On 2/18/09 11:02 AM, "Stewart Thomas J" <stewartthom...@johndeere.com> wrote:
> I've heard several people mention using EDEV with FCP. We tested FCP and EDEV > was simple to set up and get working. Giving it to Linux seemed like it took a > bit more work. It's allocated just like any other minidisk. That's its primary advantage -- you get the storage guys to hand you a bunch of really enormous chunks of space, attach them to CP and you let your directory manager hand them out as it would any other native storage type. > We had an IBM consultant come in and told us to never use EDEV > for Linux guests. Never is a pretty strong word. There is a performance penalty from the extra translation layer from 390 FBA to native FBA, but the amount of operational complexity and configuration management issues using FBA removes from the environment is often worth it. > Is anyone using EDEV FBA in production today for Linux > guests? If so, just low-I/O server or is anyone using it for Oracle/DB2? We have customers doing both successfully (native-attach and EDEV) for Oracle and DB/2. Most of the management complaints come from the native-attach people. If you have a good performance monitor, the performance difference is manageable, but it is there and you need to plan how to manage it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
