snip
Not to mention with a wait stated system, since you cannot 'attach a zillion
page packs'. You are limited to 253x4GB page space, about one TB.
snip
Having so many page space makes one want to use dynamic PAV volumes, it
means 253x2 device devices addresses, and it means maximum 128 base
Thanks for everyone for your suggestion.
Niran Kamaksorn
Bangkok, Thailand
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the
Unfortunately, with a max of 128 gig of real, that would leave
you with the requirement to attach a zillion page packs to the system.
Performance would probably not be too good.
Not to mention with a wait stated system, since you cannot 'attach a zillion
page packs'. You are limited to 253x4GB
I have a few lpars with 192MB of real defined. Would that be enough for
64-bit testing ?
The discussiong seemed to get off track about real storage.
You can start testing 64 bit virtual with any amount of real storage.
It is virtual storage and only what you use, requires backing in real
or aux.
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:54:26 -0500, Clark, Kevin D, HRC-Alexandria/EDS
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Question:
I have a few lpars with 192MB of real defined. Would that be enough for
64-bit testing ?
The absolute minimums are documented in the Planning for Installation
manual (see cut/paste from
In our case, we saw no problem whatsoever in moving from 32-bit OS/390
2.10 to 64-bit z/OS 1.4. We did, however, hit a couple of glitches (in ISV
software -- Model 204 and CA-Dispatch) when we finally increased the amount of
physical memory allocated to our production LPAR to more than
At several SHAREs I gave a pitch on this conversion. The last time was in
Boston to a nearly empty room: I'm done with it. Check the proceedings for
Session 2839 SHARE 105.
.
.
.
JO.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
626-302-7535 Office
323-715-0595
Question:
I have a few lpars with 192MB of real defined. Would that be enough for
64-bit testing ?
Kevin
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET
By all means *start* your 64-bit testing on the most disposable LPAR you
have regardless of size. However, certain 64-bit problems *will not* show
up in an LPAR that has less than 2 gig of memory. Before going to
production in a 2 gig LPAR, you must somehow build a large test LPAR if
only
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Skip Robinson
By all means *start* your 64-bit testing on the most
disposable LPAR you have regardless of size. However, certain
64-bit problems *will not* show up in an LPAR that has less
than 2 gig of memory.
In a recent note, Chase, John said:
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 12:11:03 -0600
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Skip Robinson
By all means *start* your 64-bit testing on the most
disposable LPAR you have regardless of size. However,
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 12:24 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: How much real is required for 64-bit
snip
I'd guess the twilight zone is virtual; I'd
Before going to production in a 2 gig
LPAR, you must somehow build a large test LPAR if only
temporarily. Otherwise you may be in for some nasty surprises.
Maybe, but the RSM issues have been fixed for years now. I would expect
that simply applying the necessary maintenance would be
Skip Robinson wrote:
By all means *start* your 64-bit testing on the most disposable LPAR you
have regardless of size. However, certain 64-bit problems *will not* show
up in an LPAR that has less than 2 gig of memory. Before going to
production in a 2 gig LPAR, you must somehow build a large
I have a few lpars with 192MB of real defined. Would that be enough for
64-bit testing ?
...
I wouldn't attempt it without at least some memory above 2GB.
Otherwise, how would you know anything was working?
-teD
Me? A skeptic? I trust you have proof!
Maybe, but the RSM issues have been fixed for years now. I would expect
that simply applying the necessary maintenance would be sufficient to
avoid most of the problems. Much the same would apply with ISV software
by now.
...
Boy! Aren't you the optimist!
I have been burned (recently) by 'FIXED'
Clark,
back when we did 64bit conversion we started out on an lpar that was real
small (way below 2GB). We ran into a few problems because the lpar was so
small that no one else had seen before us. (But that was OS/390 2.10.)
Best regards, Barbara Nitz
--
10 GB Mailbox, 100 FreeSMS/Monat
of it ?
Niran Kamaksorn
Bangkok, Thailand
-IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU wrote: -
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
From: Barbara Nitz
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
Date: 11/11/2005 13:12
Subject: Re: How much real is required for 64-bit
Clark,
back when we did 64bit
18 matches
Mail list logo