>should be a very short interval indeed, one of some few hours, not one of days >or weeks.
In your dreams! We've been lucky to get one IPL of one LPAR a month. >Toleration schemes, which attempt to make the non-incidental compresence of >two versions of some component in the same MAS possible, are, I think, >generically ill-advised. >They are almost always management initiatives to >resolve technical problems without really addressing them; and as such they >are all but predestined to fail. I've been involved with parallel sysplex since 1994, and have never found a failure due to differing releases. I've already stated I disagree, so I won't bother to do so, again. Also, I shall not bother to address your shaky arguments without any new evidence from you to support them. Co-existance of multiple releases within a MAS has existed since long before SYSPLEX came out. SYSPLEX simply came with a changed policy of supporting only a certain number of levels instead of 'everything'. - I'm a SuperHero with neither powers, nor motivation! Kimota! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
