Re: SLES 11 ECKD DASD issue
Yes. And I tried both formatting at the mini disk level and not formatting the mini disks. Possible I made a mistake with CPFMTXA? The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it. From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:linux-...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Post Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 3:33 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: SLES 11 ECKD DASD issue >>> On 9/23/2009 at 1:38 PM, "Guyer, Jim" wrote: > Hello, > > I'm trying to install SLES 11 on our z/VM 5.3 system. When I get to > the DASD Disk Management page to activate/format the disks, the system > fails to bring them active. Was CPFMTXA run against them to initialize them? Mark Post -- 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 -- 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
Re: SLES 11 ECKD DASD issue
>>> On 9/23/2009 at 1:38 PM, "Guyer, Jim" wrote: > Hello, > > I'm trying to install SLES 11 on our z/VM 5.3 system. When I get to the > DASD Disk Management page to activate/format the disks, the system fails > to bring them active. Was CPFMTXA run against them to initialize them? Mark Post -- 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
Re: When will CMMA be removed from the kernel?
> Xenia, wouldn't it be better if VMRM didn't have ... > ... > Our approach is to look in side (sic) the server ... Moderator - order in the court please! Again, we're all trying to do what is best for the z/VM/Linux customer. Let's try to understand the difference between how VMRM and *this other approach* is sending signals to the penguin farm to resize siervers. Barton, could you please supply some documentation as to how ESALPS's equivalent to VMRM is better. Thanks. "Mike MacIsaac"(845) 433-7061 -- 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
SLES 11 ECKD DASD issue
Hello, I'm trying to install SLES 11 on our z/VM 5.3 system. When I get to the DASD Disk Management page to activate/format the disks, the system fails to bring them active. When I SSH in they aren't online and I have the messages in the log: dasd: 0.0.0201: default ERP in fastpath (4 retries left) dasd: 0.0.0201: default ERP in fastpath (3 retries left) dasd: 0.0.0201: default ERP in fastpath (2 retries left) dasd: 0.0.0201: default ERP in fastpath (1 retries left) dasd_generic couldn't online device 0.0.0201 with discipline ECKD rc=-5 This is the first install on our z10 box, but I can't imagine that is a problem. I found where there was some kind of bug in the kernel, but I don't think it applies - Linux version 2.6.27.19-5-default. Where did I go wrong? Thanks! Jim Jim Guyer The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy 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
Re: When will CMMA be removed from the kernel?
Xenia, wouldn't it be better if VMRM didn't have to depend on users remembering to do this as their workload changes? If they have one large server say with a large oracle application, the minimum value setting would have to be the minimum for this server? So all servers are treated and trimmed equally. And if the users happen to change their workload (but we know users don't do this), the setting would be changed after the first outage? Our approach is to look in side the server and not depend on a systems staff that must know everything their users are doing. (And yes Mike this could be considered marketing - but what an opportunity) Xenia Tkatschow wrote: I'm curious that Barton wrote on August 28th: VMRM has taken so much storage away from servers that the server or application dies. I would HIGHLY recommend against using it. z/VM has recently documented how to keep VMRM from eating up too much memory, though the mechansim to do so has been there since at least 5.2. The z/VM Performance book, Chapter 17 - VMRM Tuning Parameters, talks about a constant MinRequired. MinRequired is the minimum amount of memory the Linux guest(s) must have at all times. VMRM will not ask the guest(s) to shrink beyond that point. Below is the usage note added to Chapter 17 of the z/VM Performance book. 4. Use of VMRM-CMM can potentially reduce the performance of one or more of the participating Linux guests because VMRM can ask the Linux guests to give up too much memory resulting in the Linux guests using excessive CPU time trying to find more storage to give up and leaving little CPU time available for useful work. To prevent this situation from happening, VMRM has a configurable constant that defines a value below which VMRM will not ask the Linux guests to shrink. By default, this safety net value is 64MB, but for certain workloads, the value may be too low, thus causing poor performance. The safety net value is defined by the constant MinRequired in the VMRM constants file, IRMCONS COPY, and by default is set to 16384 pages. To change the safety net value, update the value of constant MinRequired (set in pages) in file IRMCONS COPY. The update should be made as a local modification using the automated local modification procedure documented in Appendix D in the z/VM Guide for Automated Installation and Service. For more info, see APAR 64439 for z/VM 5.2 and z/VM 5.3 and informational APAR II14518 for z/VM 5.4 Xenia Tkatschow z/VM Performance Endicott, NY 13760 -- 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 -- 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 <>
Re: When will CMMA be removed from the kernel?
I'm curious that Barton wrote on August 28th: > VMRM has taken so much storage away from servers that the > server or application dies. I would HIGHLY recommend against using it. z/VM has recently documented how to keep VMRM from eating up too much memory, though the mechansim to do so has been there since at least 5.2. The z/VM Performance book, Chapter 17 - VMRM Tuning Parameters, talks about a constant MinRequired. MinRequired is the minimum amount of memory the Linux guest(s) must have at all times. VMRM will not ask the guest(s) to shrink beyond that point. Below is the usage note added to Chapter 17 of the z/VM Performance book. 4. Use of VMRM-CMM can potentially reduce the performance of one or more of the participating Linux guests because VMRM can ask the Linux guests to give up too much memory resulting in the Linux guests using excessive CPU time trying to find more storage to give up and leaving little CPU time available for useful work. To prevent this situation from happening, VMRM has a configurable constant that defines a value below which VMRM will not ask the Linux guests to shrink. By default, this safety net value is 64MB, but for certain workloads, the value may be too low, thus causing poor performance. The safety net value is defined by the constant MinRequired in the VMRM constants file, IRMCONS COPY, and by default is set to 16384 pages. To change the safety net value, update the value of constant MinRequired (set in pages) in file IRMCONS COPY. The update should be made as a local modification using the automated local modification procedure documented in Appendix D in the z/VM Guide for Automated Installation and Service. For more info, see APAR 64439 for z/VM 5.2 and z/VM 5.3 and informational APAR II14518 for z/VM 5.4 Xenia Tkatschow z/VM Performance Endicott, NY 13760 -- 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
Re: When will CMMA be removed from the kernel?
Barton, I wrote, > ... could you point to some numbers ... You replied, but I don't see a reference to any numbers. You wrote in a reply: > VMRM should have been enough, but it has very poor feed back > mechanisms, and has no clue about what is happening inside Linux. And: > With that in mind, with our ESALPS, we do know what is going > on inside of Linux Again, without numbers, these claims seem to be just advertisements. Which version of ESALPS and which version of VMRM? Was the latest z/VM service applied? Please supply some support to these claims. Who was it that wrote "If you can't measure it, I'm just not interested"? (we spar but I know both of us just want the best for the z/VM/Linux customer :)) Thanks. "Mike MacIsaac"(845) 433-7061 -- 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
Re: When will CMMA be removed from the kernel?
>>> On 9/23/2009 at 10:51 AM, Michael MacIsaac wrote: -snip- > Good question. You've turned on CMM1 on Linux, but as I understand it, > there must also be a *collaborative* piece enabled on z/VM. If you want to have the size of the "balloon" dynamically changed with insight from the z/VM perspective, then yes. If all you want to do is squeeze a particular guest or two to get a solid feel for what size they should be permanently, then you can do that manually. Mark Post -- 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
Re: When will CMMA be removed from the kernel?
Mike, CMM does require a collaborative piece. Or one can tune the system manually with CMM commands, but that gets boring. VMRM should have been enough, but it has very poor feed back mechanisms, and has no clue about what is happening inside Linux. It is thus severely limited, has lots of reported crashing of servers; it can not be trusted to understand or tune a production system. VMRM will more likely make performance worse or crash servers than help. With that in mind, with our ESALPS, we do know what is going on inside of Linux including size of page cache, available storage, and don't have to rely on looking at virtual disk i/o to know how much virtual disk is actually in use - we get that information from Linux real time. After writing some ESAMON rexx macro's to use this information to then issue CMM commands - thus validating the ability to provide your "collaborative piece", we've decided to produce the Velocity Resource Manager (VRM) to issue these commands. VRM requires Version 4 of ESALPS - now named the "z Velocity Performance Suite (zVPS). Since we DO have the interest of producing better performance and have the ability to validate tuning actions, i see very positive potential for VRM. A couple other items that will be in VRM: - Limiting servers to specified CPU levels to reduce software costs - Limit groups of servers to specified CPU levels to manage chargeback for users Michael MacIsaac wrote: Sam, I'm curious that Barton wrote on August 28th: VMRM has taken so much storage away from servers that the server or application dies. I would HIGHLY recommend against using it. But he wrote today: CMM-1 has very positive results So does CMM-1 have positive results without the collaborative piece? Barton, could you point to some numbers showing CMM-1 with positive results without VMRM? Did you use a different z/VM collaborative piece? Thanks. "Mike MacIsaac"(845) 433-7061 -- 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 -- 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 <>
Re: When will CMMA be removed from the kernel?
All of our RHEL4 guests are pre-update-7 and unlikely to be upgraded any time soon. I think I've seen this doc before. Thanks though. -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:linux-...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of dave Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 9:35 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] When will CMMA be removed from the kernel? This presentation might be of some interest to those looking at the CMM-1 and CMM2/CMMA options: http://www.linuxvm.org/Present/SHARE113/S9272lj.pdf Enjoy. DJ - Original Message - From: "Hall, Ken (GTS)" To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: When will CMMA be removed from the kernel? Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 11:45:29 -0400 > We tried CMM-1 a month or two ago on a single guest. > Without VMRM, there's nothing for it to talk to, so it > does nothing. (It works by having VMRM send it notices to > decrease working set size.) > > With it enabled on one guest, on a machine slightly memory > constrained, it drove the memory utilization of the guest > down to the point that it wouldn't run at all. Obviously, > it has to be enabled on a significant percentage of your > guests to be useful. > > Most of ours are RHEL4 though, so (I believe) that's out > of the question. We're still evaluating. > > > -Original Message- > From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:linux-...@vm.marist.edu] > On Behalf Of Michael MacIsaac > Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 10:51 AM > To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU > Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] When will CMMA be removed from > the kernel? > > Sam, > > > We load the CMM module via > > /etc/sysconfig/kernel > > MODULES_LOADED_ON_BOOT="vmcp cmm" > > > > So what is it that we have turned on? > Good question. You've turned on CMM1 on Linux, but as I > understand it, there must also be a *collaborative* piece > enabled on z/VM. > > In both the latest Virtualization Cookbooks > (ibm.com/redbooks), and the SLES 10 SP2 "read-only" root > paper (linuxvm.org/present), there is a writeup on how to > use CMM1 (much of this section was written by Ray Mansell > - thanks Ray!). Search for "Enabling Collaborative Memory > Management". It discusses how to also enable the > collaborative piece: VMRM > on z/VM. > > I'm curious that Barton wrote on August 28th: > > VMRM has taken so much storage away from servers that > > the server or application dies. I would HIGHLY > recommend against using it. > > But he wrote today: > > CMM-1 has very positive results > > So does CMM-1 have positive results without the > collaborative piece? Barton, could you point to some > numbers showing CMM-1 with positive results without VMRM? > Did you use a different z/VM collaborative piece? Thanks. > > "Mike MacIsaac"(845) 433-7061 > > -- > 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 > > -- > This message w/attachments (message) may > be privileged, confidential or proprietary, and if you are > not an intended recipient, please notify the sender, do > not use or share it and delete it. Unless specifically > indicated, this message is not an offer to sell or a > solicitation of any investment products or other financial > product or service, an official confirmation of any > transaction, or an official statement of Merrill Lynch. > Subject to applicable law, Merrill Lynch may monitor, > review and retain e-communications (EC) traveling through > its networks/systems. The laws of the country of each > sender/recipient may impact the handling of EC, and EC may > be archived, supervised and produced in countries other > than the country in which you are located. This message > cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free. > References to "Merrill Lynch" are references to any > company in the Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. group of > companies, which are wholly-owned by Bank of America > Corporation. Securities and Insurance Products: * Are Not > FDIC Insured * Are Not Bank Guaranteed * May Lose Value * > Are Not a Bank Deposit * Are Not a Condition to Any > Banking Service or Activity * Are Not Insured by Any > Federal Government Agency. Attachments that are part of > this E-communication may have additional important > disclosures and disclaimers, which you should read. This > message is subject to terms available at the following > link: http://www.ml.com/e-communications_terms/. By > messaging with Merrill Lynch you consent to the foregoing. > -- > > > > -- > 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.m
Re: Linux and z/VM Wiki
>>> On 9/23/2009 at 9:51 AM, David Boyes wrote: -snip- > I like the idea of user created documentation, but maybe there's a way to > notify this list with a summary of updates every so often. That would > ameliorate some of my crankyness. The RecentChanges page has an RSS feed button on it. (Also an "Atom" button that has the same icon as the RSS feed, but I'm not familiar with that.) But, that will notify you every time a new user account is created, etc. But beyond that, the idea of a Wiki isn't something you look at every so often to see if anything changed. You go there to look for something specific, when you need to find it. If there are particular pages you really do want to be notified about when changed, you can "watch" that article. Hmm. Writing this has given me the idea that we should have a "Topics Needed/Wanted" page, and people who are interested in contributing can watch that page to be notified when a new topic is added or removed. That would be better than using the main page, once we start to get a significant amount of content there. Mark Post -- 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
Re: Linux and z/VM Wiki
>>> On 9/23/2009 at 1:36 AM, "Douglas M. Wooster" wrote: -snip- > I'm sure one could use a Wiki as a discussion > forum, but it really seems better suited to developing, storing, and > searching reference material. I'm not sure how this meme got started, but nobody is advocating moving general discussion from the mailing list to the Wiki. What I _did_ say/mean was that as the Wiki grows, I would like to see the discussion of what content goes where (organization/structure), what other topics are needed, what existing topics need editing, etc., happen on the Talk pages of the Wiki itself, not here. Until the number of people actively contributing to the Wiki reaches whatever critical mass is necessary, most of that discussion is going to have to happen in this mailing list. That's a significant difference, obviously, and one that I believe respects the time of the people on the list that aren't going to be interested in such minutiae. > Being able to place documentation > where other people can find it, like you can do on a wiki, is great, > when you have something authoritative to say. Given the population of this mailing list, I can't think of any more authoritative source. Everyone from the people doing actual z/VM and Linux development, to the distribution providers, to the "old hands" at z/VM and Linux, to the brand new person is represented here. Mark Post -- 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
Re: When will CMMA be removed from the kernel?
This presentation might be of some interest to those looking at the CMM-1 and CMM2/CMMA options: http://www.linuxvm.org/Present/SHARE113/S9272lj.pdf Enjoy. DJ - Original Message - From: "Hall, Ken (GTS)" To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: When will CMMA be removed from the kernel? Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 11:45:29 -0400 > We tried CMM-1 a month or two ago on a single guest. > Without VMRM, there's nothing for it to talk to, so it > does nothing. (It works by having VMRM send it notices to > decrease working set size.) > > With it enabled on one guest, on a machine slightly memory > constrained, it drove the memory utilization of the guest > down to the point that it wouldn't run at all. Obviously, > it has to be enabled on a significant percentage of your > guests to be useful. > > Most of ours are RHEL4 though, so (I believe) that's out > of the question. We're still evaluating. > > > -Original Message- > From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:linux-...@vm.marist.edu] > On Behalf Of Michael MacIsaac > Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 10:51 AM > To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU > Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] When will CMMA be removed from > the kernel? > > Sam, > > > We load the CMM module via > > /etc/sysconfig/kernel > > MODULES_LOADED_ON_BOOT="vmcp cmm" > > > > So what is it that we have turned on? > Good question. You've turned on CMM1 on Linux, but as I > understand it, there must also be a *collaborative* piece > enabled on z/VM. > > In both the latest Virtualization Cookbooks > (ibm.com/redbooks), and the SLES 10 SP2 "read-only" root > paper (linuxvm.org/present), there is a writeup on how to > use CMM1 (much of this section was written by Ray Mansell > - thanks Ray!). Search for "Enabling Collaborative Memory > Management". It discusses how to also enable the > collaborative piece: VMRM > on z/VM. > > I'm curious that Barton wrote on August 28th: > > VMRM has taken so much storage away from servers that > > the server or application dies. I would HIGHLY > recommend against using it. > > But he wrote today: > > CMM-1 has very positive results > > So does CMM-1 have positive results without the > collaborative piece? Barton, could you point to some > numbers showing CMM-1 with positive results without VMRM? > Did you use a different z/VM collaborative piece? Thanks. > > "Mike MacIsaac"(845) 433-7061 > > -- > 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 > > -- > This message w/attachments (message) may > be privileged, confidential or proprietary, and if you are > not an intended recipient, please notify the sender, do > not use or share it and delete it. Unless specifically > indicated, this message is not an offer to sell or a > solicitation of any investment products or other financial > product or service, an official confirmation of any > transaction, or an official statement of Merrill Lynch. > Subject to applicable law, Merrill Lynch may monitor, > review and retain e-communications (EC) traveling through > its networks/systems. The laws of the country of each > sender/recipient may impact the handling of EC, and EC may > be archived, supervised and produced in countries other > than the country in which you are located. This message > cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free. > References to "Merrill Lynch" are references to any > company in the Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. group of > companies, which are wholly-owned by Bank of America > Corporation. Securities and Insurance Products: * Are Not > FDIC Insured * Are Not Bank Guaranteed * May Lose Value * > Are Not a Bank Deposit * Are Not a Condition to Any > Banking Service or Activity * Are Not Insured by Any > Federal Government Agency. Attachments that are part of > this E-communication may have additional important > disclosures and disclaimers, which you should read. This > message is subject to terms available at the following > link: http://www.ml.com/e-communications_terms/. By > messaging with Merrill Lynch you consent to the foregoing. > -- > > > > -- > 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 -- 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
Re: When will CMMA be removed from the kernel?
We tried CMM-1 a month or two ago on a single guest. Without VMRM, there's nothing for it to talk to, so it does nothing. (It works by having VMRM send it notices to decrease working set size.) With it enabled on one guest, on a machine slightly memory constrained, it drove the memory utilization of the guest down to the point that it wouldn't run at all. Obviously, it has to be enabled on a significant percentage of your guests to be useful. Most of ours are RHEL4 though, so (I believe) that's out of the question. We're still evaluating. -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:linux-...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of Michael MacIsaac Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 10:51 AM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] When will CMMA be removed from the kernel? Sam, > We load the CMM module via > /etc/sysconfig/kernel > MODULES_LOADED_ON_BOOT="vmcp cmm" > > So what is it that we have turned on? Good question. You've turned on CMM1 on Linux, but as I understand it, there must also be a *collaborative* piece enabled on z/VM. In both the latest Virtualization Cookbooks (ibm.com/redbooks), and the SLES 10 SP2 "read-only" root paper (linuxvm.org/present), there is a writeup on how to use CMM1 (much of this section was written by Ray Mansell - thanks Ray!). Search for "Enabling Collaborative Memory Management". It discusses how to also enable the collaborative piece: VMRM on z/VM. I'm curious that Barton wrote on August 28th: > VMRM has taken so much storage away from servers that the > server or application dies. I would HIGHLY recommend against using it. But he wrote today: > CMM-1 has very positive results So does CMM-1 have positive results without the collaborative piece? Barton, could you point to some numbers showing CMM-1 with positive results without VMRM? Did you use a different z/VM collaborative piece? Thanks. "Mike MacIsaac"(845) 433-7061 -- 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 -- This message w/attachments (message) may be privileged, confidential or proprietary, and if you are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender, do not use or share it and delete it. Unless specifically indicated, this message is not an offer to sell or a solicitation of any investment products or other financial product or service, an official confirmation of any transaction, or an official statement of Merrill Lynch. Subject to applicable law, Merrill Lynch may monitor, review and retain e-communications (EC) traveling through its networks/systems. The laws of the country of each sender/recipient may impact the handling of EC, and EC may be archived, supervised and produced in countries other than the country in which you are located. This message cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free. References to "Merrill Lynch" are references to any company in the Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. group of companies, which are wholly-owned by Bank of America Corporation. Securities and Insurance Products: * Are Not FDIC Insured * Are Not Bank Guaranteed * May Lose Value * Are Not a Bank Deposit * Are Not a Condition to Any Banking Service or Activity * Are Not Insured by Any Federal Government Agency. Attachments that are part of this E-communication may have additional important disclosures and disclaimers, which you should read. This message is subject to terms available at the following link: http://www.ml.com/e-communications_terms/. By messaging with Merrill Lynch you consent to the foregoing. -- -- 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
Re: When will CMMA be removed from the kernel?
Sam, > We load the CMM module via > /etc/sysconfig/kernel > MODULES_LOADED_ON_BOOT="vmcp cmm" > > So what is it that we have turned on? Good question. You've turned on CMM1 on Linux, but as I understand it, there must also be a *collaborative* piece enabled on z/VM. In both the latest Virtualization Cookbooks (ibm.com/redbooks), and the SLES 10 SP2 "read-only" root paper (linuxvm.org/present), there is a writeup on how to use CMM1 (much of this section was written by Ray Mansell - thanks Ray!). Search for "Enabling Collaborative Memory Management". It discusses how to also enable the collaborative piece: VMRM on z/VM. I'm curious that Barton wrote on August 28th: > VMRM has taken so much storage away from servers that the > server or application dies. I would HIGHLY recommend against using it. But he wrote today: > CMM-1 has very positive results So does CMM-1 have positive results without the collaborative piece? Barton, could you point to some numbers showing CMM-1 with positive results without VMRM? Did you use a different z/VM collaborative piece? Thanks. "Mike MacIsaac"(845) 433-7061 -- 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
Re: Linux and z/VM Wiki
Wow..I don't really know how this discussion got so far off-base. For several years now, there has been a lot of discussion in the z/VM community about the need to have a place to collect the "wisdom of the elders", i.e. the knowledge and experience of those of us who have been doing this a long time and which can be of help to the new folks who keep showing up asking for help. A wiki seemed like a useful place to try and do that. (Dave even tried to get something like this going a few years ago.) Mark Post is simply trying to get that movement going again and I appreciate his efforts. Since Linux continues to be the "hot thing" that companies are putting on z/VM, it makes sense to include information on it in the wiki too. Absolutely no one has suggested getting rid of this list or supplanting it with the wiki. There is certainly no reason the two cannot coexist nicely. Whether or not you are willing to trust the information provided on the wiki is totally up to each individual. Just because some wiki's are full of crap isn't really a good reason not to try this one. If there are problems with the way the wiki is managed, we'll deal with it. We are simply trying to fill a need that, so far, no one has successfully addressed. Martha McConaghy (SHARE Linux and VM Program Manager) Strategic Planner/Project Manager Marist College -- 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
Re: Linux and z/VM Wiki
> for anything new one has to go looking. > > In contrast, everything on this list arrives in my inbox. I see > everything, choose what to read, respond where I feel the urge. If it > was a wiki, I'd be battling to keep up, I'd probably just fall away. General rant aside, I think that's the point that gets me the most. I want the technology to *tell* me when something interesting happens (for sufficiently wide definitions of "interesting"), not have to go look for it. I have plenty of other stuff to do, and having to poll the wiki to find out if there's something interesting going on is IMHO a step backwards. I like the idea of user created documentation, but maybe there's a way to notify this list with a summary of updates every so often. That would ameliorate some of my crankyness. > A site like http://isay.js.id.au/ can be good for documenting stuff (or > publishing one's opinions), and http://www.php.net shows how well > documentation based on a wiki can work, Note that both are heavily and systematically edited.
Re: When will CMMA be removed from the kernel?
I was wondering how you turn on each of the offerings. I have looked in several manuals and they talk about and compare the CMM offerings, but they were not specific on implementation. We load the CMM module via /etc/sysconfig/kernel MODULES_LOADED_ON_BOOT="vmcp cmm" So what is it that we have turned on? Sam Bass -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:linux-...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of Leland Lucius Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 4:53 AM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: When will CMMA be removed from the kernel? Barton Robinson wrote: > So you should probably measure the two before deciding on which one you > want to keep. CMM-1 has very positive results, cmma not so positive. > At the risk of bringing on the wrath of the performance gods, I just have to say that I'm not really interested in measuring whether CMMA is better then CMM-1. If the folks at IBM think that CMMA was worthwhile enough to implement, then I'll drink their Kool-Aid and be happy with it. Especially since CMMA is so much easier to manage...just turn the blasted thing on. And it just makes sense for the two OSes to "actively" communicate page states rather than the not-so-dynamic method of CMM-1. Leland -- 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 -- 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
Re: OpenSolaris and Luminex
> Is OpenSolaris on zLinux viable or is it still in early development? Well, we think so. It's been very stable so far. It's available, with support, etc. Drop me a note offlist and let's see what can be done. -- db -- 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
Re: Linux and z/VM Wiki
John Summerfield wrote: Jack Woehr wrote: John Summerfield wrote: Who should, sensibly, assume that this site speaks for any part of the Linux community? Well, the Linux on z/VM community. It needs a wiki. It's a good idea. It's a shame you quoted me without context. Wasn't the intent, John. I was springboarding off of a line of your prose to say something I wanted to say about the Wiki itself. Not arguing with you, more like a relay handoff. -- Jack J. Woehr# «'I know what "it" means well enough, when I find http://www.well.com/~jax # a thing,' said the Duck: 'it's generally a frog or http://www.softwoehr.com # a worm.'» - Lewis Carroll, _Alice in Wonderland_ -- 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
Re: Linux and z/VM Wiki
Jack Woehr wrote: John Summerfield wrote: Who should, sensibly, assume that this site speaks for any part of the Linux community? Well, the Linux on z/VM community. It needs a wiki. It's a good idea. It's a shame you quoted me without context. -- Cheers John -- spambait 1...@coco.merseine.nu z1...@coco.merseine.nu -- Advice http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375 You cannot reply off-list:-) -- 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
Re: When will CMMA be removed from the kernel?
Barton Robinson wrote: So you should probably measure the two before deciding on which one you want to keep. CMM-1 has very positive results, cmma not so positive. At the risk of bringing on the wrath of the performance gods, I just have to say that I'm not really interested in measuring whether CMMA is better then CMM-1. If the folks at IBM think that CMMA was worthwhile enough to implement, then I'll drink their Kool-Aid and be happy with it. Especially since CMMA is so much easier to manage...just turn the blasted thing on. And it just makes sense for the two OSes to "actively" communicate page states rather than the not-so-dynamic method of CMM-1. Leland -- 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
Re: When will CMMA be removed from the kernel?
So you should probably measure the two before deciding on which one you want to keep. CMM-1 has very positive results, cmma not so positive. Leland Lucius wrote: Mark Post wrote: On 9/22/2009 at 11:35 PM, Leland Lucius wrote: Is it being removed entirely or will distros be providing it? First, let's distinguish between CMM-1 and CMM-2/CMMA. It is the latter that is being dropped by IBM. It will remain in the distribution versions in which it currently resides, as long as they are supported (I believe). Based on the comments from Shawn Wells, that means SLES only. So, SLES10 will be the last we will see of CMM-2/CMMA? Pity. I'd rather have seen CMM-1 buy the farm. Oh well. I guess we have to live with the upstream idiots!!! (Just my, not necessarily rational, opinion. Too bad if they don't like it.) Leland -- 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 -- 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 <>
Re: When will CMMA be removed from the kernel?
Mark Post wrote: On 9/22/2009 at 11:35 PM, Leland Lucius wrote: Is it being removed entirely or will distros be providing it? First, let's distinguish between CMM-1 and CMM-2/CMMA. It is the latter that is being dropped by IBM. It will remain in the distribution versions in which it currently resides, as long as they are supported (I believe). Based on the comments from Shawn Wells, that means SLES only. So, SLES10 will be the last we will see of CMM-2/CMMA? Pity. I'd rather have seen CMM-1 buy the farm. Oh well. I guess we have to live with the upstream idiots!!! (Just my, not necessarily rational, opinion. Too bad if they don't like it.) Leland -- 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
