Thank you to all that responded. To summarize, several of you think it is a good idea, with the only downside being the loss of the separate reporting capability of zAAP work and zAAP eligible time.
Bob -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Al Sherkow Sent: Friday, March 18, 2011 11:41 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: zIIPs and zAAPs Bob -- I think the main point is acquiring the zIIPs with the machine avoids that potential future zAAP to zIIP conversion charge in the future. As Norman wrote with "zAAP on zIIP" all the work on that runs on the zIIP appears as zIIP work. The Java work is not "reported" in the SMF as zAAP any more. I'm not sure about the various zAAP "eligible" time fields (maybe someone else can clear this detail up). I think the odds are that overtime there will be more zIIP work in z/OS as IBM may create additional "eligible" workloads for the zIIP. Other vendors also may move some work to zIIP. Little additional work will go to the zAAPs. (though IBM has made some other work "eligible" for zAAP in addition to Java like XML processing). Al Sherkow, I/S Management Strategies, Ltd. Consulting Expertise on Capacity Planning, Performance Tuning, WLC, LPARs, IRD and LCS Software Seminars on IBM SW Pricing, LPARs, and IRD Voice: +1 414 332-3062 Web: www.sherkow.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
