DASD I/O performance VM 44 vs. VM 52
Hello, from a Linux point of view, will a VM 5.2 give significant better dasd I/O performance than a VM 4.4 system? I tried to find some values in the z/VM performance report, of course it is better but its hard to find hout how much (10%, 20%, 50%, .. ? ?) because most comparison is between vm 5.1 and vm 5.2. Any thumb-rules (or other hints) on this one? Thanks Stefan Diese E-Mail enthaelt vertrauliche oder rechtlich geschuetzteInformationen.Wenn Sie nicht der beabsichtigte Empfaenger sind, informieren Sie bittesofort den Absender und loeschen Sie diese E-Mail. Das unbefugteKopierendieser E-Mail oder die unbefugte Weitergabe der enthaltenenInformationenist nicht gestattet.The information contained in this message is confidential or protectedbylaw. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the senderanddelete this message. Any unauthorised copying of this message or unauthorised distribution of the information contained herein isprohibited.
Re: VM/ESA 2.4 under z/VM 5.x
We had a VM/ESA 2.4 system running as a guest under z/VM 5.1on a z800 z890. No problems. Thanks, Mark Vandale MCS z/VM Team Lead Office: (860) 823-2756 Cell:(860) 705-1657 CSC This is a PRIVATE message. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete without copying and kindly advise us by e-mail of the mistake in delivery. NOTE: Regardless of content, this e-mail shall not operate to bind CSC to any order or other contract unless pursuant to explicit written agreement or government initiative expressly permitting the use of e-mail for such purpose. Alan Ackerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] ANKOFAMERICA.COM To Sent by: VM/ESA VMESA-L@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU and z/VM cc Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject .UARK.EDURe: VM/ESA 2.4 under z/VM 5.x 03/14/2006 11:51 PM Please respond to VM/ESA and z/VM Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] .UARK.EDU I hope you can find someone who has tried it. We haven't tried it. It certainly isn't supported. What hardware are you planning to run on? VM does not virtualize everything (in fact, cannot). z/VM 5.x is supported only on zSeries and System z9. VM/ESA 2.4.0 does not (officially) run on a z9. It might work, especially if you aren't using anything that is hardware dependent. (For example, 370 guests will NOT work.) The last release of VM I can find that was listed (in the GI manual) as supporting VM/ESA 2.4.0 guests is z/VM 4.3.0. The GI manual includes the caveat: In general, an operating system, version, or release is supported as a guest of VM only on hardware (processors, DASD, and other devices) for which support has been announced for that operating system, version, or release to run native, in an LPAR, or as a guest of VM. On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 13:50:56 -0600, Dan Andrada [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Listers! Just wanted to find out if anyone has been able to run VM/ESA 2.4 as a guest under z/VM 5.x - any info would be greatly appreciated! Thanks! === =
Re: DASD I/O performance VM 44 vs. VM 52
On 3/15/06, Stefan Raabe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I now read about the emulated FBA on SCSI that cones with vm 5.1 which gives some improvement in comparison with vm44, but there are no more i/o improvements in the vm 5.1 performance report. You don't want to do FBA emulation on SCSI if you are concerned about I/O performance. That has not been the focus area for this support. Rob -- Rob van der Heij Velocity Software, Inc
Re: ITO parameterfor LPR link
Hello Les, Thanks for the explanation. I see for ITO the possibilities are : You can specify the following nnn values: 0 If specified, the link will be deactivated when there is no activity on the link. RSCS will first send files that are queued for transmission, or finish reception of the file currently being received, before deactivating the link. 1-99 Approximates the number of minutes until the link will be deactivated if there has been no activity on it. 100 If specified, no ITO will be in effect; the link will stay active until it is deactivated manually or until an unrecoverable error occurs. Would there be any problem if ITO=100 is used (or even a number from 1-99)? Why would anyone want to have the link inactive? Mike -Original Message- From: VM/ESA and z/VM Discussions [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Les Geer (607-429-3580) Sent: March 14, 2006 4:33 PM To: VMESA-L@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: ITO parameterfor LPR link From what I see from examples, etc... it seems that for an LPR link, the ITO parameter is always set to 0. Each time a file is printed there a bunch of messages and the link becomes inactive. I assume this is because of the ITO parameter, correct? Correct this cause's the link to automatically terminate when there are no more files to process. AUTOSTART linkdefine parameter is what cause's the link to start when a file is queue to it. If ITO is set to something different what is the effect? Does it tie up the printer? For an LPR link, the connection with the printer is terminated however the link remains active for that time period. Best Regards, Les Geer IBM z/VM and Linux Development
Re: VM/ESA 2.4 under z/VM 5.x
Thanks for the input everyone! We're looking at getting off our 9221 box running VM/ESA 2.4 and VSE/ESA 2.6.3. We have merely two VSE guest machines and just a handful of programmers that use CMS for developemnt purposes. No Linux, no productio n VM guest machines other than the VSE guests. In our shop, VM is merely a hyper-visor for our VSE guests. However, our programming staff does not want to lose the various EXEC's they use in CMS and XEDIT. We have a proposal to move to a z/890 processor to run z/VM and z/VSE to stay in support. To ease our migration, I would like to bring up VM/ESA 2.4 as a second-level guest along with one or both of the VSE guests unde r that, and progress from there. Even at the entry level configuration of a z/890, its processing capacity is easily twice that of our current 9221 utilization, so I don't think I need to be too concerned about processing overhead. I've asked IBM about this and I've not been given a definitive answer. Th e latest FAQ that IBM has provided on their z/VM site states that z/VM will run VSE/ESA and VM/ESA as guests. The Tell-All for me would be to find out if anyone has attempted or done this kind of migration. So with that said, if anyone has any further information or experience in doing a migration of this type, I would be very grateful for your input. Thanks again!
Re: Calling an assembler function from REXX
Am interested in REXX calling Assembler.
Re: VM/ESA 2.4 under z/VM 5.x
Hi Dan: Although you will have a great boost in performance power be careful about the performance expectations of your 3rd level VSE guests. Each time the VSE guest is dispatched you will be running a SIE under SIE (virtual machines are always dispatched in processing mode known as emulation mode - the instruction that places a CPU in emulation mode is Start Interpretive Execution). In long gone releases and hardware left by the curb this killed performance. Strides have been made in this area but a 3rd level production dispatch - better measure it carefully. I have not done this on z boxes - so it may be tolerable. Best of luck and let us on the list know how it goes. What type of CPU usage do you have today? David Kreuter Dan Andrada wrote: Thanks for the input everyone! We're looking at getting off our 9221 box running VM/ESA 2.4 and VSE/ESA 2.6.3. We have merely two VSE guest machines and just a handful of programmers that use CMS for developemnt purposes. No Linux, no productio n VM guest machines other than the VSE guests. In our shop, VM is merely a hyper-visor for our VSE guests. However, our programming staff does not want to lose the various EXEC's they use in CMS and XEDIT. We have a proposal to move to a z/890 processor to run z/VM and z/VSE to stay in support. To ease our migration, I would like to bring up VM/ESA 2.4 as a second-level guest along with one or both of the VSE guests unde r that, and progress from there. Even at the entry level configuration of a z/890, its processing capacity is easily twice that of our current 9221 utilization, so I don't think I need to be too concerned about processing overhead. I've asked IBM about this and I've not been given a definitive answer. Th e latest FAQ that IBM has provided on their z/VM site states that z/VM will run VSE/ESA and VM/ESA as guests. The Tell-All for me would be to find out if anyone has attempted or done this kind of migration. So with that said, if anyone has any further information or experience in doing a migration of this type, I would be very grateful for your input. Thanks again!
Re: Calling an assembler function from REXX
Hi, Norman. I can help you out with that..what exactly are you interested in doing? DJ Norman Graessle wrote: Am interested in REXX calling Assembler.
