A couple of releases ago, I measured an increase in CPU time for some
benchmark-type tasks that used ZFS vs. HFS when both were caching
equally. That pattern was later confirmed with one or two real
workloads. According to IBM this is not really unexpected because ZFS
does more (journaling,
Hello all, we are planning to migrate from z/os 1.7 to 1.11. In our
planning we are trying to decide if we want to go to zfs instead of the
hfs. Is there anyone out there that can think of any good reasons not to
go to zfs when we do our upgrade?
The suggestion about waiting until you get to 1.11
Hello all, we are planning to migrate from z/os 1.7 to 1.11. In our
planning we are trying to decide if we want to go to zfs instead of the
hfs. Is there anyone out there that can think of any good reasons not to
go to zfs when we do our upgrade?
==
This email and any files
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Ward, Mike S
Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 8:41 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: hfs VS zfs
Hello all, we are planning to migrate from z/os 1.7 to 1.11.
In our planning we
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Jerry Whitteridge
Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 12:21 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: hfs VS zfs
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
cloning procedures but once we
worked out the kinks it became a non-issue.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Ward, Mike S
Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 8:41 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: hfs VS zfs
Hello all, we
Is there anyone out there that can think of any good reasons not to
go to zfs when we do our upgrade?
I would do z/FS as a separate project, either before or after.
Moving from an unsupported release level to a bigger jump than supported by IBM
will be complex enough.
-
Too busy driving to stop
On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 12:07:22 -0800, Schwarz, Barry A
barry.a.schw...@boeing.com wrote:
On a z9 BC running z/OS 1.8, there is a noticeable (~2 minutes) pause in the
IPL sequence while zFS initializes, accompanied by a non-scrollable message
on the log that eventually does clear. We don't IPL
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Richard Peurifoy
Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 3:27 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: hfs VS zfs
On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 12:07:22 -0800, Schwarz, Barry A
barry.a.schw
VS zfs
On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 12:07:22 -0800, Schwarz, Barry A
barry.a.schw...@boeing.com wrote:
snip
This is probably cause becaue the file system hadn't been
properly shutdown.
This causes the file system to be verified when starting.
If you issue
F OMVS,STOPPFS=ZFS
before you finish
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Richard Peurifoy
Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 3:53 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: hfs VS zfs
snip
Is that needed even if I do
F OMVS,SHUTDOWN
I think so, but am
Could someone please explain what has been going on with zFS
recommendations etc.
I have also seen recommendations that we should all move from HFS to zFS
file systems. Now, we are told that we should not use zFS Milti-File Mode
(MFM) aggregates in shared systems.
If I was running a non-shared
, November 24, 2007 1:44 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: HFS Vs ZFs
Could someone please explain what has been going on with zFS
recommendations etc.
I have also seen recommendations that we should all move from HFS to zFS
file systems. Now, we are told that we should not use zFS Milti
Functionally stabilized usually leads to dismissal. So, I ass/u/me/d
it was. I actually don't remember anyone saying it was going away.
Seems that at some point it would be wise to make the move.
At 11:03 PM 9/11/2006, you wrote:
Brian France wrote:
Okay, I know (hope) I'll see this in the
10, 2006 12:37 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: HFS Vs ZFs
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 10:40:18 -0400, Bruce Black
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
HFS datasets hold a single USS file system, while zFS can hold multiple
file systems.
Didn't I see a recommendation from IBM a year or two ago not to put
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 11:37:01 -0500, Tom Marchant [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 10:40:18 -0400, Bruce Black [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
HFS datasets hold a single USS file system, while zFS can hold multiple
file systems.
Didn't I see a recommendation from IBM a year or two ago not
Tom Marchant wrote:
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 10:40:18 -0400, Bruce Black [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
HFS datasets hold a single USS file system, while zFS can hold multiple
file systems.
Didn't I see a recommendation from IBM a year or two ago not to put multiple
file systems into a zFS? A
Okay, I know (hope) I'll see this in the manual, but would like to
ask ahead of time. IF HFS is indeed going away and zFS is the way to
go, does that mean there is a shared zFS ala HFS?
At 11:47 AM 9/11/2006, you wrote:
Tom Marchant wrote:
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 10:40:18 -0400, Bruce Black
Brian France wrote:
Okay, I know (hope) I'll see this in the manual, but would like to ask
ahead of time. IF HFS is indeed going away and zFS is the way to go,
does that mean there is a shared zFS ala HFS?
Who said HFS was going away?
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
In a message dated 9/11/2006 10:04:12 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Who said HFS was going away?
You did!
Not true. zFS is the replacement for HFS, which has been stabilized.
--
For IBM-MAIN
Ed Finnell wrote:
In a message dated 9/11/2006 10:04:12 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Who said HFS was going away?
You did!
Not true. zFS is the replacement for HFS, which has been stabilized.
I might very well have accurately stated that HFS has been
What's different between HFS ZFs, I am migrating a z/OS from 1.4 to
1.7.anyone comment or have experience on using ZFs...is it a good
time
to change from HFS or ZFsor stay at HFS
I am sure that others will give you more details but here is a brief answer:
They are similar in
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 10:40:18 -0400, Bruce Black [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
HFS datasets hold a single USS file system, while zFS can hold multiple
file systems.
Didn't I see a recommendation from IBM a year or two ago not to put multiple
file systems into a zFS? A statement of direction, maybe?
Hi,
What's different between HFS ZFs, I am migrating a z/OS from 1.4 to
1.7.anyone comment or have experience on using ZFs...is it a good time
to change from HFS or ZFsor stay at HFS
Tommy
--
For IBM-MAIN
In a recent note, Rob Wunderlich said:
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 10:02:04 -0600
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:41:54 -0500, David Andrews [log in to unmask]
wrote:
z/OS is an awesome platform, but we really need as a group to get over
this
silly anti-Windows thing.
Sorry, but um, no.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Comstock
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 1:38 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: HFS vs. zFS?
snip
Talk to me off list if you just want to show them a PDF file
served from
Its funny that no one mentioned the most obvious place to keep
documentation - printed in a 3 ring binder. Most of the procedures we need
in operating our mainframe fit in one 2 binder. Certainly, any procedure
that needs to be referenced when the system is down (IPL, SADump, Stand
Alone
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:41:54 -0500, David Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
z/OS is an awesome platform, but we really need as a group to get over
this
silly anti-Windows thing.
Sorry, but um, no.
We need to accommodate our Windows customers, sure -- they've been taken
in and there's little we
In a message dated 11/11/2005 8:59:18 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I just realized I haven't posted for quite a while. It seems like traffic
in general on IBM-Main has been a lot less in the last few months,
although yesterday had more posts than usual as of
On 11 Nov 2005 08:02:12 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob
Wunderlich) wrote:
I think the strongest shops are those that embrace both platforms. There
are strengths in both, and applications for both. The decision to host an
application on a particular platform is an it depends business decision
that
R.S. wrote:
Demagoguery.
Er, pardon??
I can put my Winodows doc (I could if I had any) on *another PC*. I
have bunch of PCs in my shop, and even at home.
I don't have too many mainframe CPCs, do you ?
I remember pain in the **s, when, after POR, all the systems were
un-IPLable.
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Craddock, Chris
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 7:27 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: HFS vs. zFS?
Well its late in the day and I just couldn't resist. So I'm a bad
person.
Suppose, for the sake of argument, that I want to keep all the z/OS
documentation
On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 08:22 -0500, Charles Mills wrote:
Chris raises a great point. You really should keep your z/OS doc on Windows
- you're never going to need it more than when z/OS is down.
No need -- there's always the CD collection sitting on the bookshelf, or
the online collection at
Chris raises a great point. You really should keep your z/OS doc on Windows
- you're never going to need it more than when z/OS is down.
...
Back in the early 1980's, our operations manager had this really 'great' idea.
He got us to consolidate all the notes, procedures, white-board info into one
Suppose, for the sake of argument, that I want to keep all the z/OS
documentation that I currently have on a Windows share on z/OS itself. I
plan to put it all in z/OS UNIX files and serve it up via the HTTPD
server. This avoids any dependance on the Windows server for our
documentation.
The
Well its late in the day and I just couldn't resist. So I'm a bad
person.
Suppose, for the sake of argument, that I want to keep all the z/OS
documentation that I currently have on a Windows share on z/OS itself.
I plan to put it all in z/OS UNIX files and serve it up via the HTTPD
server.
McKown, John wrote:
Suppose, for the sake of argument, that I want to keep all the z/OS
documentation that I currently have on a Windows share on z/OS itself. I
plan to put it all in z/OS UNIX files and serve it up via the HTTPD
server. This avoids any dependance on the Windows server for our
37 matches
Mail list logo
