Here is another consideration for this discussion: Until recently, deploying WAS on z/OS was very cost prohibitive, especially with the OTC and S&S costs. However, with the zNALC pricing announcement providing LPAR pricing, the playing field changed. Now you can create and control a WAS-only lpar and how many MSUs you want it to consume. z/OS, its features and some other charges for that lpar possibly drop to single digits (in the thousands of $$$ and are separate from normal z/OS WLC charges). Of course, some good reasons for this setup could assume your backstore (DB2) is on the same platform, zAAPs can be available and other synergies can be achieved (high availability, GDPS, etc.).
What is nice about z/Linux and ZNALC is that you now have application, business and infrastructural *choices* that won't break the bank based strictly on processor license cost issues we all have observed on Unix platforms and full capacity-based IPLA product charges under z/OS. Bob Richards -----Original Message----- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of McKown, John Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 4:15 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: OK - a really stupid question. > -----Original Message----- > From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Mark Post > Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 3:07 PM > To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU > Subject: Re: OK - a really stupid question. > > > >>> On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 3:49 PM, in message > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > om>, "McKown, > John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -snip- > > I think that what he is saying is that it would be cheaper > to use a zAAP > > for Java support on z/Linux and z/VM than to get another > IFL and put it > > into the pool when all it is really needed for is Java > programs. z/Linux > > and z/VM are licensed by number of CPs/IFLs and he is > assuming that a > > zAAP under z/Linux would not increase his software cost. > > I understand that. My point is that just using IFLs is (most > probably) less expensive than what's going on today. Getting > IBM to make zAAPs available on Linux is highly unlikely > (although I won't say impossible). They've already made huge > cost reductions available as is. > > > Mark Post > Ah. And I hadn't thought about it much, but it would be likely that enabling the zAAP would require a change to z/Linux dispatching as it did to z/OS as well as a modified JVM. Modifying the JVM might be OK. But to modify the z/Linux dispatcher would likely put out "too much" information about how the zAAP is enabled. Right now, that information is rather restricted so that some "hot shot" would not be as likely to try to "fake out" the z/OS dispatcher to get his own non-Java code to run on a zAAP. Of course, this later is just speculation on my part. -- John McKown LEGAL DISCLAIMER The information transmitted is intended solely for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email in error please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. SunTrust and Seeing beyond money are federally registered service marks of SunTrust Banks, Inc. [ST:XCL] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
