> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
>
> On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 08:26:44 -0500, John McKown wrote:
> >
> > Also, z/VM still makes VMWare look sick and immature.
> >
> Understood. But is this because z/VM does a superior job of providing
> virtual images of the underlying hardware, or because z/VM provides
> images of an architecture superior to that hardware. z/VM becomes
> something like another layer of microcode.
>
> I glanced at Sine Nomine's page about OpenSolaris for Z. There's a
> prominent restriction that it runs only under z/VM, not in an LPAR.
> So it exploits a CP feature. An easy conjecture, with no evidence,
> is that it uses CP Block DASD I/O to bypass the complexities of
> CKD channel programs.
AFAIK, PR/SM neither cares nor knows whether DASD is CKD or FBA. z/VSE
supports both, with or without z/VM in the mix. And of course z/VM
supports both.
> Then, is it fairer to compare VMWare to z/VM or to PR/SM?
Does VMWare run on "bare metal" yet?
> Is OpenSolaris for z eligible for IFL?
Since the OpenSolaris port requires z/VM, and z/VM can run on IFL, it
seems reasonable to assume so.
> Thinking about the recurrent chatter about FBA, might something
> akin to CP Block I/O be moved into PR/SM to provide FBA emulation
> or other device type imaging?
Shouldn't be necessary. AFAIK that's done in the DASD hardware
nowadays.
-jc-
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
