I did not say it was my dream configuration.
However we had to run those two banks productions and development (and
test...) on it.
Unfortunately any "more efficient" configuration required additional
processors - that means a lot of money.
And later we grew up, but we still had 2 or 3 CPs. Only the z10 had more
(5), but it was sixth CPC in a shop AFAIR.
I also remeber my co-worker CICS guy's complaint on inefficient
configuration - there was local joke "yes, we should use much more
full-sized, dedicated CPs". ;-)
--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland
W dniu 18.04.2025 o 13:35, Scott Chapman pisze:
Oh, you definitely can run a surprising number of LPARs on a single CP. That
doesn't mean that it will be the most efficient way to run in terms of total
MSUs consumed and performance consistency.
Scott
On Thu, 17 Apr 2025 16:25:22 +0200, Radoslaw Skorupka<[email protected]>
wrote:
W dniu 17.04.2025 o 14:15, Scott Chapman pisze:
[...]
I do agree in principle that most configurations should have at least 3 CPs.
Enforcing that would be good, but that's a more difficult lift in terms of the
software costs. Especially when it comes to old ISV contracts.
[...]
Well. I launched a bank on machine with one CP and 4GB memory. 9672-R16
4 LPARs, several CICS regions (~10-12 total), DB2 in 3 LPARs.
Then we launched... another bank, but the machine was rich of CPs - it
was R26 and plenty of memory (5GB).
--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
