On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 15:57:12 -0600, Alan Ackerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
.NET> wrote:
>Don Cox of IBM sent me this one:
>
>IBM System z: The Ultimate Virtualization Platform
>The future runs on System z
>
>Reed A. Mullen
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>IBM Systems and Technology Group
>
>Is that the Reed Mullen pr
I don't think so Gary. Look at the pure cost of processing resources.
A typical IFL today has what, 500 or so MIPs at a miniumum? That
isn't going to emulate a typical bloated X86 system all that fast,
even given the processing map within virtual machines.
At least in general, it is diffic
On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 13:25:01 +0100, Rob van der Heij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 7:26 AM, Alan Ackerman
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Ideas on what value z/VM adds would be appreciated!
>
>Starting point should be the presentations that Reed Mullen does at
>various event
On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 01:26:06 -0500, Alan Ackerman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Another question from the same architecture person. What is the value ad
ded
by z/VM over
>VMWARE for a Linux workload? (That's my wording, not his.)
>
>As usual, I don't know anything about what VMWARE can or cannot do.
On Tue, 4 Nov 2008, Dean, David (I/S) wrote:
> Why would anyone want to take a cherry pie and spread crap on top?
>
> No offense intended.
>
> David Dean
> Information Systems
> *bcbstauthorized*
Hum, that parses strangely because we normally say that software "runs on
top" of hardware. So the
:59 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Value added by z/VM versus VMWARE
If z/VM supported virtual x86 systems, that support would make the
platforms
extremely competitive and, potentially, cause a sea change in the source
of
computing resource for x86.
Considering the average CPU
If z/VM supported virtual x86 systems, that support would make the platforms
extremely competitive and, potentially, cause a sea change in the source of
computing resource for x86.
Considering the average CPU utilization for x86 desktop systems (less than
15% by some estimates), such support could
Sure- and it does a good job doing that too. On Intel x86. That's what
confuses me- the two platforms, mainframe and x86 are hardly
competitive to each other.
Or perhaps they are in some minds. But something sure had to go down
twisted to get that kind of comparison running again. :)
-Pau
I'm not even sure how they would wind up on a comparison, but roughly,
if you need high I/O or transactional capabilty -- use z/VM.
If you need a whale of a lot of CPU processing, use Intel.
On Nov 2, 2008, at 9:34 AM, Barton Robinson wrote:
Exactly, but the issue is to explain this to pete
On Nov 1, 2008, at 9:58 PM, Paul Raulerson wrote:
I am very confused indeed by this whole conversation -VMWARE and z/
VM solve different solutions. And they are both extraordinarily
good at what they do.
IBM is positioning z/VM as a platform for virtualization, for hosting
Linux applicati
Exactly, but the issue is to explain this to peter principal IT managers.
Paul Raulerson wrote:
I am very confused indeed by this whole conversation -VMWARE and z/VM
solve different solutions. And they are both extraordinarily good at
what they do.
Just at the 10,000 foot level, VMWARE i
I am very confused indeed by this whole conversation -VMWARE and z/VM
solve different solutions. And they are both extraordinarily good at
what they do.
Just at the 10,000 foot level, VMWARE is designed to virtualize PC
hardware and z/VM virtualizes mainframe hardware. Dismissing this as
> -Original Message-
> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Barton Robinson
> Sent: 01 November 2008 23:34
> To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
> Subject: Re: Value added by z/VM versus VMWARE
>
>
> One thing that really bothe
One thing that really bothers me about VMWARE. When I ask about performance to the people
that measure, they tell me the VMWARE contract specifically states they are not allowed to
talk about it's performance. A vendor that won't let people talk about performance must
be very afraid details wi
Alan --
What Rob said. (Which I know that you know, but which
bears repeating and deserves to be heard by your architect.)
Don't make out like z/VM is a silver bullet, but be clear that
z/VM is a powerful weapon in his arsenal.
Also: I like to draw illustrations from other platforms.
Even the m
On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 7:26 AM, Alan Ackerman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ideas on what value z/VM adds would be appreciated!
Starting point should be the presentations that Reed Mullen does at
various events on the value of z/VM for running Linux workloads, and
the comparison between z/VM and o
Another question from the same architecture person. What is the value add
ed by z/VM over
VMWARE for a Linux workload? (That's my wording, not his.)
As usual, I don't know anything about what VMWARE can or cannot do. I'm s
ure it can run fewer
guests than VM, but not how many. VM has shared DASD
17 matches
Mail list logo
