That used to be true. But not any more. We now only use MQ and TCP/IP
into CICS Sockets.
Aww. And I was just ready to release my 2780 emulation package for
Linux...8-(
-- db
--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive
: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 5:43 PM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux experience - Solaris?
Evans, Kevin R wrote:
The zLinux front end will only be for users coming in with XML over
either MQ Series or TCP/IP. We handle direct communication to our
users
using MQ Series and TCP/IP
Of
Frank Swarbrick
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 8:29 PM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux experience - Solaris?
So I have to ask. When TV shows and movies talk about accessing NCIC,
does their accuracy (or lack thereof) send shivers up your spine?
:-)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/01
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Frank Swarbrick
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 8:32 PM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux experience - Solaris?
You may have already mentioned this, but what what is your transport
mechanism
For the readers of this list that are outside the USA, here's a brief
description of what the NCIC is and what services it provides:
NCIC is a computerized index of criminal justice information (i.e.-
criminal record history information, fugitives, stolen properties,
missing persons). It is
It's also the source of some of the most interesting requirements for
preserving older communications technology and generating connectivity
gadgets to adapt to (sometimes) things that IBM hasn't manufactured in
decades.
It's fascinating stuff.
For the readers of this list that are outside
David,
That used to be true. But not any more. We now only use MQ and TCP/IP
into CICS Sockets.
Kevin
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
David Boyes
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 11:51 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux
Rich this is indeed interesting, is this a one-off, or a serious
project
we are taking about here?
Oh, we're quite serious...8-) I guess it is time for a quick update
since the last round of discussion -- thanks to the folks who deferred
to letting me get organized first.
SNA is currently
on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
David Boyes
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 9:18 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux experience - Solaris?
Rich this is indeed interesting, is this a one-off, or a serious
project
we are taking about here?
Oh, we're quite
front-end can handle TCP/IP
or MQ inbound messages.
Kevin
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Kielek, Samuel
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 9:45 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux experience - Solaris?
David,
You should
It was, or at least was at some point. I find their WWW portal UI so
awful that I seldom use it, though. Makes IBMlink2000 look positively
modern.
You should submit this to the opensolaris-discuss list so that it can
become an approved project and listed on the communities portal. I
believe
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 9:45 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux experience - Solaris?
David,
You should submit this to the opensolaris-discuss list so that it can
become an approved project and listed on the communities portal. I
believe that should help drive up
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tim Hare
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 10:21 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux experience - Solaris?
I'm curious - why a z/Linux front end to handle XML, MQ, and TCP/IP
I'm curious - why a z/Linux front end to handle XML, MQ, and TCP/IP
inbound messages when CICS has the facilities for all of them (and
SOAP/
Web Services, HTTP, etc.)?
Don't know if this is the specific reason, but one simple reason others
have used:
XML and MQ processing tends to be
, this approach seemed to suit our needs
best.
Regards,
Kevin
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Tim Hare
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 11:21 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux experience - Solaris?
I'm curious - why a z/Linux front
communications front-end can handle TCP/IP
or MQ inbound messages.
Kevin
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Kielek, Samuel
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 9:45 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux experience - Solaris?
David,
You
: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 11:54 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux experience - Solaris?
My guesses:
1) more comfort level with Linux than alternative platforms...
2) less $$ (oh, wait, this is the Fed Govthat can't be a
consideration;-)
DJ
Tim Hare wrote:
I'm
] On Behalf Of
David Boyes
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 11:39 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux experience - Solaris?
I'm curious - why a z/Linux front end to handle XML, MQ, and TCP/IP
inbound messages when CICS has the facilities for all of them (and
SOAP/
Web Services, HTTP, etc
Scalability (under VM) was another basic reason for our choices.
Kevin
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
David Boyes
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 11:39 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux experience - Solaris?
I'm
: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Dave Jones
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 11:54 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux experience - Solaris?
My guesses:
1) more comfort level with Linux than alternative platforms...
2) less $$ (oh, wait, this is the Fed
Evans, Kevin R wrote:
The zLinux front end will only be for users coming in with XML over
either MQ Series or TCP/IP. We handle direct communication to our users
using MQ Series and TCP/IP with our native message formats currently.
Our users are various state agencies.
We don't have regular
So I have to ask. When TV shows and movies talk about accessing NCIC,
does their accuracy (or lack thereof) send shivers up your spine?
:-)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/01/06 10:41 AM
Well, comfort level with Linux was not that high when we decided on
our
method on NCIC (and we still haven't settled
only.
Kevin
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
David Boyes
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 11:39 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux experience - Solaris?
I'm curious - why a z/Linux front end to handle XML, MQ, and TCP/IP
On 10/23/06, Walter Marguccio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
this has been cross-posted to the ibmmain-list
we are a shop with a z890-230 with three zOS.e LPARs in Basic
Sysplex. We'd be really happy to consolidate some of our applications
running right now on Blades and/or pSeries on the mainframe
Mark Perry wrote:
Filesystems live in LVs and LVs in VGs which are made up from PVs(=Disks)
1) It is the LV that is striped and not the Filesystem.
2) A striped LV can be expanded providing it uses the same PVs in its
VG. (This implies you did not fully utilize the PVs to begin with of
course!
No, I hadn't seen the demo before. Thanks for the link; that is certainly the
bees' knees!
Makes me want to go corrupt some file systems to see what would happen.
Well, OK, not really.
Jon
snip
Now you are talking: ZFS looks great, cheap disks and reliability too.
I wonder if we will
On 10/23/06, Walter Marguccio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
this has been cross-posted to the ibmmain-list
we are a shop with a z890-230 with three zOS.e LPARs in Basic
Sysplex. We'd be really happy to consolidate some of our applications
running right now on Blades and/or pSeries on the mainframe
A good friend of mine used to say that many performance problems
really are expectation problems.
The strengths of zSeries are not in single-engine clock speed but in
massive throughput. It is not trivial to design a benchmark that
demonstrates it. Instead of doing end-to-end benchmarks I
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 2:32 PM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux experience
Careful what you wish for...
Kielek, Samuel wrote:
I believe under GPL v3 this is not a problem, but last I checked Linus
and many in the kernel devel community had put the kibosh
From what I understand this has nothing to do with IBM.
When they are ready, they'll pipe up. I could swear it was mentioned
here already, darned search engines... :(
Mark Perry wrote:
Rich this is indeed interesting, is this a one-off, or a serious project
we are taking about here?
IBM and
On 10/26/06, John Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was told some time ago that you don't want to migrate a heavy
CPU user to a z/VM instance... though, I suspect, an I/O bound
environment would be just peachy.
I don't know who shared that wisdom with you, but I suggest you don't
buy a car
Rob van der Heij wrote:
On 10/26/06, John Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was told some time ago that you don't want to migrate a heavy
CPU user to a z/VM instance... though, I suspect, an I/O bound
environment would be just peachy.
I don't know who shared that wisdom with you, but I
A good friend of mine used to say that many performance problems
really are expectation problems.
The strengths of zSeries are not in single-engine clock speed but in
massive throughput. It is not trivial to design a benchmark that
demonstrates it. Instead of doing end-to-end benchmarks I prefer
Kielek, Samuel wrote:
Google is sponsoring the ZFS port to Linux, details are here:
http://zfs-on-fuse.blogspot.com/
and here:
http://www.wizy.org/wiki/ZFS_on_FUSE
And GNU/OpenSolaris already has it and info on that distro is here:
http://www.gnusolaris.org
The key word here is FUSE.
Given the differences in licensing (GPL vs. CDDL) I would say that is
very unlikely.
Mark Post
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Mark Perry
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 5:31 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux
: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Post, Mark K
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 2:04 PM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux experience
Given the differences in licensing (GPL vs. CDDL) I would say that is
very unlikely.
Mark Post
-Original Message
Careful what you wish for...
Kielek, Samuel wrote:
I believe under GPL v3 this is not a problem, but last I checked Linus
and many in the kernel devel community had put the kibosh on that. Of
course Sun could dual license ZFS.. Or, someone with far too much free
time could port OpenSolaris to
Ohh, do you know something I don't?? Do tell! :)
-Sam
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Rich Smrcina
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 2:32 PM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux experience
Careful what you wish for...
Kielek
! :)
-Sam
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Rich Smrcina
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 2:32 PM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux experience
Careful what you wish for...
Kielek, Samuel wrote:
I believe under GPL v3
Uhh, lot of good tips, thanks to everyone. I'll try to answer randomly to some
of the queries.
As more than one mentionend our single IFL runs at full speed, that is 365
MIPS. I have been told
that the clock of an IFL is about 0,8 GHz, not 1,3 GHz as per my original post.
In my opinion, *A
Yeah, the Velocity people are The Best. I have been pushing to get ESAMON
here, but the ever-present budget constraints have not allowed it so far.
After the problem with the app I mentioned, VM/Linux may be dead at this shop,
so I may never get it in here.
Jon
snip
Jon, drop a note to the
If you are going to be examining your DASD setup, check to see if you have your
file systes striped. I did a few tests here and saw performance increase about
10% when I striped the file systems. You have to weigh this against the fact
that you can not dynamically extend a striped file
Jon Brock wrote:
You have to weigh this against the fact that you can not dynamically extend a
striped file system, though; you have to back it up, delete it, recreate it,
and restore.
Assuming you refer to the use of LVM - yes its dangerous to assume I
know ;-)
Filesystems live in LVs and
True enough, but I have yet to find anyone who doesn't fully utilize the PVs to
begin with. (Now I'm the one doing the assuming.) I'm sure there are folks
who do -- and probably for this very reason -- but there aren't very many.
Yes, I was referring to LVM and to EXT file systems. The way
Jon Brock wrote:
True enough, but I have yet to find anyone who doesn't fully utilize the PVs to
begin with. (Now I'm the one doing the assuming.) I'm sure there are folks
who do -- and probably for this very reason -- but there aren't very many.
Yes, I was referring to LVM and to EXT file
Mark Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1) It is the LV that is stripped and not the Filesystem.
2) A stripped LV can be expanded providing it uses the same
PVs in its VG. (This implies you did not fully utilize
the PVs to begin with of course! and that is the real catch.)
3) A Filesystem
Richard Troth wrote:
Is there any value to striping an LV if the backing PVs are striped?
To ask with slightly different wording, is it worth doing RAID in Linux
if the storage hardware does RAID?
-- R;
Yes if the PV use different paths through the zSeries (Oops System z)
I/O subsystem and
Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Mark Perry
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 4:01 PM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux experience
Jon Brock wrote:
True enough, but I have yet to find anyone who doesn't fully utilize
the PVs to begin with. (Now I'm the one doing the assuming
this has been cross-posted to the ibmmain-list
we are a shop with a z890-230 with three zOS.e LPARs in Basic
Sysplex. We'd be really happy to consolidate some of our applications
running right now on Blades and/or pSeries on the mainframe due to
reliability and scalability of the latter. Within
Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Walter Marguccio
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 3:01 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: zLinux experience
this has been cross-posted to the ibmmain-list
we are a shop with a z890-230 with three zOS.e LPARs in Basic
Sysplex
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: zLinux experience
this has been cross-posted to the ibmmain-list
we are a shop with a z890-230 with three zOS.e LPARs in Basic
Sysplex. We'd be really happy to consolidate some of our applications
running right now on Blades and/or pSeries on the mainframe due
Walter,
Its hard to say with so little information.
Can you provide ANY numbers on the benchmark comparisons?
Kirk
Walter Marguccio wrote:
this has been cross-posted to the ibmmain-list
we are a shop with a z890-230 with three zOS.e LPARs in Basic
Sysplex. We'd be really happy to
-390] zLinux experience
I know that database stuff should be mostly IO, but I usually find that
there are stored procedures and stuff that do a lot of compute stuff.
If that is the case with your test then the MIPS become important. I
don't know the MIPS of the z890, but I am going to guess
: Monday, October 23, 2006 8:34 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zLinux experience
I know that database stuff should be mostly IO, but I usually find that
there are stored procedures and stuff that do a lot of compute stuff.
If that is the case with your test then the MIPS become important
All IFL's run at full speed regardless of the 'z/OS' engine designation.
-Original Message-
Brandt, Mark H
Was the IFL engine that got turned on on your z890-230 a full speed z890
engine at 365 mips or a z890-230 engine at 85 mips ?
Mark Brandt
I was under the impression that an IFL engine is always full speed.
If it is a z890-230 with an IFL, then there are two 390 engines and 1 IFL
engine.
If there are only two engines turned on and one is an IFL, then the box is a
z890-130, which is what we have.
Do you know something
On Monday, 10/23/2006 at 03:00 MST, Walter Marguccio
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and all benchmarks show that our IFL is *FAR* behind the
Power5 architecture (round 20.000 Eur).
Comparing oscillator speeds is not very interesting; it ranks right up
there with MIPS. How does your workload perform?
@VM.MARIST.EDU
Assunto: zLinux experience
this has been cross-posted to the ibmmain-list
we are a shop with a z890-230 with three zOS.e LPARs in Basic
Sysplex. We'd be really happy to consolidate some of our applications
running right now on Blades and/or pSeries on the mainframe due to
reliability
Actually, this leads me to a related question I have been wanting to ask: is
anyone aware of an analysis of the difference between a single-IFL vs a
multi-IFL system under VM?
We have an application we wanted to bring up under VM/Linux, but when we tried
it we had great difficulty with it
Jon: Well, this is interesting to me as well. At a client we are
running many Oracle servers, 130 or so. Performance data much to my
delight shows that most of the time they run in Q1 or Q2. Nice.
Production servers, too, seem to serve up their objects and go idle.
Now we introduce DB2 linux
Subject: Re: zLinux experience
Actually, this leads me to a related question I have been wanting to
ask: is anyone aware of an analysis of the difference between a
single-IFL vs a multi-IFL system under VM?
We have an application we wanted to bring up under VM/Linux, but when we
tried it we had
Jon, drop a note to the folks at Velocity Software...they probably know
more about Linux performance issues in zSeries than anyone else. They've
just completed a study of how Oracle (not MySQL, I understand) performs
in this environment, and the results might have implications for what
you are
Thomas David Rivers wrote:
Yeah - that's what I meant by a white box distributor
I mean - presumably - that's an attempt to drive the purchase price
down - not up?
No. It's an attempt to standardize the environment with machine that are
all alike. White box distributors just make boxes with
- Start Original Message -
Sent: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 08:55:40 -0500
From: Dave Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The beauty of z/VM is getting all the V-Lans, V-Routers, and V-Firewalls you
want for nothing and then all that V-Cabling running at memory speeds
and also Hypersockets for LPAR
When you look at the Software cost in the TCO analysis. The OTC costs
for Oracle would have been
Intel - 5 one processor platforms running Oracle = $40K * 5 = $200K
IFL - 1 processor IFL running 5 virtual Oracles = $40K
I can't speak to specifics on Oracle maintenance price but believe it is
This reminds me of a question I had been meaning to ask: Does anyone know
whether the virtualization systems mentioned -- especially Xen and VMWare --
support overcommitment of memory?
Thanks,
Jon
snip
Just playing Devil's Advocate here...
No one has mentioned that Virtualization (i.e.
Hi, folks.
Jim Marshall, of the Office of Personnel Management (U.S.A. Federal
Government) just posted the following over on the IBM-MAIN list:
---
I have seen some requests lately for a positive zLinux experience. I am
running
hmm...
I don't mean to rain on parades, but these figures seem kinda
high to me.
Tiger Direct (here in Raleigh) is running a deal where you can
get a 3.03ghz celeron w/256K cache, 1GIG of memory in a case
(with power-supply) for $79.99. So - $2K for a PC seems awfully
pricy these days.
: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Thomas David Rivers
Sent: June 26, 2006 11:38
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: OPM zLinux Experience
hmm...
I don't mean to rain on parades, but these figures seem kinda
high to me.
Tiger Direct (here in Raleigh) is running a deal
Yeah - that's what I meant by a white box distributor
I mean - presumably - that's an attempt to drive the purchase price
down - not up? So - if those are the retail walk-in prices, I would
hope that a corporate IT dept. could do better...
- Dave Rivers -
But buying for a corporate
A few comments on the $399.99 'server'
Linux on 390 Port LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU wrote on 06/26/2006 10:38:22 AM:
hmm...
I don't mean to rain on parades, but these figures seem kinda
high to me.
Tiger Direct (here in Raleigh) is running a deal where you can
get a 3.03ghz celeron
, and not doing business with us.
Mark Post
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Thomas David Rivers
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 11:38 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: OPM zLinux Experience
hmm...
I don't mean to rain on parades
Subject: Re: OPM zLinux Experience
-snip-
You get what you pay for yes. But you also do NOT get what you DO NOT
pay for.
--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: OPM zLinux Experience
Hi, folks.
Jim Marshall, of the Office of Personnel Management (U.S.A. Federal
Government) just posted the following over on the IBM-MAIN list:
---
-snip-
Using Oracle
Ar Llu, 2006-06-26 am 11:19 -0500, ysgrifennodd James Melin:
Yes. Big reason. At what point does the box get overwhelmed by the rate of
data through the firewall and cause a network slowdown. At what point will
a single drive failure kill the box. What is the maximum sustainable data
rate
Ar Llu, 2006-06-26 am 12:32 -0400, ysgrifennodd Post, Mark K:
Mirrored drives for the OS (which requires a SCSI/SATA RAID controller)
Not really, in fact almost every raid controller sold today is BIOS
software RAID on generic controller chips.
Alan
Subject
Re: OPM
zLinux Experience
Please respond to
Linux on 390 Port LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Ar Llu, 2006-06-26 am 11:19 -0500, ysgrifennodd
77 matches
Mail list logo
