Re: Big LPAR vs small LPAR and DataSharing.

200 processors in a CEC? A couple of production sysplexes with fully configured internal CFs and some test LPARS+CF to use any spare capacity (capacity which could be used in production should it be needed) and you could easily get to 200 processors. One customer I knew, had a test sysplex

Re: Big LPAR vs small LPAR and DataSharing.

In short, giant LPARs can definitely be problematic. Similarly, too small LPARs can be problematic. Somewhere in the middle is ideal, but where that is will depend. First off, the most significant impact is you don't want LPARs whose processor count is so high that it crosses drawers. (In

Re: Big LPAR vs small LPAR and DataSharing.

I found a youtube video of the GSE presentation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAjMr4q4lUk Slide 10 contains the topic. It's not fully clear what "system does mean". Refer is to the multiprocessor factor that should be related to CEC configuration and at the same time talks about adding a

Re: Big LPAR vs small LPAR and DataSharing.

"It doesn't take an extremely large number of CPUs before a single-image system will deliver less capacity than a sysplex configuration of two systems, each with half as many CPUs". In the original context of the GSE material, does "system" here mean physical CEC, or LPAR? It is unclear, and "It

Re: Big LPAR vs small LPAR and DataSharing.

IBM provides tables of the cpu available with different processors and different numbers of engines. Search for LSPR . https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/ibm-z-lspr-itr-zosv2r4#ibmz16A02 gives 1 CPU 13 MSU 2 25

Re: Big LPAR vs small LPAR and DataSharing.

AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Big LPAR vs small LPAR and DataSharing. W dniu 19.04.2024 o 10:32, Massimo Biancucci pisze: > Hi everybody, > > In a presentation at GSE I saw a slide with a graph about the > advantage of having more small sysplex LPARs versus a bigger one. &

Re: Big LPAR vs small LPAR and DataSharing.

W dniu 19.04.2024 o 10:32, Massimo Biancucci pisze: Hi everybody, In a presentation at GSE I saw a slide with a graph about the advantage of having more small sysplex LPARs versus a bigger one. So for instance, it's better to have 5 LPARs with 4 processors than one with 20. There was a

Re: Big LPAR vs small LPAR and DataSharing.

Zero experience. However, as I was reading this I seem to remember that when IBM announced their first 10-way mainframe that Amdahl released a statement that they would never build a mainframe with more than 8 CPU's. Their reasoning was you had diminishing returns once you went beyond 8

Big LPAR vs small LPAR and DataSharing.

Hi everybody, In a presentation at GSE I saw a slide with a graph about the advantage of having more small sysplex LPARs versus a bigger one. So for instance, it's better to have 5 LPARs with 4 processors than one with 20. There was a sentence: "It doesn't take an extremely large number of CPUs