On Thu, 6 Nov 2003, Jim Sibley wrote:
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 10:53:00 -0800
From: Jim Sibley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Linux on 390 Port [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Perpetuating Myths about the zSeries
Well, IBM has painted the zSeries black, put a cool
copper
]
Subject: Re: Perpetuating Myths about the zSeries
Adam:
I like where you're going with this idea... People's perception of a
computer are completely out of line with reality. I know
this is a bit off
track, but it does remind me of the movie War Games. I distinctly
remember a chubby guy
A number of years ago I worked on a project that involved donating computers and
software to police departments, so we had a lot of press coverage.
The computer was an old mini that was one of the first ones without a front panel.
Just a plain beige metal box with a couple of big clunky disk
John:
Touché'. I somehow missed that one. I do remember the acoustic coupler,
but I wasn't quick enough to pick up on the tone dial and put two and two
together. Its all part of the Hollywood fantasy. As one great actor said:
Movies is magic.
ETH
---SNIP---
autodialling with a ACOUSTIC
]
|
| cc:
|
| Subject: Re: Perpetuating Myths about the zSeries
:
|
| Subject: Re: Perpetuating Myths about the zSeries
On Thu, 2003-11-06 at 07:44, McKown, John wrote:
What I loved about war games was that the hacker's computer was somehow
autodialling with a ACOUSTIC coupled modem. I distinctly remember seeing the
handset of the phone in the acoustic modem. Oh, and the phone was PULSE
dialled, not TONE
On Thu, 2003-11-06 at 08:45, James Melin wrote:
Wasnt there somone who twiddle 'doom' so that the 'monsters' were processes
and used it to manage the system? I vaguely recall hearing about that.
Yeah. It makes process killing pretty splendidly interactive.
Adam
for the curious - http://www.cs.unm.edu/~dlchao/flake/doom/
f
At 09:10 AM 11/6/2003 -0600, you wrote:
On Thu, 2003-11-06 at 08:45, James Melin wrote:
Wasnt there somone who twiddle 'doom' so that the 'monsters' were processes
and used it to manage the system? I vaguely recall hearing about
On Wednesday, 11/05/2003 at 04:53 CST, Adam Thornton
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Finally, everyone *knows* it's not a high-performance machine unless
it's liquid-cooled. Get with the program, guys!
Go check your z990 specs! It has on-board refrigeration with fan back-up.
:-) (z900 may have it
On Thursday, 11/06/2003 at 12:22 EST, Bruce Hayden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The z900 does also, and the G6. I'm not sure about the G5.. The z800
is all air cooled. (My lawnmower is liquid cooled. Does that mean
it is high performance too? ;-)
I've seen your lawnmower. That would be a
Well, IBM has painted the zSeries black, put a cool
copper reflective strip on it, and changed the door
locks! The external cables are orange for ESCON and
bright yellow for FICON.
The only problem is that they now look exactly like
the new pSeries boxes!
=
Jim Sibley
Implementor of Linux on
Okay, now add a slave display from the Service Element to the front door, and put up a
cool screensaver, such as [EMAIL PROTECTED], and you've got something.
Besides, it would give the operator/technician something to look at when things go
wrong, so he doesn't have to open the back door.
: Perpetuating Myths about the zSeries
Adam:
I like where you're going with this idea... People's perception
of a
computer are completely out of line with reality. I know
this is a bit off
track, but it does remind me of the movie War Games. I
distinctly
remember a chubby guy (computer
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 02:00:27PM -0500, Gregg C Levine wrote:
Hmm.. What I loved about the film, was the kid's computer. It was
supposed to be an S-100 based unit, one of the IMSAI jobs. And
naturally the modem as well.
Smile when you say that, pardner...my first computer (which I still own)
On Thu, 2003-11-06 at 19:53, Jim Sibley wrote:
The only problem is that they now look exactly like
the new pSeries boxes!
A few tri-color fans and some neon tubes should fit in any
budget for a new zSeries machine. Anyone ready for a web site
devoted to zSeries casemodding then? ;-) The first
Hello from Gregg C Levine
And why wouldn't I? Thank you for bringing that up.
---
Gregg C Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Force will be with you...Always. Obi-Wan Kenobi
Use the Force, Luke. Obi-Wan Kenobi
(This company
Finally, everyone *knows* it's not a high-performance machine unless
it's liquid-cooled. Get with the program, guys!
Go check your z990 specs! It has on-board refrigeration with
fan back-up.
:-) (z900 may have it , too...i don't remember)
Yeah, but you don't get a neat clear panel so
How about George Madl's new mower? Given his grief with it, it *better*
perform, as well as make julienne fries...8-)
-- db
David Boyes
Sine Nomine Associates
The z900 does also, and the G6. I'm not sure about the
G5.. The z800
is all air cooled. (My lawnmower is liquid cooled. Does
On Thu, 2003-11-06 at 13:03, Rob van der Heij wrote:
A few tri-color fans and some neon tubes should fit in any
budget for a new zSeries machine. Anyone ready for a web site
devoted to zSeries casemodding then? ;-) The first S/390 casemod
that I know of was done by Gary who put a see-through
On Thu, 2003-11-06 at 13:57, Rob van der Heij wrote:
[Yelling] Adam! David is after your cough syrup again!
Too late, I think.
Adam
]
|
| cc:
|
| Subject: Re: Perpetuating Myths about the zSeries
: Perpetuating Myths about the zSeries
|
-
-
|
Okay, now add a slave display from the Service Element to the front
door,
and put up a cool screensaver, such as [EMAIL PROTECTED
Well, I think we're all pretty much agreed that it's the *perception* of
poor CPU performance, rather than the reality, that's the big
Linux/zSeries problem.
Therefore, may I present the following humble suggestion, aimed at
correcting this misperception among the, well, young and impressionable?
Adam:
I like where you're going with this idea... People's perception of a
computer are completely out of line with reality. I know this is a bit off
track, but it does remind me of the movie War Games. I distinctly
remember a chubby guy (computer geek) sticking his head in a 3420 tape drive
Any idea what the effort would be to write agents that work on
NT, SUN, HP, AIX, Apple, and more?
Yes, probably as well as you do. That doesn't change the fact that at least
one reasonably common tool doesn't use SNMP at this time.
The SNMP agents ARE FREE. Well supported. Cheap
to utilize.
I don't understand the need for each and every tool to have its own
client, when the same information is available -- usually
with much less
system overhead -- using SNMP.
IMHO, monitors in the Linux space need to support
technologies like SNMP.
To not do so, and to insist on your own
Gee David, calling people names? So all of the customers that
invested in a product that just can't do the job are poor sods?
And now you want IBM to write a bunch of agents to protect
these poor sod investments?
Sorry, just could not resist...
Any idea what the effort would be to write agents
YES, ABSOLUTELY! (TCO used to be called economy of
scale ).
TCO includes quite a bit more than that - investment lifetime (amortisation period)
for one.
--
Phil Payne
http://www.isham-research.com
+44 7785 302 803
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003, David Boyes wrote:
Advertising aside, that's nice (and I knew that), but there are people who
don't have, and can't/won't get ESALPS, and/or are already using another
performance tool on another platform that understands RMF-PM input.
I don't understand the need for each
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: Linux on 390 Port [EMAIL PROTECTED]
10/30/2003 04:49 PM
Please respond to Linux on 390 Port
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: Perpetuating Myths about the zSeries
My answer was, and still is (and likely always will be) avoid any
cc:
Sent by: Linux onSubject: Re: Perpetuating Myths about
the zSeries
390 Port
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
IST.EDU
10/31/2003 07:55
AM
What about memory intensive? And how do you gage the CPU intensive
applications? For example we are planning to migrate some of
our Solaris
(SPARC) applications off of SPARC and into the z/VM Linux
world.
Something that occurred to me (and since Joe Temple is kindly answering
questions):
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 7:55 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Perpetuating Myths about the zSeries
What about memory intensive? And how do you gage the CPU intensive
applications? For example we are planning to migrate some of our Solaris
(SPARC) applications off
Eric I've published a methodology for doing this kind of
migration planning. The presentation can be found at
HTTP://velocitysoftware.com/present/ConsTECH
Probably for what you want, start at
HTTP://velocitysoftware.com/present/ConsTECH/sld015.html
One day I'll add some notes to make this a little
But David, this is now TOTALLY possible using ESALPS.
ESALPS collects data from SUN, HP, WinNT, Linux, and
anything else that either NETSNMP supports, or has their
own native SNMP implementation... (but thanks for asking)
And of course when you get to Linux on zVM, ESALPS even
provides correct
[EMAIL PROTECTED]To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
e.net cc:
Sent by: Linux onSubject: Re: Perpetuating Myths about
the zSeries
390 Port
[EMAIL PROTECTED
Sibley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 7:31 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Perpetuating Myths about the zSeries
-snip-
Linux on all sorts of platforms was just a gleam in
someone's eye 5 years ago. It started getting pushed
on the zSeries 3 years ago
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: Perpetuating Myths about the zSeries
Well my question then is, what is a
transaction?
A very good question, and exactly why the how many PCs can I
consolidate?
question is basically a useless one. The answer has to include what the
PCs
I have enjoyed the responses to these questions I posed
regarding what is
a transaction. So to continue, I was asked, what are the
JVMs doing?
Not the JVMs, what are the *applications* doing? The JVMs respond in a
predictable way; it's the applications that make things messy.
But then
And here we agree. Bringing BogusMIPS into the
discussion was like
throwing a mouse in front of a cat. You distracted us
from your real
point: That things are better now than they used to
be.
Sorry, I've noticed that you so easy to distract. I'll
keep that in mind! ;-)
=
Jim Sibley
Barton wrote:
There were two redbooks this
year that looked at many performance issues. If
anything, they were
productive in finding performance issues that needed
to be
addressed.
I'm not addressing tuning, but rather taking issue
with the fact that there is very little recent
performance and
David wrote:
I'm not convinced it's even valid there, if there is
any type of virtualization (LPAR or VM) active and
there are shared resources.
Alan's right - bogomips is a red flag! And the
assumption that all people take their numbers for VM
instances in production environments is interesting
On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 10:43, Jim Sibley wrote:
So, rather grousing about bogomips, what standard
measure do you have that can measure the relative
speed of the processors!
Quake. (Mostly just kidding.)
Adam
On Wednesday, 10/29/2003 at 08:43 PST, Jim Sibley
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, rather grousing about bogomips, what standard
measure do you have that can measure the relative
speed of the processors!
I keep trying to say that the speed of the processor is not the measure.
It is the throughput
I recall someone from QNX (Quantum Computing) who wanted some Dhoomstone
ratings.
John R. Campbell, Speaker to Machines (GNUrd) {813-356|697}-5322
Adsumo ergo raptus sum
MacOS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging
Windows.
IBM Certified: IBM AIX
Jim, might I suggest you apply to the next redbook???
As for your LPAR, that probably explains a lot. In the real world,
I can't figure out why a customer who has to pay for it would
dedicate an LPAR to Linux that is at best today 1.3Ghz (z990),
at 1-2 orders of magnitude more in price than a say
Alan wrote:
Of course, OSA and FCP QDIO (DMA) changes that
picture a bit since all
of
a sudden the amount of data moving in/out is
proportional to the CPU's
ability to process the queues. Or is it? What if I
have two CPUs
operating a single DMA queue? Three CPUs? Gaaack!
What about a 64 bit
It breaks down to religious shouting because the
differences (the VM features) become too numerous
to count and wind up as fundamental to the VMer's
zSeries experience.
Or like two queens at a dress ball arguing over who
has the best costume when both costumes do what
they're supposed to do -
I'm not convinced it's even valid there, if there is
any type of virtualization (LPAR or VM) active and
there are shared resources.
Alan's right - bogomips is a red flag! And the
assumption that all people take their numbers for VM
instances in production environments is interesting
(and
Barton wrote:
Jim, might I suggest you apply to the next
redbook???
Love to, but the Boss won't let me ('nuff said). He
wants me to go back and so zOS. My forays into PT for
Linux are during slack times and weekends and when I
can get on the hardware. I got on the TREX by
promising to do a beta
]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]cc:
Sent by: Linux onSubject: Re: Perpetuating Myths about
the zSeries
390 Port
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
IST.EDU
10/29/2003 02:00
On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 02:09:10PM -0500, David Boyes wrote:
| This is programmer error -- the hardware is doing exactly what it should do,
| methinks. Correcting the developers usually helps, although that's much
| harder. I've yet to find a programming language or toolset that doesn't do
|
Alan wrote:
I would only ask that you complete the picture by
factoring in costs.Changes in prices of energy,
people, real estate, machines, etc., can bring on
board workloads that were previously out of reach.
This is the core of the TCO argument. Are you able to
achieve acceptable results at a
On Tuesday, 10/28/2003 at 08:57 PST, Jim Sibley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
mp2000 - less than 200 bogomips
9672-zz7 (g6) 630 bogomips
2064-116 (z1) 820 bogomips
2084-b16 (Trexx GA1) 2400 bogomips!
The speed of the top of the line zSeries has increased
at four fold in the last 3-4 years.
It
On Tue, 2003-10-28 at 10:57, Jim Sibley wrote:
The speed of the top of the line zSeries has increased
at four fold in the last 3-4 years.
I'd be amazed if Intel hasn't done at least this well too.
Adam
On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 11:21:23AM -0600, Adam Thornton wrote:
| On Tue, 2003-10-28 at 10:57, Jim Sibley wrote:
| The speed of the top of the line zSeries has increased
| at four fold in the last 3-4 years.
|
| I'd be amazed if Intel hasn't done at least this well too.
It probably has. But
Ignoring BogoMIPS arguments for the time being and returning to what I think
Jim was really asking: Our original recommendations as to what type of
workloads were good matches for the 390 architecture were based on the G5/G6
boxes, now that we have the z990 with its enhanced instruction
/28/2003 01:14 PM
Please respond to Linux on 390 Port
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: Perpetuating Myths about the zSeries
On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 11:21:23AM -0600, Adam Thornton wrote:
| On Tue, 2003-10-28 at 10:57, Jim Sibley wrote:
| The speed
:27 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Perpetuating Myths about the zSeries
I have heard the story line, If you have high transaction
volume, then
you don't want Big Blue IRON. Well my question then is, what is a
transaction? Is this a computation, is this prime number
generation
with this problem then just aborting the program. Users find this problem really
annoying.
-Original Message-
From: Eric Sammons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 10:27 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Perpetuating Myths about the zSeries
I have heard the story line
On Tuesday, 10/28/2003 at 01:27 EST, Eric Sammons
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thoughts???
I don't think we're trying to compare (in this discussion, anyway) the
relative merits of different platforms. The question at hand is whether
the latest generation of zSeries hardware and software have
-Original Message-
From: Fargusson.Alan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 12:49 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Perpetuating Myths about the zSeries
snip
If I may ramble on a bit: one thing I have noticed is that
all systems I have worked with have
Well my question then is, what is a
transaction?
A very good question, and exactly why the how many PCs can I consolidate?
question is basically a useless one. The answer has to include what the PCs
are doing and how they do it. It's comparing apples and pumpkins.
So what is a transaction?
On Windows this
results in the famous general protection fault, on Unix it
results in the famous segmentation fault, and on z/OS it is
the famous SOC4. I wonder if there isn't a better way to
deal with this problem then just aborting the program. Users
find this problem really annoying.
On Tuesday, 10/28/2003 at 10:49 PST, Fargusson.Alan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If I may ramble on a bit: one thing I have noticed is that all systems I
have
worked with have one common problem, which is programs that try to
access
memory regions outside of the allocated virtual memory for the
On Tue, 2003-10-28 at 13:09, David Boyes wrote:
This is programmer error -- the hardware is doing exactly what it should do,
methinks. Correcting the developers usually helps, although that's much
harder. I've yet to find a programming language or toolset that doesn't do
exactly what the
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Perpetuating Myths about the zSeries
On Windows this
results in the famous general protection fault, on Unix it
results in the famous segmentation fault, and on z/OS it is
the famous SOC4. I wonder if there isn't a better way to
deal with this problem then just
-Original Message-
From: Fargusson.Alan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 1:35 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Perpetuating Myths about the zSeries
Of course this is a programmer error, and the hardware is
doing the right thing. But is the OS doing
I think you could make the case that PROLOG, when it's behaving
nondeterministically, is *perhaps* not doing what the programmer tells
it to.
MMf. The argument on whether data-driven languages like Prolog or Standard
ML are deterministic or not is a very fine line (and has nothing to do with
- Original Message -
From: David Boyes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 1:09 PM
Subject: Re: Perpetuating Myths about the zSeries
On Windows this
results in the famous general protection fault, on Unix it
results in the famous segmentation
Of course this is a programmer error, and the hardware is
doing the right thing. But is the OS doing the right thing?
The programmer didn't ask the OS to abort the program.
Ostensibly the reason that the OS is limiting access is to do resource
access or utilization controls. If the
Alan wrote:
Why should anyone give a rats behind about bogomips
numbers? A
four-fold
increase in bogomips says only that bogomips runs 4
times as fast as it
used to.
Your question about comparisons of competitiveness is
interesting, but
not
in the context of bogomips. I would ask if TCO has
On Tuesday, 10/28/2003 at 01:30 PST, Jim Sibley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Its like the old TSO is slow myth vs CMS. In the few
years of the of the s/360, TSO was slow and a lot of
products tried to replace it (ROSCOE, etc). Once TSO
got improved, the myth persisted.
Yes, but in this case
First of all, it was not a myth that TSO was slow when
compared to CMS. And i'm not religious about CMS vs TSO.
Second, i'd really like a concrete example of what performance
literature is way behind for Linux. There were two redbooks this
year that looked at many performance issues. If
Jim said:
Its like the old TSO is slow myth vs CMS. In the few
years of the of the s/360, TSO was slow and a lot of
products tried to replace it (ROSCOE, etc). Once TSO
got improved, the myth persisted.
In a shop with heavy use of both VM (CMS) and MVS
one could gather evidence from objective
76 matches
Mail list logo
