CMM-1 is almost always appropriate (SLES9, SLES10, RHEL4, RHEL5). CMMA
is NOT. CMM1 is recommended, CMMA is not. Mark is right on the numbers.
Paul, Thomas wrote:
Hi Mark,
CMM is not applicable here because of the S/W & H/W. 1M is nothing to
brag about. Thank you for the input.
Thanks
Tom
-----Original Message-----
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On
Behalf Of Mark Post
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 4:11 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Linux Sizing & z/VM Customization
On 8/27/2009 at 10:26 AM, "Paul, Thomas" <thomas.p...@iso.com>
wrote:
-snip-
2. Linux Sizing - All Linux guests are independent - in other words,
they
all have their own Kernel, etc. The idea is to build an NSS and make
it
like a CMS user. So, if I accomplish that what would be the size of
z/Linux guest under z/VM with just z/Linux running. And, second if I
do
build DCSS for Websphere binary, how much storage would I be able to
save?
Currently, most of them running at 1.2G & 1.5G.
If by "build an NSS" you mean having the kernel in an NSS, that will
save you about 1MB per guest that uses it. Not a whole lot.
According to Barton Robinson of Velocity Software, you get the biggest
real storage savings by using CMM and xip2fs. (If I'm remembering
wrong, I know Barton will correct this.)
CMM is the easiest to implement, and doesn't really require any effort
to maintain. Setting up xip2fs is not terribly easy to set up (I'm
working on getting that changed) and not easy to maintain. Still, if
you're really constrained, it may be worth the effort. For some insight
into that process, look at the presentation on it at
http://linuxvm.org/Present/
Mark Post
This email is intended for the recipient only. If you are not the intended
recipient please disregard, and do not use the information for any purpose.
