Re: Mainframe vs grid
In our experience, older boxes are more expensive to operate than new ones. In our last couple of upgrades, our TCO was less each time. I honestly believe that much of the cost of running a mainframe shop is in the culture. Superstitions, baggage, management out of touch with the reality, and a PC mentality. I found it interesting that ... an aging mainframe couldn't cut it, so the IT staff looked elsewhere. An astute, bottom line oriented management would have insisted on price comparisons to include a new mainframe. I submit that a hard nosed business decision would not have gone with the grid. That said, if you are one of our competitors, then, yes, the grid is for you :-) My $0.03 -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Howard Brazee Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 7:56 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Mainframe vs grid Slashdot had this article today: http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/07/01/05/0538224.shtml IBM touted 2006 as a resurgence year for the mainframe, but not so fast. At R.L. Polk and Co., one of the oldest automobile analytics firms in the U.S., an aging mainframe couldn't cut it, so the IT staff looked elsewhere. Their search led to a grid computing environment - more specifically, a grid computing environment running Linux on more than 120 Dell servers. The mainframe's still there, apparently, but after an internal comparison showed the Linux grid outperforming the mainframe by 70% with a 65% reduction in hardware costs, Polk seemed content banishing the big box to a dark, lonely corner for more medial tasks. With a link to: http://searchopensource.stage.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,si d39_gci1237399,00.html NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any files transmitted with it are intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. The message, together with any attachment, may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, printing, saving, copying, disclosure or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete all copies. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Mainframe vs grid
I think my last company is a good example of old stuff costing more than new. We built our datacenter in 1995. We ended up buying a 3090-600S. That and all the real 3380 3390 dasd caused them to buy 4 big Liebert units. At the time, the 9672 had been out for a while with about a 60 MIP processor. They were coming out with a 100 MIP processor in September in the 9672 line, but there was no guarantee it would be available on time. September was the time we were originally going to open our datacenter. Management didn't want to bet the farm on IBM's coming out with the new model on time, so they went with the old 3090. Had they gotten the 9672 and some of the dasd that was just coming out, they probably could have gotten 1 Liebert unit. Maybe 2 for backup. I'm sure the electricity costs over the years and the maintenance costs were way more than made up for the $23,000 we paid for the 3090. We also got many strings of 3380s for maybe $1,000 a box. Even 3390s would have been cheaper in the long run. At least where I work now, they seem to be much more progressive in purchasing equipment. Eric Bielefeld Sr. z/OS Systems Programmer Lands End Dodgeville, Wisconsin 414-475-7434 - Original Message - From: Hal Merritt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Mainframe vs grid In our experience, older boxes are more expensive to operate than new ones. In our last couple of upgrades, our TCO was less each time. I honestly believe that much of the cost of running a mainframe shop is in the culture. Superstitions, baggage, management out of touch with the reality, and a PC mentality. I found it interesting that ... an aging mainframe couldn't cut it, so the IT staff looked elsewhere. An astute, bottom line oriented management would have insisted on price comparisons to include a new mainframe. I submit that a hard nosed business decision would not have gone with the grid. That said, if you are one of our competitors, then, yes, the grid is for you :-) My $0.03 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Mainframe vs grid
-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roger Bolan Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 7:15 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Mainframe vs grid I notice that the Mainframe vs grid is a new grid running new software on new hardware versus an unspecified aging mainframe running old software. One wonders how new software on a new mainframe would have compared. Regards, Roger Bolan I often wonder this as well. Unfortunately, I don't really know of any company which can afford to try two (or more) possible solutions then pick the best of the bunch. They usually must just guess. This means that management will likely either go with what they are comfortable with (and more are comfortable with newer technologies) or go with what is in vogue. -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged and/or confidential. It is for intended addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal offense. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing it. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Mainframe vs grid
---snip an aging mainframe, yea okay, so what were they running? a 9021 with 128 meg of central storage running OS/390 2.4 ? Hey, I want a 9021. But I guess I would settle on a 9121. There actually is a guy in Poughkeepsie with a 9021 in his basement. ---unsnip I'd settle for a 9221 (rack-based) system, if it takes single-phase power. :-) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Mainframe vs grid
Slashdot had this article today: http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/07/01/05/0538224.shtml IBM touted 2006 as a resurgence year for the mainframe, but not so fast. At R.L. Polk and Co., one of the oldest automobile analytics firms in the U.S., an aging mainframe couldn't cut it, so the IT staff looked elsewhere. Their search led to a grid computing environment more specifically, a grid computing environment running Linux on more than 120 Dell servers. The mainframe's still there, apparently, but after an internal comparison showed the Linux grid outperforming the mainframe by 70% with a 65% reduction in hardware costs, Polk seemed content banishing the big box to a dark, lonely corner for more medial tasks. With a link to: http://searchopensource.stage.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid39_gci1237399,00.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Mainframe vs grid
I read the article and it did not contain any information concerning the size of the mainframe that is being compared to the grid. I have seen detailed analysis of grid computing versus the use of a parallel sysplex in z/OS and the z environment compared favorably when using its capabilities. This article talks about the mainframe using VSAM files and some IMS. It seems to me like they needed to be using less VSAM and more IMS, perhaps FP to get the throughput that was required. The mainframe has plenty of options for processing large amounts of data in parallel -- similar to what this customer achieved through the use of a grid -- that provide for faster response time. Also, this article mentioned that the application changes were difficult and time consuming and that the newly written application could handle changes more quickly. This too could be handled with good application design on the mainframe. So -- what is your point -- this appears to be a project where everyone was comfortable with the programming environment of a grid and developed an application that maximized it strengths to produce a good result for the client. That is great for the client. My caution is to take this article and imply that anyone else would achieve the same result by using the same technology and that the same result could not be achieved using a mainframe. How about some basic math on the numbers presented -- one mainframe versus the grid of more than 120 Dell servers to produce an application that finished in 65% less time. Did they compare the cost and performance of three mainframes loosely coupled as a sysplex to determine what the performance would be? Let's see, three versus 120 and the three could probably outperform the 120? Don't get me wrong, I know that it is easy to second guess a solution. However, this company spent a lot of money on the completed solution. The article even says that money was in third place on their priority list. So, cost of the solution did not rule out the mainframe. It appears from the article that a single mainframe does not scale as well as 120 Dell servers. I think I could have made that leap of faith without an elaborate test. I walked away from the article with the impression that good technicians on this project did not want to use the mainframe and developed a good solution without it. However, this does not tell me that the mainframe could not have done this job equally as well had the project been composed of mainframe technicians that knew how to make the environment scale and perform equally as well as a grid. Just my bucks worth. So many words could not be worth two cents, could they? Tom Moulder snip Slashdot had this article today: http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/07/01/05/0538224.shtml IBM touted 2006 as a resurgence year for the mainframe, but not so fast. At R.L. Polk and Co., one of the oldest automobile analytics firms in the U.S., an aging mainframe couldn't cut it, so the IT staff looked elsewhere. Their search led to a grid computing environment - more specifically, a grid computing environment running Linux on more than 120 Dell servers. The mainframe's still there, apparently, but after an internal comparison showed the Linux grid outperforming the mainframe by 70% with a 65% reduction in hardware costs, Polk seemed content banishing the big box to a dark, lonely corner for more medial tasks. With a link to: http://searchopensource.stage.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid39_ gci1237399,00.html snip -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Mainframe vs grid
an aging mainframe, yea okay, so what were they running? a 9021 with 128 meg of central storage running OS/390 2.4 ? okay, sarcasm mode back off. for now. - Original Message - From: Howard Brazee [EMAIL PROTECTED] Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 8:56 AM Subject: Mainframe vs grid Slashdot had this article today: http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/07/01/05/0538224.shtml IBM touted 2006 as a resurgence year for the mainframe, but not so fast. At R.L. Polk and Co., one of the oldest automobile analytics firms in the U.S., an aging mainframe couldn't cut it, so the IT staff looked elsewhere. Their search led to a grid computing environment - more specifically, a grid computing environment running Linux on more than 120 Dell servers. The mainframe's still there, apparently, but after an internal comparison showed the Linux grid outperforming the mainframe by 70% with a 65% reduction in hardware costs, Polk seemed content banishing the big box to a dark, lonely corner for more medial tasks. With a link to: http://searchopensource.stage.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid39_gci1237399,00.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Mainframe vs grid
an aging mainframe, yea okay, so what were they running? a 9021 with 128 meg of central storage running OS/390 2.4 ? Hey, I want a 9021. But I guess I would settle on a 9121. There actually is a guy in Poughkeepsie with a 9021 in his basement. -- Will -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Mainframe vs grid
I notice that the Mainframe vs grid is a new grid running new software on new hardware versus an unspecified aging mainframe running old software. One wonders how new software on a new mainframe would have compared. Regards, Roger Bolan IBM Printing Systems Division Visit our Web site at http://www.ibm.com/printers. IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU wrote on 01/05/2007 06:56:15 AM: Slashdot had this article today: http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/07/01/05/0538224.shtml -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
