On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 7:26 AM, Alan Ackerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ideas on what value z/VM adds would be appreciated! Starting point should be the presentations that Reed Mullen does at various events on the value of z/VM for running Linux workloads, and the comparison between z/VM and other virtualization options. Those presentations work both ways to explain technology of the other platform. When I explained System z virtualization to a PC-minded audience (http://www.rvdheij.nl/Presentations/nluug-2007.pdf) several people afterwards confirmed that learning about System z and z/VM made them understand why they did not make progress with VMware and Xen as fast as anticipated. Some people claim their hardware is so cheap you don't have to share it like we do on the mainframe. But when you look further you find that the cost of an extra box is not just the hardware but way more. At some point it does make sense to share, even when shareable hardware may be a bit more expensive. The cost of some infrastructure components grows faster that the number of discrete boxes (i.e. explodes). This is why the scale of virtualization makes a big difference (whether you have 4 or 400 servers in a box). z/VM provides a "virtual raised floor" that replaces handling of physical components by software. Such a configuration can be managed easier, and in many cases automated to reduce cost and improve quality. Maturity of System z and z/VM frees you from a lot of low-level issues, solutions like VMware at best replace them by different issues that are hoped to be easier to manage. Rob
