I agree with the recommendation to get a CF engine as the best/first choice all around. I also agree to proceed with caution if you're going to share one or more CPs between the Coupling Facility Control Code (CFCC) and z/OS and/or other operating systems. "Proceed with caution" is not the same thing as "don't." You just want to be extra careful, test well, and back off the idea if it's not suitable in your environment since there are some potential issues that could surface.
However, if you have one or more CPs (general purpose processors) that you're willing to *dedicate* to a CFCC LPAR, this caution doesn't apply. In this case you're using a dedicated CP as if it were a CF engine, and that's perfectly fine. You might be dedicating a sub-capacity CP (or more than one) with different capacity characteristics than a CF engine, but there's no particular issue with that as long as you have sufficient capacity for your needs. Or, if you have some "trivial" z/OS workload sharing that CP with the CFCC, such as a "sandbox" z/OS LPAR for system programmers that sees little activity, that might be fine. There are certain upgrade scenarios when it can make a great deal of sense to use one or more CPs for the CFCC for relatively brief periods of time. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy Sipples IT Architect Executive, Industry Solutions, IBM Z & LinuxONE E-Mail: sipp...@sg.ibm.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
