Hello from Gregg C Levine
Funny that particular comment surfaced here. If I remember correctly,
MVS was originally built, and debugged, under VM, early releases that is
of MVS, I would think, and I know everyone will correct me, that VM
itself was also built, and debugged under itself. Oh, and there were a
large amount of complaints of the early releases of MVS, abnormally
ending under VM, so this issue is neither old, nor new. Just different.
And I believe that discussion surfaced originally on the list that
discusses the H entity. Now if I have my facts wrong, I will cheerfully
accept any corrections, public or private.
-------------------
Gregg C Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------------------------------------
"The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
"Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi )
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
> John Summerfield
> Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 5:32 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: LinuxWorld Article series
> 
> > > ...
> > >This is nothing really new.  Sharing a VM system with early
releases of
> > >MVS was unpleasant.
> >
> >   I hear that it's no problem with the two in different LPARs, and
that
> > running MVS as a guest under VM works well with a surprisingly small
> > performance hit (in the 2-3% ballpark.)
> > --
> > --henry schaffer
> >
> 
> In the times when "Sharing a VM system with early releases of MVS was
> unpleasant," IBM hadn't invented LPARs and I think Gene had just
released (or
> was about to release) the S/470s.
> 
> 
> MVS+VM, I was told, made the 168 comparable in performance to a 135.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Cheers
> John Summerfield
> 
> Microsoft's most solid OS: http://www.geocities.com/rcwoolley/
> 
> Note: mail delivered to me is deemed to be intended for me, for my
disposition.
> 
> ==============================
> If you don't like being told you're wrong,
>         be right!

Reply via email to