Re: Linux images greater a 3390-3 image?
We have United Linux version 1 and have /usr on its own 3390-3. Since we just started testing MQ and Oracle we started using LVM but it seems cumbersome. Before it was easy to move filesystems between guests. umount from one system, CP LINK, mount on the other LVM isn't so simple. Is there good doc on moving the LVM filesystem minidisks to another guest and getting them to mount properly? Jim Sibley wrote: > I'm assuming most zSeries system use a standard 3390-3 > volume (or less) for their base systems. What I've > noticed in the last few releases for zSeries and in > RHEL3 (beta) especially is the burgeoning size of > /usr. > > For SuSE SLES8, I could get by with moving /usr to a > separate volume and I could everything but the > document pdf's on the volume. > > I tried to install EVERYTHING on the redhat beta and I > had /usr on its own 3390-3 volume and the install > wizard said I needed another 1179 MB! (Being a > development shop, some of our people actually use a > lot of this stuff). > > In fact, after a pared down install, I only used 6% of > the / volume and 72% of the /usr volume! > > What alternatives do we have in the zSeries world for > this ever expanding filesystem? > > - Larger volumes on an RVA or Shark (which performance > less well with lots of data behind a single UCB - no > PAV's)? Do a lot of people use large volumes on shark > or RVA? Do a lot of people actually use the SCSI > feature of shark? > > - After building a minimal system, move /usr to an LVM > volume? > > - Other alternatives? > > I understand that the POSIX specs insist on certain > things, but what you end up with is about 15 > direcotries using 8% of your space and one directory > using 92%. And the software install wizards of the > major distributors follow the POSIX rules... > > = > Jim Sibley > Implementor of Linux on zSeries in the beautiful Silicon Valley > > "Computer are useless.They can only give answers." Pablo Picasso > > __ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Re: Linux images greater a 3390-3 image?
On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > > - After building a minimal system, move /usr to an LVM > > volume? > > - Install /usr onto an LVM (I don't like putting / on an LVM) > > Yes, this is (finally) supported. RH had this supported as of 7.3. > Unlike SuSE, RH puts everything under /usr (except the minimal system > itself, of course): no /opt. > > And debian actually try to be even more strict here: cgi-bin scripts > will not reside under /var/www but hopefully somewhere under /usr/share > or /usr/lib and get symlinked. debian: ScriptAlias /cgi-bin/ /usr/lib/cgi-bin/ CGI programs can be written in a compiled language, so /usr/share is wrong. I'm not keen on the Debian location, but it's fairly easy to ignore: I don't see much reason to run a webserver with anything like a vendor's configuration anyway. I _might_ use it as a default server, and litter it with traps for Code Red and such. -- Cheers John. Join the "Linux Support by Small Businesses" list at http://mail.computerdatasafe.com.au/mailman/listinfo/lssb Copyright John Summerfield. Reproduction prohibited.
Re: Linux images greater a 3390-3 image?
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 02:17:45PM -0700, Jim Sibley wrote: > I'm assuming most zSeries system use a standard 3390-3 > volume (or less) for their base systems. What I've > noticed in the last few releases for zSeries and in > RHEL3 (beta) especially is the burgeoning size of > /usr. > > For SuSE SLES8, I could get by with moving /usr to a > separate volume and I could everything but the > document pdf's on the volume. > > I tried to install EVERYTHING on the redhat beta and I > had /usr on its own 3390-3 volume and the install > wizard said I needed another 1179 MB! (Being a > development shop, some of our people actually use a > lot of this stuff). > > In fact, after a pared down install, I only used 6% of > the / volume and 72% of the /usr volume! > > What alternatives do we have in the zSeries world for > this ever expanding filesystem? > > - Larger volumes on an RVA or Shark (which performance > less well with lots of data behind a single UCB - no > PAV's)? Do a lot of people use large volumes on shark > or RVA? Do a lot of people actually use the SCSI > feature of shark? > > - After building a minimal system, move /usr to an LVM > volume? - Install /usr onto an LVM (I don't like putting / on an LVM) Yes, this is (finally) supported. RH had this supported as of 7.3. Unlike SuSE, RH puts everything under /usr (except the minimal system itself, of course): no /opt. And debian actually try to be even more strict here: cgi-bin scripts will not reside under /var/www but hopefully somewhere under /usr/share or /usr/lib and get symlinked. -- Tzafrir Cohen +---+ http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir/ |vim is a mutt's best friend| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] +---+
Re: Linux images greater a 3390-3 image?
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, McKown, John wrote: > Use a "linear raid" with a customized initrd with RAID as a builtin? Or > "split" the /usr at some other subdirectory level. > > /usr > /usr/local > /usr/ > /usr/ > > I don't know what is under /usr on RH on zSeries. To discover where to split it, one first needs to install it to discover where the space is used. I'm waiting for August (and new download limits) before looking at it, but I guess if LVM isn't offered at install time I'd use RAID and bug Red Hat about it. I can imagine there are quite a few stickybeaks here, and that the official RH list for the beta wll be full of discussion about IA32 matters. Any chance of Red Hatters tuning in here? -- Cheers John. Join the "Linux Support by Small Businesses" list at http://mail.computerdatasafe.com.au/mailman/listinfo/lssb Copyright John Summerfield. Reproduction prohibited.
Re: Linux images greater a 3390-3 image?
If you're using a SHARK or ICEBERG device, redefine a few volumes as 3390-9's. You don't need an IOCDS change or a power-on reset even, although you may have to vary the devices off and back on. You can also try the logical volume manager to make a larger logical volume out of multiple physical ones. I do see that in SLES8, LVM and vgscan come up before /usr gets mounted from /etc/fstab. Not sure I'd want to rely on this, though, especially with dasd shared among many servers. It's possible to have /usr running on one server and other servers NFS mount it. It would be slow, and the primary server can't ever go down. We actually got /usr on SLES8 onto a single 3390-3 with lots of stuff on it, about 80% full. we did have to move /opt to its own partition, one of two partitions on a 3390 minidisks of 1500 cylinders, one for / and one for /opt. /home is its own (set of) minidisk(s) and we do swap in V-disk. "Great Minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people." - Admiral Hyman Rickover Gordon Wolfe, Ph.D. (425)865-5940 VM Enterprise Servers, The Boeing Company > -- > From: Jim Sibley > Reply To: Linux on 390 Port > Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 2:17 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Linux images greater a 3390-3 image? > > I'm assuming most zSeries system use a standard 3390-3 > volume (or less) for their base systems. What I've > noticed in the last few releases for zSeries and in > RHEL3 (beta) especially is the burgeoning size of > /usr. > > For SuSE SLES8, I could get by with moving /usr to a > separate volume and I could everything but the > document pdf's on the volume. > > I tried to install EVERYTHING on the redhat beta and I > had /usr on its own 3390-3 volume and the install > wizard said I needed another 1179 MB! (Being a > development shop, some of our people actually use a > lot of this stuff). > > In fact, after a pared down install, I only used 6% of > the / volume and 72% of the /usr volume! > > What alternatives do we have in the zSeries world for > this ever expanding filesystem? > > - Larger volumes on an RVA or Shark (which performance > less well with lots of data behind a single UCB - no > PAV's)? Do a lot of people use large volumes on shark > or RVA? Do a lot of people actually use the SCSI > feature of shark? > > - After building a minimal system, move /usr to an LVM > volume? > > - Other alternatives? > > I understand that the POSIX specs insist on certain > things, but what you end up with is about 15 > direcotries using 8% of your space and one directory > using 92%. And the software install wizards of the > major distributors follow the POSIX rules... > > > > = > Jim Sibley > Implementor of Linux on zSeries in the beautiful Silicon Valley > > "Computer are useless.They can only give answers." Pablo Picasso > > __ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com > >
Re: Linux images greater a 3390-3 image?
Use a "linear raid" with a customized initrd with RAID as a builtin? Or "split" the /usr at some other subdirectory level. /usr /usr/local /usr/ /usr/ I don't know what is under /usr on RH on zSeries. -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer UICI Insurance Center Applications & Solutions Team +1.817.255.3225 This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its' content is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. > -Original Message- > From: Jim Sibley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 4:18 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Linux images greater a 3390-3 image? > > > I'm assuming most zSeries system use a standard 3390-3 > volume (or less) for their base systems. What I've > noticed in the last few releases for zSeries and in > RHEL3 (beta) especially is the burgeoning size of > /usr. > > For SuSE SLES8, I could get by with moving /usr to a > separate volume and I could everything but the > document pdf's on the volume. > > I tried to install EVERYTHING on the redhat beta and I > had /usr on its own 3390-3 volume and the install > wizard said I needed another 1179 MB! (Being a > development shop, some of our people actually use a > lot of this stuff). > > In fact, after a pared down install, I only used 6% of > the / volume and 72% of the /usr volume! > > What alternatives do we have in the zSeries world for > this ever expanding filesystem? > > - Larger volumes on an RVA or Shark (which performance > less well with lots of data behind a single UCB - no > PAV's)? Do a lot of people use large volumes on shark > or RVA? Do a lot of people actually use the SCSI > feature of shark? > > - After building a minimal system, move /usr to an LVM > volume? > > - Other alternatives? > > I understand that the POSIX specs insist on certain > things, but what you end up with is about 15 > direcotries using 8% of your space and one directory > using 92%. And the software install wizards of the > major distributors follow the POSIX rules... > > > > = > Jim Sibley > Implementor of Linux on zSeries in the beautiful Silicon Valley > > "Computer are useless.They can only give answers." Pablo Picasso > > __ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com >
