PAVs have been used to a great degree by DB2 on the OS/390 side of the zbox. I would expect that UDB on our Linux side will appreciate the multiple exposures as well. Those of you who share read only dasd between Linux instances will probably see a benefit also. I should think, however, that the best mediator of I/O conflicts would be z/VM itself, working the multiple exposures on behalf of the Linux images at a different level.
Ingo Adlung wrote: > I'd like to gather your feedback on the requirement for Linux > exploiting Parallel Access Volume (PAV) support available on ESS > (Shark) storage subsystems and its competitors in the market. > > In the past some customers expressed their concern about the data > throughput ESCON attachments provide, which made us think about PAV > support. However, I would appreciate any thoughts about FICON based > storage attachments already satisfying your throughput requirements > or whether you consider PAV exploitation a major requirement > nonetheless ? Any opinions ? e.g. do you see requirements for it > as you can't move to FICON in the forseeable future ? > > I would appreciate your feedback, either offline or to this list. > In any case I would appreciate if you could also depict the business > scenario / solution you expect PAV exploitation being a requirement > for. > > Thanks and best regards, > > Ingo > > ********************************************************************** > Ingo Adlung, > Linux for zSeries - Strategy & Design > > The box said, 'Requires Windows95 or better', ...so I installed LINUX.
