReKWp_1yxu-NEsGD6fi4SfuVOk8Zmu-QeHOZnYqzJQJO4CcM_ECK9VDKssTGw4CY9oE1sdH_YX_gRbyKVQcH9rwXgq0ZuMlZXOKvgtf2AGqYewtLgack4HJSNMUjoR2r9smrlkqIcn62jby6kFS9Fjc-aHHycLBtcOn15_kQJ-RyPaUi1jhJ_7TztO4BhRh1GBimeHMc2V6Tc7trOeinXk_9mXkgPFneiOJr-6JBKMiTnnuK6kuMv3yQ_4d-3OAT8mVXWzW_1A_lRKPCAz7Srdzp2JRJnN_JtLEMAZIJ7cl8GiCkBOWrd9IM5LBGMUuDQ7g6RYOpO9ka4XwqO4GCok_DSE6dEZGNLzdDsP7pLQ-Q/https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.docker.com%2Fdesktop%2Fmulti-arch%2F.
>
> > - KB
> >
> > --- Original Message ---
> > On Friday, April 22nd, 2022 at 9:49 PM, Matt Hogstrom m...@hogstrom.org 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > > On Apr 22, 2022, at 3:42 AM, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > If you already deliver container images that support your product 
> > > > > that currently run outside z/OS, or if that’s what you plan to do, 
> > > > > it’d be a great idea to add s390x compatibility to your container 
> > > > > images so your customers have greater deployment flexibility. That’s 
> > > > > usually quite easy to do.
> > > > > Good advice. I would also add that if you are a vendor planning to 
> > > > > deliver zCX container images then make sure you add other 
> > > > > compatibilities just in case your customers don't run zCX. It could 
> > > > > be a POC obstacle.
> > >
> > > Building the s390x containers is straight forward. It’s the POC 
> > > challenge. It’s like showing up with SAE tools to work on a car that is 
> > > metric. Not going to be very useful.
> > >
> > > Matt Hogstrom
> > > m...@hogstrom.org
> > > +1-919-656-0564
> > > PGP Key: 0x90ECB270
> > > Facebook 
> > > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffacebook.com%2Fmatt.hogstromdata=05%7C01%7Csmetz3%40gmu.edu%7C8b2de0c8570e4ddcacff08da266cfd5c%7C9e857255df574c47a0c00546460380cb%7C0%7C0%7C637864546814298225%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7Csdata=unm7d4SQ%2FYmEiEF4QBflWFtJDmalRXPaKNvgP7yKYPk%3Dreserved=0
> > >  LinkedIn 
> > > https://secure-web.cisco.com/19EIjF3gPAVO-1Ucm1mk8vLALV1kA_wrr1ctjTr6GqBuQqBdOALNuvq8AebqxiAezp7aIkseab-pvuPhnk8LA0iGMBc9N2eYZXDxTskRDC8psM8hiJg1SRvR2WrOeJ4MDXMGnk4Vqzi93ruxtfQTITU8UPOv4HsRyRXGMupAuZO4ldnkPyQf3ZeNURTMt85S8MjFfqFJ7t2ww7nRlJ8ob9ncc4ORRbjZmfu8Ktv-_bivfjc3SvWv8GDRliUDF_zEs8qlkvh1kMG10v2sLpbOkVnwqg_5il4vvm2mEx_4lJHTZwhPZ7vBGX1PWW-YGtWnzrBEhfDhWd4djKrLFLJVnLUDizsFfCQ_KGL8YDcOQxEM3Nioe7XLFLfNM1i02l_RM0Ry3OUzBWtB0uMjVUF7kILOKC4WGKvjVC3BPUtC1YNw/https%3A%2F%2Flinkedin%2Fin%2Fmhogstrom
> > >  Twitter 
> > > https://secure-web.cisco.com/1rYiRmhHGTzOyNlSY2c1_pJGalPZJup71QiMAOlExw8ZWgNCKwYDFFstu54a9U2Ce7SHJAFa9ZLPBnHrt-LGGSbYMnGlEOFxH4nNUjzkAthim8emWsSkEJsYIBITZhNmN

Re: Use of zCX

[David Crayford]

On 25/4/22 11:37, kekronbekron wrote:

What about code that does CPU instruction set specific things.
How likely is the success of its compilation on s390x with minimal work.


About 100% likely. Linux is Linux is Linux. IBM have ported all the 
compiler tool-chains such a GCC, LLVM/Clang etc. In the case of LLVM, 
it's used to build other compilers and runtimes such as Rust, Swift, 
Golang etc. You can cross-compile if you don't have access to Linux on Z 
but then you wouldn't have tested it :)




If it's "easy", why is the IBM Z and LinuxOne Open Source list not bigger 
-https://www.ibm.com/community/z/open-source-software/


I have no doubt there's a lot more available then what's listed in that 
community. It's awesome that IBM have ported LuaJIT to s390x. It should 
be possible to port that to z/OS and then OpenResty and Kong. 
https://github.com/linux-on-ibm-z/LuaJIT/blob/v2.1/src/vm_s390x.dasc


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[kekronbekron]

Okay, maybe I'm mixing things up.
So 'tainers are doable, assuming the program can first compile to s390x?
What about code that does CPU instruction set specific things.
How likely is the success of its compilation on s390x with minimal work.
If it's "easy", why is the IBM Z and LinuxOne Open Source list not bigger - 
https://www.ibm.com/community/z/open-source-software/

- KB

--- Original Message ---
On Monday, April 25th, 2022 at 7:41 AM, David Crayford  
wrote:


> On 23/4/22 14:10, kekronbekron wrote:
>
> > > Building the s390x containers is straight forward.
> > > Again, really? (honest question).
> > > Are there any public examples for reference?
> > > You know, small enough that it isn't 50 million lines of code or 
> > > something.
>
>
> I don't want to speak for Matt but building docker images for a specific
> architecture is trivial. To build a s390x container that includes native
> binaries you just compile/link you programs and then build the docker
> image scrom scratch and specify the --platform. See
> https://docs.docker.com/desktop/multi-arch/.
>
> > - KB
> >
> > --- Original Message ---
> > On Friday, April 22nd, 2022 at 9:49 PM, Matt Hogstrom m...@hogstrom.org 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > > On Apr 22, 2022, at 3:42 AM, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > If you already deliver container images that support your product 
> > > > > that currently run outside z/OS, or if that’s what you plan to do, 
> > > > > it’d be a great idea to add s390x compatibility to your container 
> > > > > images so your customers have greater deployment flexibility. That’s 
> > > > > usually quite easy to do.
> > > > > Good advice. I would also add that if you are a vendor planning to 
> > > > > deliver zCX container images then make sure you add other 
> > > > > compatibilities just in case your customers don't run zCX. It could 
> > > > > be a POC obstacle.
> > >
> > > Building the s390x containers is straight forward. It’s the POC 
> > > challenge. It’s like showing up with SAE tools to work on a car that is 
> > > metric. Not going to be very useful.
> > >
> > > Matt Hogstrom
> > > m...@hogstrom.org
> > > +1-919-656-0564
> > > PGP Key: 0x90ECB270
> > > Facebook https://facebook.com/matt.hogstrom LinkedIn 
> > > https://linkedin/in/mhogstrom Twitter https://twitter.com/hogstrom
> > >
> > > “It may be cognitive, but, it ain’t intuitive."
> > > — Hogstrom
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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
>
>
> --
> 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: Use of zCX

[David Crayford]

On 23/4/22 14:10, kekronbekron wrote:

Building the s390x containers is straight forward.

Again, really? (honest question).
Are there any public examples for reference?
You know, small enough that it isn't 50 million lines of code or something.


I don't want to speak for Matt but building docker images for a specific 
architecture is trivial. To build a s390x container that includes native 
binaries you just compile/link you programs and then build the docker 
image scrom scratch and specify the --platform. See 
https://docs.docker.com/desktop/multi-arch/.





- KB

--- Original Message ---
On Friday, April 22nd, 2022 at 9:49 PM, Matt Hogstrom  wrote:



On Apr 22, 2022, at 3:42 AM, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com wrote:


If you already deliver container images that support your product that 
currently run outside z/OS, or if that’s what you plan to do, it’d be a great 
idea to add s390x compatibility to your container images so your customers have 
greater deployment flexibility. That’s usually quite easy to do.

Good advice. I would also add that if you are a vendor planning to deliver zCX 
container images then make sure you add other compatibilities just in case your 
customers don't run zCX. It could be a POC obstacle.


Building the s390x containers is straight forward. It’s the POC challenge. It’s 
like showing up with SAE tools to work on a car that is metric. Not going to be 
very useful.

Matt Hogstrom
m...@hogstrom.org
+1-919-656-0564
PGP Key: 0x90ECB270
Facebook https://facebook.com/matt.hogstrom LinkedIn 
https://linkedin/in/mhogstrom Twitter https://twitter.com/hogstrom


“It may be cognitive, but, it ain’t intuitive."
— Hogstrom



--
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


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[David Crayford]

On 23/4/22 14:04, kekronbekron wrote:

If you want to run Linux you can buy a 2 socket, 128 core enterprise x86 server 
with 200TB of disk for less then a single zIIP.

This is the kind of nibble I like the most.
Thank you for this example!


zCX certainly has it's uses. For production middleware such as MQ 
running zCX on z/OS for the concentrator makes perfect sense and will 
save customers money. For the kind of applications I use Linux for such 
as Elastic stacks, Kafka and other distributed software which are 
designed to be scaled out I'm skeptical if zCX is a good fit. I'm happy 
to be proved wrong.





- KB
--- Original Message ---
On Friday, April 22nd, 2022 at 6:32 AM, David Crayford  
wrote:



On 22/4/22 03:35, Charles Mills wrote:


I am not a "corporate shop" guy but apparently "put up a VM LPAR" is a huge political 
leap for many z/OS shops. The idea is facilitating "if we could just get one instance of Linux up under 
z/OS we could show that to senior management and take it from there." Hence zCX.


Right, but zCX is not free. You have to pay a hardware license fee plus
assign zIIP, disk and storage resources. If you want to run Linux you
can buy a 2 socket, 128 core enterprise x86 server with 200TB of disk
for less then a single zIIP. 400Gbs ethernet is available in most data
centers now. Maybe that's the political leap. z/OS guys want to run
Linux on z Hardware because they own it. Most companies have
provisioning systems like Ansible where you can easily spin up a few
linux VMs.

Who remembers zBX? That died a death pretty quickly.


Charles

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Dave Jones
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2022 10:55 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Use of zCX

I agree with Robert's objections to zCX, and, frankly, If all a site wants to 
do is run zLinux applications on an IBM z system, it is much simpler (and 
perhaps cheaper) to just install z/VM on the box and then host as many Linux 
guests as you want. No extra external tooling is needed; just use out of the 
box management apps that are already available. Plus, the system programmers 
have much greater and finer, control over the hardware resources (memory, CPU, 
etc.) each zLinux guest is allowed to consume. And of course, z/VM and zLinux 
run very well on the full speed IFL engines, no other specialty engines 
required. Connect the z/VM and z/OS LPARs together by hyper-sockets and you're 
good to go.
If I was an z/OS shop looking towards Linux, that's how I would proceed.
Thought and comments always welcome.
DJ

--
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


--
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


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[kekronbekron]

> Building the s390x containers is straight forward.

Again, really? (honest question).
Are there any public examples for reference?
You know, small enough that it isn't 50 million lines of code or something.

- KB

--- Original Message ---
On Friday, April 22nd, 2022 at 9:49 PM, Matt Hogstrom  wrote:


> > On Apr 22, 2022, at 3:42 AM, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > If you already deliver container images that support your product that 
> > > currently run outside z/OS, or if that’s what you plan to do, it’d be a 
> > > great idea to add s390x compatibility to your container images so your 
> > > customers have greater deployment flexibility. That’s usually quite easy 
> > > to do.
> >
> > Good advice. I would also add that if you are a vendor planning to deliver 
> > zCX container images then make sure you add other compatibilities just in 
> > case your customers don't run zCX. It could be a POC obstacle.
>
>
> Building the s390x containers is straight forward. It’s the POC challenge. 
> It’s like showing up with SAE tools to work on a car that is metric. Not 
> going to be very useful.
>
> Matt Hogstrom
> m...@hogstrom.org
> +1-919-656-0564
> PGP Key: 0x90ECB270
> Facebook https://facebook.com/matt.hogstrom LinkedIn 
> https://linkedin/in/mhogstrom Twitter https://twitter.com/hogstrom
>
>
> “It may be cognitive, but, it ain’t intuitive."
> — Hogstrom
>
>
>
> --
> 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: Use of zCX

[kekronbekron]

> If you already deliver container images that support your product that 
> currently run outside z/OS, or if that’s what you plan to do, it’d be a great 
> idea to add s390x compatibility to your container images so your customers 
> have greater deployment flexibility. That’s usually quite easy to do.

Honest question... adding s390x target is easy?
Say if there are a bunch of open source projects that build to x86_64, arm64, 
etc.
Can a shop that runs zLinux themselves add compat for s390x, for the 
projects/containers they're looking at?

- KB

--- Original Message ---
On Friday, April 22nd, 2022 at 11:13 AM, Timothy Sipples  
wrote:


> David Crayford wrote:
>
> > Right, but zCX is not free.
>
>
> Actually it’s no additional charge for 90 days. However, “it’s not free” is 
> not a meaningful argument. It’s never free to run applications in an 
> enterprise context at least. What matters is whether there’s sufficient or 
> better value-for-money compared to next best alternatives. “Money” here also 
> includes labor inputs and the many other cost-related ingredients.
>
> > You have to pay a hardware license fee...
>
>
> No, you don’t. On IBM z14 and IBM z15 machines you have the option to order 
> Feature Code 0104, and then there’s no additional software charge for/with 
> z/OS. Or you can choose the IBM Container Hosting Foundation for z/OS 
> (5655-HZ1), a monthly charge software element. On IBM z16 machines there’s no 
> Feature Code 0104, so you would choose the IBM Container Hosting Foundation 
> for z/OS. For this 5655-HZ1 software element there’s a further choice of flat 
> or tiered pricing. And you can change your mind. For example, you can start 
> on tiered then switch to flat or vice versa. Obviously you should compare 
> (and perhaps periodically re-compare) flat and tiered then pick the lower 
> price.
>
> Another option is the IBM zCX Foundation for Red Hat OpenShift (5655-ZCX). 
> This IBM Program Number has zero license charge but chargeable annual 
> Subscription & Support. Loosely speaking you can think of this product as 
> “Yearly License Charge” (YLC), akin to MLC but 12 months at a time. This 
> product does not require either Feature Code 0104 or 5655-HZ1. As its name 
> indicates this product provides Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform on z/OS, 
> delivered and supported by IBM.
>
> In case anyone is wondering, IBM plans to continue offering, developing, and 
> supporting both the z/OS Container Extensions and IBM zCX Foundation for Red 
> Hat OpenShift. You can choose either or even both. One is not a replacement 
> for the other. If you’d like a Red Hat analogy, the z/OS Container Extensions 
> are analogous to Podman, and of course the IBM zCX Foundation for Red Hat 
> OpenShift is Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform.
>
> If you’re a software vendor/solution provider, and if you deliver Docker/OCI 
> container images as part of your solution, either the z/OS Container 
> Extensions or the IBM zCX Foundation for Red Hat OpenShift should support 
> your software. The container images need to be either s390x single 
> architecture or multi-architecture with s390x compatibility. If your 
> container image runs on Linux on IBM Z/LinuxONE (on Podman as a notable 
> example) or on IBM Cloud Hyper Protect Virtual Servers then it will be fine 
> on z/OS in either of the container runtimes as long as there are no 
> unsatisfied external dependencies. If you notice anything unusual that 
> contradicts what I just wrote, please let IBM know so IBM can (most probably) 
> fix it. If you already deliver container images that support your product 
> that currently run outside z/OS, or if that’s what you plan to do, it’d be a 
> great idea to add s390x compatibility to your container images so your 
> customers have greater deployment flexibility. That’s usually quite easy to 
> do.
>
> Please note that Feature Codes 0103 and 0104 are NOT carry forward feature 
> codes. Obviously they don’t carry forward to IBM z16 (since they don’t exist 
> on that model), but they also did not/do not carry forward from IBM z14 to 
> z15.
>
> > ...plus assign zIIP, disk and storage resources.
>
>
> You’re not strictly required to have or use zIIPs, but IBM recommends at 
> least one for zCX.
>
> As a periodic reminder, my views are my own. Always rely first on official 
> IBM publications and statements if you want to know what’s official.
>
> — — — — —
> Timothy Sipples
> Senior Architect
> Digital Assets, Industry Solutions, and Cyber Security
> IBM zSystems and LinuxONE
> 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

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: 

Re: Use of zCX

[kekronbekron]

> If you want to run Linux you can buy a 2 socket, 128 core enterprise x86 
> server with 200TB of disk for less then a single zIIP.

This is the kind of nibble I like the most.
Thank you for this example!

- KB
--- Original Message ---
On Friday, April 22nd, 2022 at 6:32 AM, David Crayford  
wrote:


> On 22/4/22 03:35, Charles Mills wrote:
>
> > I am not a "corporate shop" guy but apparently "put up a VM LPAR" is a huge 
> > political leap for many z/OS shops. The idea is facilitating "if we could 
> > just get one instance of Linux up under z/OS we could show that to senior 
> > management and take it from there." Hence zCX.
>
>
> Right, but zCX is not free. You have to pay a hardware license fee plus
> assign zIIP, disk and storage resources. If you want to run Linux you
> can buy a 2 socket, 128 core enterprise x86 server with 200TB of disk
> for less then a single zIIP. 400Gbs ethernet is available in most data
> centers now. Maybe that's the political leap. z/OS guys want to run
> Linux on z Hardware because they own it. Most companies have
> provisioning systems like Ansible where you can easily spin up a few
> linux VMs.
>
> Who remembers zBX? That died a death pretty quickly.
>
> > Charles
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
> > Behalf Of Dave Jones
> > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2022 10:55 AM
> > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> > Subject: Re: Use of zCX
> >
> > I agree with Robert's objections to zCX, and, frankly, If all a site wants 
> > to do is run zLinux applications on an IBM z system, it is much simpler 
> > (and perhaps cheaper) to just install z/VM on the box and then host as many 
> > Linux guests as you want. No extra external tooling is needed; just use out 
> > of the box management apps that are already available. Plus, the system 
> > programmers have much greater and finer, control over the hardware 
> > resources (memory, CPU, etc.) each zLinux guest is allowed to consume. And 
> > of course, z/VM and zLinux run very well on the full speed IFL engines, no 
> > other specialty engines required. Connect the z/VM and z/OS LPARs together 
> > by hyper-sockets and you're good to go.
> > If I was an z/OS shop looking towards Linux, that's how I would proceed.
> > Thought and comments always welcome.
> > DJ
> >
> > --
> > 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
>
>
> --
> 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: Use of zCX

[David Crayford]

On 23/4/22 06:00, Phil Smith III wrote:

David Crayford wrote:


Don't mean to put you on the spot Phil, but can you elaborate? Is there
a big drop off in Linux on Z users? Did the poster children move to x86
systems?
  


Well, the several examples I can think of moved the workload elsewhere,
presumably to x86. I hate to be negative about Linux on Z because I was at
Linuxcare for five years doing Linux deployment on Z and thought it was a
great platorm. But I fear that the hype was too great, such that folks
jumped in too deep and then said "U". I'm really not sure.


I can remember the hype. IBM were making ludicrous claims about spinning 
up 40k Linux VMs on z/VM. At the time most of the hype was centered 
around x86 server consolidation. I can also remember reading an article 
suggesting that Googles core systems could run on z :) All of that was 
completely debunked when I attended a SHARE presentation about lessons 
learned from migrating to Linux on Z. There were a good few battle 
stories and it was refreshing to hear a real world experience. I think 
the presenter was Mike Shorkend, who frequents this forum. IIRC, the 
migration was successful but not without quite a few surprises. What 
fascinated me the most was the work that went in to the TCO analysis.



  


I'm not sure IBM helped with the LinuxONE thing, because that made it seem
different, not "Just Linux, but with mainframe scaling etc."

  


It's not dead by any means-linux-...@vm.marist.edu
  is alive and well-it's just not the
obvious growth area that it seemed like 15 years ago. Acourse I'm not what I
was 15 years ago either!

  

  



--
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: Use of zCX

[David Crayford]

On 23/4/22 00:19, Matt Hogstrom wrote:

On Apr 22, 2022, at 3:42 AM, David Crayford  wrote:


If you already deliver container images that support your product that 
currently run outside z/OS, or if that’s what you plan to do, it’d be a great 
idea to add s390x compatibility to your container images so your customers have 
greater deployment flexibility. That’s usually quite easy to do.

Good advice. I would also add that if you are a vendor planning to deliver zCX 
container images then make sure you add other compatibilities just in case your 
customers don't run zCX. It could be a POC obstacle.

Building the s390x containers is straight forward.  It’s the POC challenge.  
It’s like showing up with SAE tools to work on a car that is metric.  Not going 
to be very useful.


Couldn't agree more. There is a lot of excitement about zCX but you 
can't hang your hat on it. If you do, you may not have a viable product.





Matt Hogstrom
m...@hogstrom.org
+1-919-656-0564
PGP Key: 0x90ECB270
Facebook   LinkedIn 
  Twitter 

“It may be cognitive, but, it ain’t intuitive."
— Hogstrom



--
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: Use of zCX

[Phil Smith III]

David Crayford wrote:

>Don't mean to put you on the spot Phil, but can you elaborate? Is there
>a big drop off in Linux on Z users? Did the poster children move to x86
>systems?

 

Well, the several examples I can think of moved the workload elsewhere,
presumably to x86. I hate to be negative about Linux on Z because I was at
Linuxcare for five years doing Linux deployment on Z and thought it was a
great platorm. But I fear that the hype was too great, such that folks
jumped in too deep and then said "U". I'm really not sure.

 

I'm not sure IBM helped with the LinuxONE thing, because that made it seem
different, not "Just Linux, but with mainframe scaling etc."

 

It's not dead by any means-linux-...@vm.marist.edu
  is alive and well-it's just not the
obvious growth area that it seemed like 15 years ago. Acourse I'm not what I
was 15 years ago either!

 

 


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Kirk Wolf]

Many shops might find linux containers managed as a z/OS subsystem using z/OS 
SMS storage is attractive when compared to VM/Linux infrastucture.You can't 
make everyone happy, but now you can have it either way.  z is the new 
"Whopper" :-)


On Thu, Apr 21, 2022, at 12:55 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
> I agree with Robert's objections to zCX, and, frankly, If all a site wants to 
> do is run zLinux applications on an IBM z system, it is much simpler (and 
> perhaps cheaper) to just install z/VM on the box and then host as many Linux 
> guests as you want. No extra external tooling is needed; just use out of the 
> box management apps that are already available. Plus, the system programmers 
> have much greater and finer, control over the hardware resources (memory, 
> CPU, etc.) each zLinux guest is allowed to consume. And of course, z/VM and 
> zLinux run very well on the full speed IFL engines, no other specialty 
> engines required.  Connect the z/VM and z/OS LPARs together by hyper-sockets 
> and you're good to go. 
> If I was an z/OS shop looking towards Linux, that's how I would proceed.
> Thought and comments always welcome.
> DJ
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> 

Kirk Wolf
Dovetailed Technologies
http://dovetail.com

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Matt Hogstrom]

> On Apr 22, 2022, at 3:42 AM, David Crayford  wrote:
> 
>> 
>> If you already deliver container images that support your product that 
>> currently run outside z/OS, or if that’s what you plan to do, it’d be a 
>> great idea to add s390x compatibility to your container images so your 
>> customers have greater deployment flexibility. That’s usually quite easy to 
>> do.
> 
> Good advice. I would also add that if you are a vendor planning to deliver 
> zCX container images then make sure you add other compatibilities just in 
> case your customers don't run zCX. It could be a POC obstacle.

Building the s390x containers is straight forward.  It’s the POC challenge.  
It’s like showing up with SAE tools to work on a car that is metric.  Not going 
to be very useful.

Matt Hogstrom
m...@hogstrom.org
+1-919-656-0564
PGP Key: 0x90ECB270
Facebook   LinkedIn 
  Twitter 

“It may be cognitive, but, it ain’t intuitive."
— Hogstrom



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[David Crayford]

On 22/4/22 13:43, Timothy Sipples wrote:

David Crayford wrote:

Right, but zCX is not free.

Actually it’s no additional charge for 90 days. However, “it’s not free” is not 
a meaningful argument. It’s *never* free to run applications in an enterprise 
context at least. What matters is whether there’s sufficient or better 
value-for-money compared to next best alternatives. “Money” here also includes 
labor inputs and the many other cost-related ingredients.


Right. And for Linux deployments there are also public cloud operators 
claim to reduce the cost of labor.






You have to pay a hardware license fee...

No, you don’t. On IBM z14 and IBM z15 machines you have the *option* to order 
Feature Code 0104, and then there’s no additional software charge for/with 
z/OS. Or you can choose the IBM Container Hosting Foundation for z/OS 
(5655-HZ1), a monthly charge software element. On IBM z16 machines there’s no 
Feature Code 0104, so you would choose the IBM Container Hosting Foundation for 
z/OS. For this 5655-HZ1 software element there’s a further choice of flat or 
tiered pricing. And you can change your mind. For example, you can start on 
tiered then switch to flat or vice versa. Obviously you should compare (and 
perhaps periodically re-compare) flat and tiered then pick the lower price.


Thanks, that's great info. "Feature Code 0104" sounds like the order 
given to wipe out the Jedi :)



If you already deliver container images that support your product that 
currently run outside z/OS, or if that’s what you plan to do, it’d be a great 
idea to add s390x compatibility to your container images so your customers have 
greater deployment flexibility. That’s usually quite easy to do.


Good advice. I would also add that if you are a vendor planning to 
deliver zCX container images then make sure you add other 
compatibilities just in case your customers don't run zCX. It could be a 
POC obstacle.




Please note that Feature Codes 0103 and 0104 are NOT carry forward feature 
codes. Obviously they don’t carry forward to IBM z16 (since they don’t exist on 
that model), but they also did not/do not carry forward from IBM z14 to z15.


...plus assign zIIP, disk and storage resources.

You’re not strictly required to have or use zIIPs, but IBM recommends at least 
one for zCX.


IMO, without zIIPs it's not viable.



As a periodic reminder, my views are my own. Always rely first on official IBM 
publications and statements if you want to know what’s official.

— — — — —
Timothy Sipples
Senior Architect
Digital Assets, Industry Solutions, and Cyber Security
IBM zSystems and LinuxONE
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


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Timothy Sipples]

David Crayford wrote:
>Right, but zCX is not free.

Actually it’s no additional charge for 90 days. However, “it’s not free” is not 
a meaningful argument. It’s *never* free to run applications in an enterprise 
context at least. What matters is whether there’s sufficient or better 
value-for-money compared to next best alternatives. “Money” here also includes 
labor inputs and the many other cost-related ingredients.

>You have to pay a hardware license fee...

No, you don’t. On IBM z14 and IBM z15 machines you have the *option* to order 
Feature Code 0104, and then there’s no additional software charge for/with 
z/OS. Or you can choose the IBM Container Hosting Foundation for z/OS 
(5655-HZ1), a monthly charge software element. On IBM z16 machines there’s no 
Feature Code 0104, so you would choose the IBM Container Hosting Foundation for 
z/OS. For this 5655-HZ1 software element there’s a further choice of flat or 
tiered pricing. And you can change your mind. For example, you can start on 
tiered then switch to flat or vice versa. Obviously you should compare (and 
perhaps periodically re-compare) flat and tiered then pick the lower price.

Another option is the IBM zCX Foundation for Red Hat OpenShift (5655-ZCX). This 
IBM Program Number has zero license charge but chargeable annual Subscription & 
Support. Loosely speaking you can think of this product as “Yearly License 
Charge” (YLC), akin to MLC but 12 months at a time. This product does not 
require either Feature Code 0104 or 5655-HZ1. As its name indicates this 
product provides Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform on z/OS, delivered and 
supported by IBM.

In case anyone is wondering, IBM plans to continue offering, developing, and 
supporting both the z/OS Container Extensions and IBM zCX Foundation for Red 
Hat OpenShift. You can choose either or even both. One is not a replacement for 
the other. If you’d like a Red Hat analogy, the z/OS Container Extensions are 
analogous to Podman, and of course the IBM zCX Foundation for Red Hat OpenShift 
*is* Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform.

If you’re a software vendor/solution provider, and if you deliver Docker/OCI 
container images as part of your solution, either the z/OS Container Extensions 
or the IBM zCX Foundation for Red Hat OpenShift should support your software. 
The container images need to be either s390x single architecture or 
multi-architecture with s390x compatibility. If your container image runs on 
Linux on IBM Z/LinuxONE (on Podman as a notable example) or on IBM Cloud Hyper 
Protect Virtual Servers then it will be fine on z/OS in either of the container 
runtimes as long as there are no unsatisfied external dependencies. If you 
notice anything unusual that contradicts what I just wrote, please let IBM know 
so IBM can (most probably) fix it. If you already deliver container images that 
support your product that currently run outside z/OS, or if that’s what you 
plan to do, it’d be a great idea to add s390x compatibility to your container 
images so your customers have greater deployment flexibility. That’s usually 
quite easy to do.

Please note that Feature Codes 0103 and 0104 are NOT carry forward feature 
codes. Obviously they don’t carry forward to IBM z16 (since they don’t exist on 
that model), but they also did not/do not carry forward from IBM z14 to z15.

>...plus assign zIIP, disk and storage resources.

You’re not strictly required to have or use zIIPs, but IBM recommends at least 
one for zCX.

As a periodic reminder, my views are my own. Always rely first on official IBM 
publications and statements if you want to know what’s official.

— — — — —
Timothy Sipples
Senior Architect
Digital Assets, Industry Solutions, and Cyber Security
IBM zSystems and LinuxONE
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

Re: Use of zCX

[Michael W. Moss]

I messed about with this back in the day; it worked well.

http://gsf-soft.com/Documents/ISX390.html
Subject: Re: Use of zCX
From: "PINION, RICHARD W." 
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 18:52:08 +
Does anybody hear remember a software product from a Russian company that 
allowed one to run Linux as
an address space under OS/390?  If memory serves me correctly, I think this was 
in the 1990's, possible early
2000's.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Alan Young]

>>Early 2001.  Possibly included to run VSE in a z/OS address space to


>>aid migration?


>>


>DUO (DOS Under OS)?



If memory serves, DUO was around way before as one of the products acquired 
when CA bought UCCEL. I have a recollection of seeing a manual in the blue 
binders that I think CA was using in the late 80s.







--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[David Crayford]

On 22/4/22 03:35, Charles Mills wrote:

I am not a "corporate shop" guy but apparently "put up a VM LPAR" is a huge political 
leap for many z/OS shops. The idea is facilitating "if we could just get one instance of Linux up under 
z/OS we could show that to senior management and take it from there." Hence zCX.


Right, but zCX is not free. You have to pay a hardware license fee plus 
assign zIIP,  disk and storage resources. If you want to run Linux you 
can buy a 2 socket, 128 core enterprise x86 server with 200TB of disk 
for less then a single zIIP. 400Gbs ethernet is available in most data 
centers now. Maybe that's the political leap. z/OS guys want to run 
Linux on z Hardware because they own it. Most companies have 
provisioning systems like Ansible where you can easily spin up a few 
linux VMs.


Who remembers zBX? That died a death pretty quickly.




Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Dave Jones
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2022 10:55 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Use of zCX

I agree with Robert's objections to zCX, and, frankly, If all a site wants to 
do is run zLinux applications on an IBM z system, it is much simpler (and 
perhaps cheaper) to just install z/VM on the box and then host as many Linux 
guests as you want. No extra external tooling is needed; just use out of the 
box management apps that are already available. Plus, the system programmers 
have much greater and finer, control over the hardware resources (memory, CPU, 
etc.) each zLinux guest is allowed to consume. And of course, z/VM and zLinux 
run very well on the full speed IFL engines, no other specialty engines 
required.  Connect the z/VM and z/OS LPARs together by hyper-sockets and you're 
good to go.
If I was an z/OS shop looking towards Linux, that's how I would proceed.
Thought and comments always welcome.
DJ

--
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


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[David Crayford]

On 22/4/22 05:32, Phil Smith III wrote:

Linux on Z in
general seems to be fading, which makes me very sad: several of the poster
children have backed away completely
Don't mean to put you on the spot Phil, but can you elaborate? Is there 
a big drop off in Linux on Z users? Did the poster children move to x86 
systems?


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Attila Fogarasi]

zCX is part of new hardware exploitation.  IBM still sells mainframes and
needs software to exploit the great new hardware features.  The flip side
is that such software runs well only on the new hardware.  For zCX you
pretty much need to be on z15 or even z16 to start seeing the great
benefits.  zCX is groomed for 2GB page size, so you need that size system
to start seeing how well mainframe does.  It is solid technology just
immature but without containers z/OS will be dead in a decade or 2.  It's
not running Linux on z/OS that is significant, its the application workload
and like it or not, containers will be essential for some parts of
applications.  I'd like z/OS to stay in that game.

On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 7:33 AM Phil Smith III  wrote:

> That's a nice, positive view, Matt. Still doesn't quite make sense to me
> yet, but I'm willing to believe it. Not convinced it made sense as a use of
> very limited resources at this stage of the game, though. Linux on Z in
> general seems to be fading, which makes me very sad: several of the poster
> children have backed away completely. Whether adding it on z/OS will help
> or
> not-I have no idea. Hope so!
>
>
>
> ...phsiii
>
>
> --
> 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: Use of zCX

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 16:32:40 -0400, Phil Smith III  wrote:
>
>>What incremental skill set is required for the respective alternatives?
>>I once inquired on another form whether a VM LPAR only for Linux
>>might be administered with no CMS skill required.  Alan Altmark
>> (IIRC) answered, neither practical nor desirable in view of the
>>superiority of the CMS-based tools.  does an OOTB Linux LPAR
>>change that?
>
>Yes, it should, these days. I honestly don't know, not having actually
>touched it in 14 years. But it wasn't difficult then.
> 
Too many "it"s with unclear antecedents.

The closeness of the coupling is essential.  I found it invaluable to be
able to ADDRESS SYSCALL, ADDRESS SH, ADDRESS LINKMVS,
BPXWDYN(), BPXWUNIX(),  ... any combination in the same Exec.
Does a container build a firewall segregating such functions in any
language?

-- 
gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Phil Smith III]

That's a nice, positive view, Matt. Still doesn't quite make sense to me
yet, but I'm willing to believe it. Not convinced it made sense as a use of
very limited resources at this stage of the game, though. Linux on Z in
general seems to be fading, which makes me very sad: several of the poster
children have backed away completely. Whether adding it on z/OS will help or
not-I have no idea. Hope so!

 

...phsiii


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 20:55:49 +, Mike Schwab wrote:

>Early 2001.  Possibly included to run VSE in a z/OS address space to
>aid migration?
>
DUO (DOS Under OS)?

>On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 6:52 PM PINION, RICHARD W. wrote:
>>
>> Does anybody hear remember a software product from a Russian company that 
>> allowed one to run Linux as
>> an address space under OS/390?  If memory serves me correctly, I think this 
>> was in the 1990's, possible early
>> 2000's.

-- 
gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Matt Hogstrom]

A little bit of rationale on the question and why I think this is important.

As everyone has demonstrated there is deep z/OS skill in shops and it will be 
needed now and into the future.  All of us plan to retire so to keep Z relevant 
we need to transfer our skills to the up and comers.  There is a boatload of 
skill that most of the up and comers have in the form of Linux and cloud based 
deployments using technology like containers and their deployment and 
orchestration on a Kubernetes infrastructure.  I believe that we (z/OS and 
operations) need to marry the technologies together.  This has been done before 
and probably the most successful merge of technology was the creation of 
OpenEdition and later USS.  Arguably, without that innovation Java, Python, 
Node and a host of other capabilities would not be possible on z/OS and the 
platform would be relegated to hospice to run the existing workloads (CICS, IMS 
and batch) as there would be no way to include modern languages and tech on the 
platform.  Its the same issue with scheduling and orchestration.

Incorporating Linux around z/OS and in zCX or zLinux allows for workloads based 
on those technologies to run alongside to platform.  This isn’t just for 
applications but for me and other ISVs its about providing new capabilities 
that use open source software, common languages and the container runtimes to 
deliver products and updates using the cloud paradigm.  Without the surrounding 
capabilities to host these containers around z/OS would be like trying to run 
Java without USS.

We are all proud of what z/OS has been and it is the only game in town for high 
volume ACID transactions that drive the worlds businesses and economies.  That 
doesn’t mean that expanding its scope to embrace Linux and Kubernetes 
diminishes its value; it enhances it.   

Did USS suck in terms of performance and utility when it first came out?  Yes 
it did.  Can you say Fooorr?  Today, its been refined and 
you don’t even know its there but now the system won’t even function without it.

I believe that the same infection point is here with Cloud Native.  Without it 
on the platform, a lot of new support software for machine learning, 
capabilities like Splunk, Elastic, … and so many other capabilities are related 
to Intel Kubernetes farms.  I think the longer adoption takes the less relevant 
z/OS becomes.  Its not Z or Cloud, it’s both exist in the Hybrid Cloud and must 
work together.

/endSoapBox

Matt Hogstrom
m...@hogstrom.org

“To achieve great things two things are needed: a plan, and not quite enough 
time.”
- Leonard Bernstein

> On Apr 21, 2022, at 4:55 PM, Mike Schwab  wrote:
> 
> Early 2001.  Possibly included to run VSE in a z/OS address space to
> aid migration?
> 
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 6:52 PM PINION, RICHARD W.
>  wrote:
>> 
>> Does anybody hear remember a software product from a Russian company that 
>> allowed one to run Linux as
>> an address space under OS/390?  If memory serves me correctly, I think this 
>> was in the 1990's, possible early
>> 2000's.
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
>> Phil Smith III
>> Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2022 2:26 PM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: Use of zCX
>> 
>> [External Email. Exercise caution when clicking links or opening 
>> attachments.]
>> 
>>> It likes a LOT of real memory and it appears that the running instance
>> consumes the full amount of real memory allocated to it for the duration, 
>> making it unavailable to zOS for paging or any other use.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Well, sure-that memory use is Linux caching files in memory. This has all 
>> been explored, analyzed, and solved under z/VM years ago; alas, z/OS doesn't 
>> have the same kinds of controls, so it's going to be a problem with zCX 
>> until and unless IBM adds some knobs.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I'm with Dave Jones re "Where's the real value?" I remember when IBM first 
>> proposed what became zCX, I asked what the point was. The answer I got was 
>> "It's politically hard/impossible to get an LPAR created to run z/VM (not to 
>> mention paying for z/VM) or to run Linux on the bare iron". A technical 
>> solution to a political problem is painful to contemplate, but is sometimes 
>> necessary, and it appears that's what zCX is.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Running an entire operating system under z/OS that isn't acclimated to doing 
>> so is inherently problematic. Things like Db2 and CICS have spent many, many 
>> years being made into good z/OS citizens (OK, since CICS has always been 
>> under z/OS and predecessors, that's obvious-but Db2 started as SQL/DS on 
>> VM). 

Re: Use of zCX

[Mike Schwab]

Early 2001.  Possibly included to run VSE in a z/OS address space to
aid migration?

On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 6:52 PM PINION, RICHARD W.
 wrote:
>
> Does anybody hear remember a software product from a Russian company that 
> allowed one to run Linux as
> an address space under OS/390?  If memory serves me correctly, I think this 
> was in the 1990's, possible early
> 2000's.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
> Phil Smith III
> Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2022 2:26 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Use of zCX
>
> [External Email. Exercise caution when clicking links or opening attachments.]
>
> >It likes a LOT of real memory and it appears that the running instance
> consumes the full amount of real memory allocated to it for the duration, 
> making it unavailable to zOS for paging or any other use.
>
>
>
> Well, sure-that memory use is Linux caching files in memory. This has all 
> been explored, analyzed, and solved under z/VM years ago; alas, z/OS doesn't 
> have the same kinds of controls, so it's going to be a problem with zCX until 
> and unless IBM adds some knobs.
>
>
>
> I'm with Dave Jones re "Where's the real value?" I remember when IBM first 
> proposed what became zCX, I asked what the point was. The answer I got was 
> "It's politically hard/impossible to get an LPAR created to run z/VM (not to 
> mention paying for z/VM) or to run Linux on the bare iron". A technical 
> solution to a political problem is painful to contemplate, but is sometimes 
> necessary, and it appears that's what zCX is.
>
>
>
> Running an entire operating system under z/OS that isn't acclimated to doing 
> so is inherently problematic. Things like Db2 and CICS have spent many, many 
> years being made into good z/OS citizens (OK, since CICS has always been 
> under z/OS and predecessors, that's obvious-but Db2 started as SQL/DS on VM). 
> Sure, IBM can make Linux behave under z/OS, but it's gonna take a while! And 
> the real value is still unclear to me, beyond the political hurdles. You're 
> sure not going to run hundreds of zCX containers under z/OS, I don't think, 
> as you can Linuxen under z/VM.
>
>
>
> TonyH: My information is that z/OS (MVS) only uses SIE for zCX, so I think 
> that's just two levels of SIE, which presumably/hopefully means vSIE, which 
> isn't that bad?
>
>
>
> ...phsiii (who spent four years doing Linux provisioning under z/VM at 
> Linuxcare and then a few years doing performance of Linux under z/VM, so 
> feels he has some qualifications to make the above assertions)
>
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
> lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> Confidentiality notice:
> This e-mail message, including any attachments, may contain legally 
> privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended 
> recipient(s), or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this 
> message to the intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any 
> dissemination, distribution, or copying of this e-mail message is strictly 
> prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately 
> notify the sender and delete this e-mail message from your computer.
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN



-- 
Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA
Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all?

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Phil Smith III]

Gil asked:

>What incremental skill set is required for the respective alternatives?
>I once inquired on another form whether a VM LPAR only for Linux
>might be administered with no CMS skill required.  Alan Altmark
> (IIRC) answered, neither practical nor desirable in view of the
>superiority of the CMS-based tools.  does an OOTB Linux LPAR
>change that?

 

Yes, it should, these days. I honestly don't know, not having actually
touched it in 14 years. But it wasn't difficult then.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 12:35:10 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:

>I am not a "corporate shop" guy but apparently "put up a VM LPAR" is a huge 
>political leap for many z/OS shops. The idea is facilitating "if we could just 
>get one instance of Linux up under z/OS we could show that to senior 
>management and take it from there." Hence zCX.
>
What incremental skill set is required for the respective alternatives?
I once inquired on another form whether a VM LPAR only for Linux
might be administered with no CMS skill required.  Alan Altmark
(IIRC) answered, neither practical nor desirable in view of the
superiority of the CMS-based tools.  does an OOTB Linux LPAR
change that?

>-Original Message-
>From: Dave Jones
>Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2022 10:55 AM
>
>I agree with Robert's objections to zCX, and, frankly, If all a site wants to 
>do is run zLinux applications on an IBM z system, it is much simpler (and 
>perhaps cheaper) to just install z/VM on the box and then host as many Linux 
>guests as you want. No extra external tooling is needed; just use out of the 
>box management apps that are already available. Plus, the system programmers 
>have much greater and finer, control over the hardware resources (memory, CPU, 
>etc.) each zLinux guest is allowed to consume. And of course, z/VM and zLinux 
>run very well on the full speed IFL engines, no other specialty engines 
>required.  Connect the z/VM and z/OS LPARs together by hyper-sockets and 
>you're good to go. 
>If I was an z/OS shop looking towards Linux, that's how I would proceed.
>Thought and comments always welcome.

-- 
gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Charles Mills]

I am not a "corporate shop" guy but apparently "put up a VM LPAR" is a huge 
political leap for many z/OS shops. The idea is facilitating "if we could just 
get one instance of Linux up under z/OS we could show that to senior management 
and take it from there." Hence zCX.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Dave Jones
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2022 10:55 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Use of zCX

I agree with Robert's objections to zCX, and, frankly, If all a site wants to 
do is run zLinux applications on an IBM z system, it is much simpler (and 
perhaps cheaper) to just install z/VM on the box and then host as many Linux 
guests as you want. No extra external tooling is needed; just use out of the 
box management apps that are already available. Plus, the system programmers 
have much greater and finer, control over the hardware resources (memory, CPU, 
etc.) each zLinux guest is allowed to consume. And of course, z/VM and zLinux 
run very well on the full speed IFL engines, no other specialty engines 
required.  Connect the z/VM and z/OS LPARs together by hyper-sockets and you're 
good to go. 
If I was an z/OS shop looking towards Linux, that's how I would proceed.
Thought and comments always welcome.
DJ

--
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: Use of zCX

[PINION, RICHARD W.]

Does anybody hear remember a software product from a Russian company that 
allowed one to run Linux as
an address space under OS/390?  If memory serves me correctly, I think this was 
in the 1990's, possible early
2000's.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Phil Smith III
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2022 2:26 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Use of zCX

[External Email. Exercise caution when clicking links or opening attachments.]

>It likes a LOT of real memory and it appears that the running instance
consumes the full amount of real memory allocated to it for the duration, 
making it unavailable to zOS for paging or any other use.



Well, sure-that memory use is Linux caching files in memory. This has all been 
explored, analyzed, and solved under z/VM years ago; alas, z/OS doesn't have 
the same kinds of controls, so it's going to be a problem with zCX until and 
unless IBM adds some knobs.



I'm with Dave Jones re "Where's the real value?" I remember when IBM first 
proposed what became zCX, I asked what the point was. The answer I got was 
"It's politically hard/impossible to get an LPAR created to run z/VM (not to 
mention paying for z/VM) or to run Linux on the bare iron". A technical 
solution to a political problem is painful to contemplate, but is sometimes 
necessary, and it appears that's what zCX is.



Running an entire operating system under z/OS that isn't acclimated to doing so 
is inherently problematic. Things like Db2 and CICS have spent many, many years 
being made into good z/OS citizens (OK, since CICS has always been under z/OS 
and predecessors, that's obvious-but Db2 started as SQL/DS on VM). Sure, IBM 
can make Linux behave under z/OS, but it's gonna take a while! And the real 
value is still unclear to me, beyond the political hurdles. You're sure not 
going to run hundreds of zCX containers under z/OS, I don't think, as you can 
Linuxen under z/VM.



TonyH: My information is that z/OS (MVS) only uses SIE for zCX, so I think 
that's just two levels of SIE, which presumably/hopefully means vSIE, which 
isn't that bad?



...phsiii (who spent four years doing Linux provisioning under z/VM at 
Linuxcare and then a few years doing performance of Linux under z/VM, so feels 
he has some qualifications to make the above assertions)


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Confidentiality notice: 
This e-mail message, including any attachments, may contain legally privileged 
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient(s), or 
the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this message to the intended 
recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or 
copying of this e-mail message is strictly prohibited. If you have received 
this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete this 
e-mail message from your computer.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Phil Smith III]

>It likes a LOT of real memory and it appears that the running instance
consumes the full amount of real memory allocated to it for the duration,
making it unavailable to zOS for paging or any other use.

 

Well, sure-that memory use is Linux caching files in memory. This has all
been explored, analyzed, and solved under z/VM years ago; alas, z/OS doesn't
have the same kinds of controls, so it's going to be a problem with zCX
until and unless IBM adds some knobs.

 

I'm with Dave Jones re "Where's the real value?" I remember when IBM first
proposed what became zCX, I asked what the point was. The answer I got was
"It's politically hard/impossible to get an LPAR created to run z/VM (not to
mention paying for z/VM) or to run Linux on the bare iron". A technical
solution to a political problem is painful to contemplate, but is sometimes
necessary, and it appears that's what zCX is.

 

Running an entire operating system under z/OS that isn't acclimated to doing
so is inherently problematic. Things like Db2 and CICS have spent many, many
years being made into good z/OS citizens (OK, since CICS has always been
under z/OS and predecessors, that's obvious-but Db2 started as SQL/DS on
VM). Sure, IBM can make Linux behave under z/OS, but it's gonna take a
while! And the real value is still unclear to me, beyond the political
hurdles. You're sure not going to run hundreds of zCX containers under z/OS,
I don't think, as you can Linuxen under z/VM.

 

TonyH: My information is that z/OS (MVS) only uses SIE for zCX, so I think
that's just two levels of SIE, which presumably/hopefully means vSIE, which
isn't that bad?

 

...phsiii (who spent four years doing Linux provisioning under z/VM at
Linuxcare and then a few years doing performance of Linux under z/VM, so
feels he has some qualifications to make the above assertions)


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Dave Jones]

I agree with Robert's objections to zCX, and, frankly, If all a site wants to 
do is run zLinux applications on an IBM z system, it is much simpler (and 
perhaps cheaper) to just install z/VM on the box and then host as many Linux 
guests as you want. No extra external tooling is needed; just use out of the 
box management apps that are already available. Plus, the system programmers 
have much greater and finer, control over the hardware resources (memory, CPU, 
etc.) each zLinux guest is allowed to consume. And of course, z/VM and zLinux 
run very well on the full speed IFL engines, no other specialty engines 
required.  Connect the z/VM and z/OS LPARs together by hyper-sockets and you're 
good to go. 
If I was an z/OS shop looking towards Linux, that's how I would proceed.
Thought and comments always welcome.
DJ

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Anthony L. Zak]

EA/s/ Anthony L. Zak
 Original message From: Sean Gleann  
Date: 4/21/22  2:57 AM  (GMT-05:00) To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: 
[IBM-MAIN] Use of zCX @Robert Garrett (with a sigh of relief!) 15 minutes for 
z/CX to come up ona z/OS under z/VM at Dallas?   Me too. I thought I was doing 
somethingwrong, but couldn't get any useful feedback from IBM/Dallas about 
the'problem'.SeanOn Thu, 21 Apr 2022 at 04:57, kekronbekron 
<02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:> Apologies if this 
seems rash.> Certainly don't mean to belittle people's work; many are 
restricted with> choices, procedures, etc.> If it isn't for the cost of being 
an MF s/w vendor, competent new> solutions would steal the show.> Much like 
most of y'all, I want Z to remain king of the hill.>> -KB>> --- Original 
Message ---> On Thursday, April 21st, 2022 at 9:06 AM, kekronbekron <> 
02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:>>> > As an observer, I 
reckon IBM are forced to use OpenShift because they've> got to get RedHat in 
there.> > Also, since everyone knows the word Docker now, the Z "has to have 
it".> > Surely the industry is now waking up to the mess that is the 
Kubernetes> ecoystem mgmt., service MESS.> >> > I do wonder... for those who 
thought setting up zOSMF RACF was painful,> what their journey will be for zCX 
and OpenShift.> > Just saying, "it's free because zIIP" doesn't make it good.> 
> No Ferrari owner should be "compelled" to use a unicycle's wheel just> 
because it's free.> >> > IMHO, "Me too" solutions are seriously ruining the 
reputation of the Z> with the ridiculous CPU, memory, storage requirements.> > 
I thought it was ridiculous that RDz wanted a few gigabytes of memory> for the 
JVM.> > Rebadged oldware, with web stack & interface from early 2010s, are now> 
coming to compete with Chrome, in their lust for memory and such.> >> > - KB> > 
--- Original Message ---> > On Thursday, April 21st, 2022 at 4:22 AM, 
Tony Harminc t...@harminc.net> wrote:> >> >> >> > > On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 at 
18:00, Robert Garrett rob...@garrettfamily.us> wrote:> > >> > > [...]> > >> > > 
> It likes a LOT of real memory and it appears that the running> instance 
consumes the full amount of real memory allocated to it for the> duration, 
making it unavailable to zOS for paging or any other use. Don't> believe the 
claim that it can run in as little> > > > as 2GB. The experimental test 
instance that I built had 3GB> allocated to it (the most I could give it on the 
LPAR I was using) and it> took a full 15 minutes (yes minutes) by the clock for 
the address space to> initialize and reach the point where it was> > > > 
functional - on every start up. Admittedly, this was on a zOS image> that was 
being hosted under zVM at IBM Dallas, so I'm sure that had some> impact.> > >> 
> > That smells like three levels of SIE, which to my understanding is> > > 
never going to perform reasonably.> > >> > > Tony H.> > >> > > 
--> > > 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>> 
--> 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

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Anthony L. Zak]

/s/ Anthony L. ZakJo,z
 Original message From: Sean Gleann  
Date: 4/21/22  2:57 AM  (GMT-05:00) To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: 
[IBM-MAIN] Use of zCX @Robert Garrett (with a sigh of relief!) 15 minutes for 
z/CX to come up ona z/OS under z/VM at Dallas?   Me too. I thought I was doing 
somethingwrong, but couldn't get any useful feedback from IBM/Dallas about 
the'problem'.SeanOn Thu, 21 Apr 2022 at 04:57, kekronbekron 
<02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:> Apologies if this 
seems rash.> Certainly don't mean to belittle people's work; many are 
restricted with> choices, procedures, etc.> If it isn't for the cost of being 
an MF s/w vendor, competent new> solutions would steal the show.> Much like 
most of y'all, I want Z to remain king of the hill.>> -KB>> --- Original 
Message ---> On Thursday, April 21st, 2022 at 9:06 AM, kekronbekron <> 
02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:>>> > As an observer, I 
reckon IBM are forced to use OpenShift because they've> got to get RedHat in 
there.> > Also, since everyone knows the word Docker now, the Z "has to have 
it".> > Surely the industry is now waking up to the mess that is the 
Kubernetes> ecoystem mgmt., service MESS.> >> > I do wonder... for those who 
thought setting up zOSMF RACF was painful,> what their journey will be for zCX 
and OpenShift.> > Just saying, "it's free because zIIP" doesn't make it good.> 
> No Ferrari owner should be "compelled" to use a unicycle's wheel just> 
because it's free.> >> > IMHO, "Me too" solutions are seriously ruining the 
reputation of the Z> with the ridiculous CPU, memory, storage requirements.> > 
I thought it was ridiculous that RDz wanted a few gigabytes of memory> for the 
JVM.> > Rebadged oldware, with web stack & interface from early 2010s, are now> 
coming to compete with Chrome, in their lust for memory and such.> >> > - KB> > 
--- Original Message ---> > On Thursday, April 21st, 2022 at 4:22 AM, 
Tony Harminc t...@harminc.net> wrote:> >> >> >> > > On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 at 
18:00, Robert Garrett rob...@garrettfamily.us> wrote:> > >> > > [...]> > >> > > 
> It likes a LOT of real memory and it appears that the running> instance 
consumes the full amount of real memory allocated to it for the> duration, 
making it unavailable to zOS for paging or any other use. Don't> believe the 
claim that it can run in as little> > > > as 2GB. The experimental test 
instance that I built had 3GB> allocated to it (the most I could give it on the 
LPAR I was using) and it> took a full 15 minutes (yes minutes) by the clock for 
the address space to> initialize and reach the point where it was> > > > 
functional - on every start up. Admittedly, this was on a zOS image> that was 
being hosted under zVM at IBM Dallas, so I'm sure that had some> impact.> > >> 
> > That smells like three levels of SIE, which to my understanding is> > > 
never going to perform reasonably.> > >> > > Tony H.> > >> > > 
--> > > 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>> 
--> 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

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Sean Gleann]

@Robert Garrett (with a sigh of relief!) 15 minutes for z/CX to come up on
a z/OS under z/VM at Dallas?   Me too. I thought I was doing something
wrong, but couldn't get any useful feedback from IBM/Dallas about the
'problem'.

Sean

On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 at 04:57, kekronbekron <
02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

> Apologies if this seems rash.
> Certainly don't mean to belittle people's work; many are restricted with
> choices, procedures, etc.
> If it isn't for the cost of being an MF s/w vendor, competent new
> solutions would steal the show.
> Much like most of y'all, I want Z to remain king of the hill.
>
> -KB
>
> --- Original Message ---
> On Thursday, April 21st, 2022 at 9:06 AM, kekronbekron <
> 02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
>
> > As an observer, I reckon IBM are forced to use OpenShift because they've
> got to get RedHat in there.
> > Also, since everyone knows the word Docker now, the Z "has to have it".
> > Surely the industry is now waking up to the mess that is the Kubernetes
> ecoystem mgmt., service MESS.
> >
> > I do wonder... for those who thought setting up zOSMF RACF was painful,
> what their journey will be for zCX and OpenShift.
> > Just saying, "it's free because zIIP" doesn't make it good.
> > No Ferrari owner should be "compelled" to use a unicycle's wheel just
> because it's free.
> >
> > IMHO, "Me too" solutions are seriously ruining the reputation of the Z
> with the ridiculous CPU, memory, storage requirements.
> > I thought it was ridiculous that RDz wanted a few gigabytes of memory
> for the JVM.
> > Rebadged oldware, with web stack & interface from early 2010s, are now
> coming to compete with Chrome, in their lust for memory and such.
> >
> > - KB
> > --- Original Message ---
> > On Thursday, April 21st, 2022 at 4:22 AM, Tony Harminc t...@harminc.net
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 at 18:00, Robert Garrett rob...@garrettfamily.us
> wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > It likes a LOT of real memory and it appears that the running
> instance consumes the full amount of real memory allocated to it for the
> duration, making it unavailable to zOS for paging or any other use. Don't
> believe the claim that it can run in as little
> > > > as 2GB. The experimental test instance that I built had 3GB
> allocated to it (the most I could give it on the LPAR I was using) and it
> took a full 15 minutes (yes minutes) by the clock for the address space to
> initialize and reach the point where it was
> > > > functional - on every start up. Admittedly, this was on a zOS image
> that was being hosted under zVM at IBM Dallas, so I'm sure that had some
> impact.
> > >
> > > That smells like three levels of SIE, which to my understanding is
> > > never going to perform reasonably.
> > >
> > > Tony H.
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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
>
> --
> 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: Use of zCX

[kekronbekron]

Apologies if this seems rash.
Certainly don't mean to belittle people's work; many are restricted with 
choices, procedures, etc.
If it isn't for the cost of being an MF s/w vendor, competent new solutions 
would steal the show.
Much like most of y'all, I want Z to remain king of the hill.

-KB

--- Original Message ---
On Thursday, April 21st, 2022 at 9:06 AM, kekronbekron 
<02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:


> As an observer, I reckon IBM are forced to use OpenShift because they've got 
> to get RedHat in there.
> Also, since everyone knows the word Docker now, the Z "has to have it".
> Surely the industry is now waking up to the mess that is the Kubernetes 
> ecoystem mgmt., service MESS.
>
> I do wonder... for those who thought setting up zOSMF RACF was painful, what 
> their journey will be for zCX and OpenShift.
> Just saying, "it's free because zIIP" doesn't make it good.
> No Ferrari owner should be "compelled" to use a unicycle's wheel just because 
> it's free.
>
> IMHO, "Me too" solutions are seriously ruining the reputation of the Z with 
> the ridiculous CPU, memory, storage requirements.
> I thought it was ridiculous that RDz wanted a few gigabytes of memory for the 
> JVM.
> Rebadged oldware, with web stack & interface from early 2010s, are now coming 
> to compete with Chrome, in their lust for memory and such.
>
> - KB
> --- Original Message ---
> On Thursday, April 21st, 2022 at 4:22 AM, Tony Harminc t...@harminc.net wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 at 18:00, Robert Garrett rob...@garrettfamily.us wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > It likes a LOT of real memory and it appears that the running instance 
> > > consumes the full amount of real memory allocated to it for the duration, 
> > > making it unavailable to zOS for paging or any other use. Don't believe 
> > > the claim that it can run in as little
> > > as 2GB. The experimental test instance that I built had 3GB allocated to 
> > > it (the most I could give it on the LPAR I was using) and it took a full 
> > > 15 minutes (yes minutes) by the clock for the address space to initialize 
> > > and reach the point where it was
> > > functional - on every start up. Admittedly, this was on a zOS image that 
> > > was being hosted under zVM at IBM Dallas, so I'm sure that had some 
> > > impact.
> >
> > That smells like three levels of SIE, which to my understanding is
> > never going to perform reasonably.
> >
> > Tony H.
> >
> > --
> > 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

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[David Crayford]

On 21/4/22 06:00, Robert Garrett wrote:

I've dabbled with it some, enough to bring up an instance and get a couple of 
containers running under it, a REDIS database instance for example.


I ported Redis to z/OS many years ago. I updated it to v5 a couple of 
years back. I handed it over to our Zowe devs as they were considering 
using it for a caching layer. It's on Github 
https://github.com/lchudinov/redis





It likes a LOT of real memory and it appears that the running instance consumes 
the full amount of real memory allocated to it for the duration, making it 
unavailable to zOS for paging or any other use.   Don't believe the claim that 
it can run in as little as 2GB.  The experimental test instance that I built 
had 3GB allocated to it (the most I could give it on the LPAR I was using) and 
it took a full 15 minutes (yes minutes) by the clock for the address space to 
initialize and reach the point where it was functional - on every start up.   
Admittedly, this was on a zOS image that was being hosted under zVM at IBM 
Dallas, so I'm sure that had some impact.

The tooling for provisioning it leaves a lot to be desired, at least it did a 
year ago when I worked through it all.   Everything about building a zCX 
instance requires using tooling in zOSMF, and the zOSMF server itself requires 
just about every optional service available there is to be configured and 
available.I also found that using the tooling to make configuration changes 
to a previously built but running instance mostly doesn't work.  In my 
experience, I got much better results by instead wiping out the whole image and 
rebuilding it from scratch any time I needed to make a configuration change, 
even a seemingly minor one.

I did write a fairly detailed  'experience' document about everything, but I 
was doing so as part of a project for a client at the time so I'm not free to 
publish or share it without their permission.

Cheers,

Robert Garrett
Garrett Family Enterprises
rob...@garrettfamily.us
IBM Gold Consultant - 2022




-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Matt Hogstrom
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2022 2:56 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Use of zCX

As an ISV are interested in leveraging containers for delivery of services into 
zCX … I’m curious if

1. You have zCX installed, or plan to?
2  If so, are you looking to use IBM’s recently announced OpenShift or another 
orchestrator?

It’s always nice to know if you’re delivering content that there is a healthy 
ecosystem to use it.

If you would like to share but don’t want to on the list you can DM me.

Appreciate your thoughts and insight.

Matt Hogstrom
m...@hogstrom.org


Frodo:  “I wish the ring had never come to me.  I wish none of this had 
happened.”
Gandalf:  “So do all who live to see such things.  But it is not for them to 
decide.  All you have to do is decide what to do with this time that is given 
to you.”


--
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


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[kekronbekron]

As an observer, I reckon IBM are forced to use OpenShift because they've got to 
get RedHat in there.
Also, since everyone knows the word Docker now, the Z "has to have it".
Surely the industry is now waking up to the mess that is the Kubernetes 
ecoystem mgmt., service MESS.

I do wonder... for those who thought setting up zOSMF RACF was painful, what 
their journey will be for zCX and OpenShift.
Just saying, "it's free because zIIP" doesn't make it good.
No Ferrari owner should be "compelled" to use a unicycle's wheel just because 
it's free.

IMHO, "Me too" solutions are seriously ruining the reputation of the Z with the 
ridiculous CPU, memory, storage requirements.
I thought it was ridiculous that RDz wanted a few gigabytes of memory for the 
JVM.
Rebadged oldware, with web stack & interface from early 2010s, are now coming 
to compete with Chrome, in their lust for memory and such.

- KB
--- Original Message ---
On Thursday, April 21st, 2022 at 4:22 AM, Tony Harminc  wrote:


> On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 at 18:00, Robert Garrett rob...@garrettfamily.us wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > It likes a LOT of real memory and it appears that the running instance 
> > consumes the full amount of real memory allocated to it for the duration, 
> > making it unavailable to zOS for paging or any other use. Don't believe the 
> > claim that it can run in as little
> > as 2GB. The experimental test instance that I built had 3GB allocated to it 
> > (the most I could give it on the LPAR I was using) and it took a full 15 
> > minutes (yes minutes) by the clock for the address space to initialize and 
> > reach the point where it was
> > functional - on every start up. Admittedly, this was on a zOS image that 
> > was being hosted under zVM at IBM Dallas, so I'm sure that had some impact.
>
>
> That smells like three levels of SIE, which to my understanding is
> never going to perform reasonably.
>
> Tony H.
>
> --
> 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: Use of zCX

[Tony Harminc]

On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 at 18:00, Robert Garrett  wrote:
[...]
> It likes a LOT of real memory and it appears that the running instance 
> consumes the full amount of real memory allocated to it for the duration, 
> making it unavailable to zOS for paging or any other use.   Don't believe the 
> claim that it can run in as little
> as 2GB.  The experimental test instance that I built had 3GB allocated to it 
> (the most I could give it on the LPAR I was using) and it took a full 15 
> minutes (yes minutes) by the clock for the address space to initialize and 
> reach the point where it was
> functional - on every start up.   Admittedly, this was on a zOS image that 
> was being hosted under zVM at IBM Dallas, so I'm sure that had some impact.

That smells like three levels of SIE, which to my understanding is
never going to perform reasonably.

Tony H.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Robert Garrett]

I've dabbled with it some, enough to bring up an instance and get a couple of 
containers running under it, a REDIS database instance for example.

It likes a LOT of real memory and it appears that the running instance consumes 
the full amount of real memory allocated to it for the duration, making it 
unavailable to zOS for paging or any other use.   Don't believe the claim that 
it can run in as little as 2GB.  The experimental test instance that I built 
had 3GB allocated to it (the most I could give it on the LPAR I was using) and 
it took a full 15 minutes (yes minutes) by the clock for the address space to 
initialize and reach the point where it was functional - on every start up.   
Admittedly, this was on a zOS image that was being hosted under zVM at IBM 
Dallas, so I'm sure that had some impact.

The tooling for provisioning it leaves a lot to be desired, at least it did a 
year ago when I worked through it all.   Everything about building a zCX 
instance requires using tooling in zOSMF, and the zOSMF server itself requires 
just about every optional service available there is to be configured and 
available.I also found that using the tooling to make configuration changes 
to a previously built but running instance mostly doesn't work.  In my 
experience, I got much better results by instead wiping out the whole image and 
rebuilding it from scratch any time I needed to make a configuration change, 
even a seemingly minor one. 

I did write a fairly detailed  'experience' document about everything, but I 
was doing so as part of a project for a client at the time so I'm not free to 
publish or share it without their permission.

Cheers,

Robert Garrett
Garrett Family Enterprises 
rob...@garrettfamily.us
IBM Gold Consultant - 2022




-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Matt Hogstrom
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2022 2:56 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Use of zCX

As an ISV are interested in leveraging containers for delivery of services into 
zCX … I’m curious if 

1. You have zCX installed, or plan to?
2  If so, are you looking to use IBM’s recently announced OpenShift or another 
orchestrator?

It’s always nice to know if you’re delivering content that there is a healthy 
ecosystem to use it.  

If you would like to share but don’t want to on the list you can DM me.  

Appreciate your thoughts and insight.

Matt Hogstrom
m...@hogstrom.org


Frodo:  “I wish the ring had never come to me.  I wish none of this had 
happened.”  
Gandalf:  “So do all who live to see such things.  But it is not for them to 
decide.  All you have to do is decide what to do with this time that is given 
to you.”


--
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: Use of zCX

[David Crayford]

A well timed question. We are also exploring zCX and would like to know 
how widely it has been adopted. There is no doubt that customers can 
save a lot of money by exploiting zCX workloads running on zIIPs. 
There's an interesting paper from IBM WRT offloading MQ workloads 
https://ibm-messaging.github.io/mqperf/MQ%20with%20zCX.pdf. Of course, 
zIIPs don't come for free.


OpenShift is fantastic but the system requirements are eye-watering. 
It's certainly an investment.



On 21/4/22 03:56, Matt Hogstrom wrote:

As an ISV are interested in leveraging containers for delivery of services into 
zCX … I’m curious if

1. You have zCX installed, or plan to?
2  If so, are you looking to use IBM’s recently announced OpenShift or another 
orchestrator?

It’s always nice to know if you’re delivering content that there is a healthy 
ecosystem to use it.

If you would like to share but don’t want to on the list you can DM me.

Appreciate your thoughts and insight.

Matt Hogstrom
m...@hogstrom.org


Frodo:  “I wish the ring had never come to me.  I wish none of this had 
happened.”
Gandalf:  “So do all who live to see such things.  But it is not for them to 
decide.  All you have to do is decide what to do with this time that is given 
to you.”


--
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

Use of zCX

[Matt Hogstrom]

As an ISV are interested in leveraging containers for delivery of services into 
zCX … I’m curious if 

1. You have zCX installed, or plan to?
2  If so, are you looking to use IBM’s recently announced OpenShift or another 
orchestrator?

It’s always nice to know if you’re delivering content that there is a healthy 
ecosystem to use it.  

If you would like to share but don’t want to on the list you can DM me.  

Appreciate your thoughts and insight.

Matt Hogstrom
m...@hogstrom.org


Frodo:  “I wish the ring had never come to me.  I wish none of this had 
happened.”  
Gandalf:  “So do all who live to see such things.  But it is not for them to 
decide.  All you have to do is decide what to do with this time that is given 
to you.”


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN