Hi Timothy,
Case #1: Business as usual. Business as usual has already been taken by the budget woes. Case #2: Minimize the cost of overnight operators as much as possible (through increased automation, alerting, etc.), and compare the cost of that skeleton crew (of one?) to the likely sub-capacity license savings. We have no automation products, and cannot purchase any - budget. It seems odd to me that #1 would make financial sense, but odd is not impossible. And then.... Case #3: Case #2, plus reallocate some non-mainframe operators by shifting workload to the mainframe, starting with some workloads that can fill utilization "valleys." The mainframe operators already monitor the other systems. Mainframes are *extremely* operator-efficient -- so if there's a focus on controlling operations costs, go actually control operations costs. If you add workload to a mainframe, typically the operations staff doesn't even change. True enough, but in these budget times, with every body cutting everthing that can be cut, the layoff of staff is easily quantifiable in the amount of 'savings'. If there were other options that would reduce costs, that would be most welcome. We have already cut some staff, some software, and some maintenance services. It is also my understanding that Group Capacity L imits became available with z10, but we are on an 80 MIP z800. The ability to use an average R4H, rather than peak R4H would probably help us a lot. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Timothy Sipples" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2011 9:39:10 PM Subject: Re: Cheryl's List #148 Responding to Linda, I think you'll want to compare business cases with your management. Case #1: Business as usual. Case #2: Minimize the cost of overnight operators as much as possible (through increased automation, alerting, etc.), and compare the cost of that skeleton crew (of one?) to the likely sub-capacity license savings. It seems odd to me that #1 would make financial sense, but odd is not impossible. And then.... Case #3: Case #2, plus reallocate some non-mainframe operators by shifting workload to the mainframe, starting with some workloads that can fill utilization "valleys." Mainframes are *extremely* operator-efficient -- so if there's a focus on controlling operations costs, go actually control operations costs. If you add workload to a mainframe, typically the operations staff doesn't even change. - - - - - Timothy Sipples Resident Enterprise Architect Value Creation & Complex Deals Team IBM Growth Markets (Based in Singapore) E-Mail: [email protected] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
