Re: z/VM Linux on Cp
> -Original Message- > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of > mike.wawio...@barclays.com > Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 9:20 AM > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > Subject: Re: z/VM Linux on Cp > > It will very likely push up your software costs for all the > other LPARs on > the same machine if you need to upgrade your standard CPs. > > In general, IFLs do not count towards z/OS or z/VM software > charging by IBM > or ISVs. If you run z/VM and z/Linux in IFLs it is 'a good thing'. However, if you run your z/OS LPARs in a "Group Capacity" and limit the MSUs, then any CP power above the MSU cap is not charged to your z/OS software bill. We are doing this right now. -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * (817)-961-6183 cell john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM
Re: z/VM Linux on Cp
> Thanks, all for the answers - that is what I suspected. We have z/VM > and > z/VSE guests running in the only LPAR; if there was a move to initiate > running LINUX in the same z/VM, perhaps as a proof of concept, I > wouldn't think the costs would increase. Correct.
Re: z/VM Linux on Cp
When we first looked at this, one thing that wasn't recommended when using a CP versus an IFL was using CP Linux to run a DBMS. David, you helped us with the analysis at the time. The I/O intensive nature of the DBMS was a drawback, as was the licensing (you had to license at the full MIPS of the entire machine versus the MIPS of the IFL). Our non-DBMS deployment of Linux on CP has done its job beautifully, though. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu]on Behalf Of David Boyes Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 9:28 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: z/VM Linux on Cp > Please explain, for those of us not yet involved in Linux, why > it's not cost effective. For example, if we already have z/VM running, > there is no additional cost involved. If you already pay for VM on your standard engines, the issue is less serious. But: 1) Standard engines are 4x (or more) the cost of an IFL for equivalent horsepower. 2) Standard engines increase the computed size of the box for software licensing purposes. This can be a killer for software in other LPARs, particularly z/OS-based products. 3) Standard engines can be crippled; IFLs always run at full speed. Price per MIP is much better on IFL, especially when you can get 4x horsepower for the same spend as 1 standard CPU. 4) If you license VM on standard engines, you have to license it for all the standard engines on the entire box, not just the IFLs in the LPAR in question. 5) Use of Linux on IFLs often reduces the need for other specialty engines that are useless to general-purpose workload (eg, ZIIP, ZAAP, etc which are useless to anything but z/OS). Better yield for same spend, and the IFLs benefit ALL Linux workload, not just one z/OS instance. It'll technically work fine; it just tends to not work out from the software licensing and pricing perspective.
Re: z/VM Linux on Cp
> -Original Message- > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Charles Grady > Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 9:10 AM > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > Subject: z/VM Linux on Cp > > > OK - this one will get a laugh if sure but -- > > Will Linux run in an LPAR with only a CP and NO IFL ? > > I know that one most likely would not run a like this for long, > but being ask to install Linux PDQ in an LPAR that does NOT > have a IFL assigned. > Thanks for the reply. Yes. A CP can do everything that an IFL can do, plus a bit more (like run z/OS). When you get your IFL, all you need to do is change the LPAR defination to use the IFL instead of a CP and when you shutdown Linux/deactivate LPAR/activate LPAR/IPL Linux, the Linux system will run, as-is, on the IFL. I.e. you don't need to do anything to switch from using a CP to an IFL other than change the LPAR defination on the HMC, __no__ changes are needed in Linux if all you do is change the CP to an IFL. -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * (817)-961-6183 cell john.mck...@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM
Re: z/VM Linux on Cp
Thanks, all for the answers - that is what I suspected. We have z/VM and z/VSE guests running in the only LPAR; if there was a move to initiate running LINUX in the same z/VM, perhaps as a proof of concept, I wouldn't think the costs would increase. David Wakser -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Huegel, Thomas Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 10:28 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: z/VM Linux on Cp I have only one production z/LINUX and a test z/LINUX that runs just fine with no IFL. Most of my production is on several z/VSE guests, but I needed a LINUX for one function... The z--option was better than another INTEL box... Now if I had a plan to add dozens of z/LINUX an IFL might look more attrictave. ... a 10 at 8 but a 1 at 2 -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Wakser, David Sent: Wed 10/7/2009 9:18 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: z/VM Linux on Cp Adam: Please explain, for those of us not yet involved in Linux, why it's not cost effective. For example, if we already have z/VM running, there is no additional cost involved. David Wakser -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Adam Thornton Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 10:14 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: z/VM Linux on Cp On Oct 7, 2009, at 9:09 AM, Charles Grady wrote: > > OK - this one will get a laugh if sure but -- > > Will Linux run in an LPAR with only a CP and NO IFL ? > > I know that one most likely would not run a like this for long, > but being ask to install Linux PDQ in an LPAR that does NOT have a > IFL assigned. > Thanks for the reply. Sure, it will work. But as you've identified, it's pretty much never cost-effective over the long term to do so. Adam Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may contain material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or "Protected Health Information," within the meaning of the regulations under the Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act as amended. If it is not clear that you are the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this transmittal in error, and any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, including any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender and delete it from your system. Thank you. Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may contain material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or "Protected Health Information," within the meaning of the regulations under the Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act as amended. If it is not clear that you are the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this transmittal in error, and any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, including any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender and delete it from your system. Thank you.
Re: z/VM Linux on Cp
Thanks to all that replied. I appreciate you confirming that Linux will run on a CP without an IFL in the LPAR. That's all I needed. >>> thue...@kable.com 10/07/09 10:27AM >>> I have only one production z/LINUX and a test z/LINUX that runs just fine with no IFL. Most of my production is on several z/VSE guests, but I needed a LINUX for one function... The z--option was better than another INTEL box... Now if I had a plan to add dozens of z/LINUX an IFL might look more attrictave. ... a 10 at 8 but a 1 at 2 -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Wakser, David Sent: Wed 10/7/2009 9:18 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: z/VM Linux on Cp Adam: Please explain, for those of us not yet involved in Linux, why it's not cost effective. For example, if we already have z/VM running, there is no additional cost involved. David Wakser -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Adam Thornton Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 10:14 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: z/VM Linux on Cp On Oct 7, 2009, at 9:09 AM, Charles Grady wrote: > > OK - this one will get a laugh if sure but -- > > Will Linux run in an LPAR with only a CP and NO IFL ? > > I know that one most likely would not run a like this for long, > but being ask to install Linux PDQ in an LPAR that does NOT have a > IFL assigned. > Thanks for the reply. Sure, it will work. But as you've identified, it's pretty much never cost-effective over the long term to do so. Adam Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may contain material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or "Protected Health Information," within the meaning of the regulations under the Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act as amended. If it is not clear that you are the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this transmittal in error, and any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, including any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender and delete it from your system. Thank you. ** GDOL CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This transmission may contain confidential information protected by state or federal law. The information is intended only for use consistent with the state business discussed in this transmission.If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action based on the contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please delete this email and notify the sender immediately.Your cooperation is appreciated. **
Re: z/VM Linux on Cp
> Please explain, for those of us not yet involved in Linux, why > it's not cost effective. For example, if we already have z/VM running, > there is no additional cost involved. If you already pay for VM on your standard engines, the issue is less serious. But: 1) Standard engines are 4x (or more) the cost of an IFL for equivalent horsepower. 2) Standard engines increase the computed size of the box for software licensing purposes. This can be a killer for software in other LPARs, particularly z/OS-based products. 3) Standard engines can be crippled; IFLs always run at full speed. Price per MIP is much better on IFL, especially when you can get 4x horsepower for the same spend as 1 standard CPU. 4) If you license VM on standard engines, you have to license it for all the standard engines on the entire box, not just the IFLs in the LPAR in question. 5) Use of Linux on IFLs often reduces the need for other specialty engines that are useless to general-purpose workload (eg, ZIIP, ZAAP, etc which are useless to anything but z/OS). Better yield for same spend, and the IFLs benefit ALL Linux workload, not just one z/OS instance. It'll technically work fine; it just tends to not work out from the software licensing and pricing perspective.
Re: z/VM Linux on Cp
I have only one production z/LINUX and a test z/LINUX that runs just fine with no IFL. Most of my production is on several z/VSE guests, but I needed a LINUX for one function... The z--option was better than another INTEL box... Now if I had a plan to add dozens of z/LINUX an IFL might look more attrictave. ... a 10 at 8 but a 1 at 2 -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Wakser, David Sent: Wed 10/7/2009 9:18 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: z/VM Linux on Cp Adam: Please explain, for those of us not yet involved in Linux, why it's not cost effective. For example, if we already have z/VM running, there is no additional cost involved. David Wakser -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Adam Thornton Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 10:14 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: z/VM Linux on Cp On Oct 7, 2009, at 9:09 AM, Charles Grady wrote: > > OK - this one will get a laugh if sure but -- > > Will Linux run in an LPAR with only a CP and NO IFL ? > > I know that one most likely would not run a like this for long, > but being ask to install Linux PDQ in an LPAR that does NOT have a > IFL assigned. > Thanks for the reply. Sure, it will work. But as you've identified, it's pretty much never cost-effective over the long term to do so. Adam Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may contain material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or "Protected Health Information," within the meaning of the regulations under the Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act as amended. If it is not clear that you are the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this transmittal in error, and any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, including any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender and delete it from your system. Thank you.
Re: z/VM Linux on Cp
On Oct 7, 2009, at 9:18 AM, Wakser, David wrote: Adam: Please explain, for those of us not yet involved in Linux, why it's not cost effective. For example, if we already have z/VM running, there is no additional cost involved. David Wakser Maybe I'm undercaffeinated. Since it's in its own LPAR, you would have to pay standard-engine licensing fees, but if Linux is the only thing in that LPAR, then it doesn't matter. So never mind. I was thinking that CP-versus-IFL would mean that it would drive up your other software costs but as its own LPAR, I guess not. The cost issue--and the reason to run specialty engines--is simply that you do not want to pay standard engine licenses for engines that are not running traditional IBM mainframe workloads. Adam
Re: z/VM Linux on Cp
Hi, David. I believe what Adam is referring to is the fact that other software license charges can go up as you add general purpose engines to your system. This only matters if you're running other systems, like z/OS, in addition to z/VM and Linux guestsif you're not, then no worries. DJ Wakser, David wrote: Adam: Please explain, for those of us not yet involved in Linux, why it's not cost effective. For example, if we already have z/VM running, there is no additional cost involved. David Wakser -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Adam Thornton Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 10:14 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: z/VM Linux on Cp On Oct 7, 2009, at 9:09 AM, Charles Grady wrote: OK - this one will get a laugh if sure but -- Will Linux run in an LPAR with only a CP and NO IFL ? I know that one most likely would not run a like this for long, but being ask to install Linux PDQ in an LPAR that does NOT have a IFL assigned. Thanks for the reply. Sure, it will work. But as you've identified, it's pretty much never cost-effective over the long term to do so. Adam Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may contain material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or "Protected Health Information," within the meaning of the regulations under the Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act as amended. If it is not clear that you are the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this transmittal in error, and any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, including any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender and delete it from your system. Thank you. -- Dave Jones V/Soft www.vsoft-software.com Houston, TX 281.578.7544
Re: z/VM Linux on Cp
It will very likely push up your software costs for all the other LPARs on the same machine if you need to upgrade your standard CPs. In general, IFLs do not count towards z/OS or z/VM software charging by IBM or ISVs. If you run z/VM and z/Linux in IFLs it is 'a good thing'. Regards, Mike Mike Wawiorko Global z/OS Connectivity and Service Management GISD Platforms GRCB Technology Barclays Bank Ground Floor (C6), Turing House, Radbroke Hall, WA16 9EU (Mail Van 49) Tel: +44(0)1565 613467 or internal 7-2000-3467 Mobile: 07824527120 Email: mailto:mike.wawio...@barclays.com P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Wakser, David Sent: 07 October 2009 15:18 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: z/VM Linux on Cp Adam: Please explain, for those of us not yet involved in Linux, why it's not cost effective. For example, if we already have z/VM running, there is no additional cost involved. David Wakser -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Adam Thornton Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 10:14 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: z/VM Linux on Cp On Oct 7, 2009, at 9:09 AM, Charles Grady wrote: > > OK - this one will get a laugh if sure but -- > > Will Linux run in an LPAR with only a CP and NO IFL ? > > I know that one most likely would not run a like this for long, > but being ask to install Linux PDQ in an LPAR that does NOT have a > IFL assigned. > Thanks for the reply. Sure, it will work. But as you've identified, it's pretty much never cost-effective over the long term to do so. Adam Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may contain material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or "Protected Health Information," within the meaning of the regulations under the Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act as amended. If it is not clear that you are the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this transmittal in error, and any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, including any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender and delete it from your system. Thank you. This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for the addressee and may also be privileged or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee, or have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete it from your system and do not copy, disclose or otherwise act upon any part of this e-mail or its attachments. Internet communications are not guaranteed to be secure or virus-free. The Barclays Group does not accept responsibility for any loss arising from unauthorised access to, or interference with, any Internet communications by any third party, or from the transmission of any viruses. Replies to this e-mail may be monitored by the Barclays Group for operational or business reasons. Any opinion or other information in this e-mail or its attachments that does not relate to the business of the Barclays Group is personal to the sender and is not given or endorsed by the Barclays Group. Barclays Bank PLC.Registered in England and Wales (registered no. 1026167). Registered Office: 1 Churchill Place, London, E14 5HP, United Kingdom. Barclays Bank PLC is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority.
Re: z/VM Linux on Cp
Adam: Please explain, for those of us not yet involved in Linux, why it's not cost effective. For example, if we already have z/VM running, there is no additional cost involved. David Wakser -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Adam Thornton Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 10:14 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: z/VM Linux on Cp On Oct 7, 2009, at 9:09 AM, Charles Grady wrote: > > OK - this one will get a laugh if sure but -- > > Will Linux run in an LPAR with only a CP and NO IFL ? > > I know that one most likely would not run a like this for long, > but being ask to install Linux PDQ in an LPAR that does NOT have a > IFL assigned. > Thanks for the reply. Sure, it will work. But as you've identified, it's pretty much never cost-effective over the long term to do so. Adam Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may contain material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or "Protected Health Information," within the meaning of the regulations under the Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act as amended. If it is not clear that you are the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this transmittal in error, and any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, including any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender and delete it from your system. Thank you.
Re: z/VM Linux on Cp
On Oct 7, 2009, at 9:09 AM, Charles Grady wrote: OK - this one will get a laugh if sure but -- Will Linux run in an LPAR with only a CP and NO IFL ? I know that one most likely would not run a like this for long, but being ask to install Linux PDQ in an LPAR that does NOT have a IFL assigned. Thanks for the reply. Sure, it will work. But as you've identified, it's pretty much never cost-effective over the long term to do so. Adam
z/VM Linux on Cp
OK - this one will get a laugh if sure but -- Will Linux run in an LPAR with only a CP and NO IFL ? I know that one most likely would not run a like this for long, but being ask to install Linux PDQ in an LPAR that does NOT have a IFL assigned. Thanks for the reply. ** GDOL CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This transmission may contain confidential information protected by state or federal law. The information is intended only for use consistent with the state business discussed in this transmission.If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action based on the contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please delete this email and notify the sender immediately.Your cooperation is appreciated. **
