Dennis G. Wicks wrote:
> Greetings; (Posted to VMESA-L and LINUX-390) > > Please tell me if my recollections are correct: > > We are running a 9672-X37. We can install IFL engines > on this machine, install z/VM 4.2.0, LPAR the system with > the IFL engines in one LPAR and the 390 engines in the other, > z/VM running in both LPARS. Then we could run both 390 and linux > guests in one LPAR and just linux guests in the other. Correct. As you realise, you can't define an LPAR with both 390 engines and IFLs. > Now for a couple of questions. > > AFAIR LPARing a system has a couple of disadvantages. > Could someone refersh my menory and tell me what they are? Don't know the full details, but it has to do with the overhead imposed by another level of scheduling/despatching in the PR/SM code. Someone with better knowledge on this please chip in! > And finally, for today anyway, is there a facility for communicating > between LPARs similar to VCTCAs between guests? Unfortunately, not on the 9672. Hipersockets on the 2064 would allow you to do this, since a Hipersocket device can extend across LPARs. On your 9672 you would have to define a real CTC channel pair and do real IO between your LPARs. This is not a bad thing, just not as tidy as Hiprsockets. Cheers, Vic Cross
