They still have Start Interpretive Execution? As a former OCO coordinator for VM development I'm surprised. Alas, it was a thankless job that made no one happy.
Paul Hanrahan -----Original Message----- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jan Jaeger Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 12:53 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: Intel gets virtualization clue? Rick, see this from the positive side, once SIE assist code etc has been removed, there will no longer be an argument for OCO ;-) Jan Jaeger. (How about z/VM V5 all source again?) >From: Alan Altmark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Linux on 390 Port <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: OT: Intel gets virtualization clue? >Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 08:58:22 -0400 > >On Thursday, 10/09/2003 at 12:38 EST, Richard Troth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >wrote: > > Jim ... I don't like where this is going. > > But then, I'm a purist: I see what VM offers and find little value > > in "VM in the hardware" other than to sell to those customers who > > either have the rare real problem with VM support > > or the stereotypical allergy to it. (Can't make people LIKE >something.) > >Consider what MPG offered: Increased performance. Moving to a more >powerful machine plus the ability to RESERVE or LOCK guest pages helps >make up for the loss of MPG. Plus, the limit of 6 preferred guests >makes it less interesting for server consolidation, IMHO. > > > I have been bothered by lack of "basic mode" for the past couple > > years. Maybe this is not a problem, since I hear few customers > > complaining. But then perhaps there just are not enough customers > > who have been "hit" by the issue like Jan has. > >Intellectually, from the purist's perspective, I'm sure the loss of MPG >hurts, but the reality is that of those who run zLinux, the vast >majority run in LPARs. So, the z990 changes nothing in this respect. > > > 30 LPARs is great, and probably serves a great number of customers. > > But 30 LPARs lose a whole shipload of other value that VM offers, > > that I don't need to enumerate, preaching to the choir this is. > >I don't think 30 LPARs cost VM anything. I think it makes using LPARs >less painful for those times when you need one. Psychologically, >1/30th of the machine is less impact than 1/15th. That means getting >an LPAR when you need one is easier. With HiperSockets, IEEE VLAN, and >the z/VM 4.4 virtual switch, the management of the images in those >LPARs is much easier. You can still clone and manage content from >within VM. Whether you IPL in a virtual machine or in an LPAR is a >choice based on performance requirements. > >Alan Altmark >Sr. Software Engineer >IBM z/VM Development _________________________________________________________________ Chatten met je online vrienden via MSN Messenger. http://messenger.msn.nl/
