On Tuesday, 10/20/2009 at 09:27 EDT, Henry, Bob
bob.he...@sungardhe.com wrote:
Is anyone from z/VM development monitoring this thread and willing to
take a
look at this problem? As I said in an earlier post in answer to Bruce's
question, the remote system is z/VM 5.3.
FTPPUT expects the
The only z/VM 6.1 only items I found were:
1. Limited to z10 only
2. Prefetch guest data into processor cache
3. Closer integration with IBM Systems Director
So if that's all there is, why would anyone bother to install z/VM 6.1?
Alan Ackerman
Alan (dot) Ackerman (at) Bank of America (dot)
I've done similar things in the past but in different ways:
- routed all messages to z/OS where it was handled by the automation pack
age
there
- used SA IOM (formerly AF/Remote) which would allow you to do all that a
nd
more, including the automation side of things. A very nice tool
- possibly
Alan Ackerman wrote:
The only z/VM 6.1 only items I found were:
1. Limited to z10 only
2. Prefetch guest data into processor cache
3. Closer integration with IBM Systems Director
So if that's all there is, why would anyone bother to install z/VM 6.1?
Alan Ackerman
Alan (dot) Ackerman
Unless someone proves #2 is going to do really wonderful things, most of us
probably won't bother upgrading. We'll save our energy for the next one which
should be lots more interesting.
Folks just starting out of course should do 6.1.
Marcy
This message may contain confidential and/or
Looks right to me.
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 3:22 PM, Mart miksm...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to ask how can I make z/Linux dump.
I know that I can use VMDUMP tool but I want to check how stand-alone dump
will work.
My system is z/VM ver. 5.4 and SLES10.
Is below procedure correct?
If anyone is using SUN V2X4F DASD with PPRC over FICON, I'd love to hear
from you and review your configuration. We've been having a bit of trouble
getting PPRC working to date.
Please feel free to contact me directly off-list.
-Mike Coffin
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 12:34 AM, Alan Altmark alan_altm...@us.ibm.comwrote:
On Tuesday, 10/20/2009 at 06:46 EDT, Marcy Cortes
marcy.d.cor...@wellsfargo.com wrote:
Did pricing change?
No.
One does wonder, Why the version number change?
On Wednesday, 10/21/2009 at 11:48 EDT, P S zosw...@gmail.com wrote:
One does wonder, Why the version number change?
The z10 Architectural Level Set.
Alan Altmark
z/VM Development
IBM Endicott
I don't have any IBM inside information, but I suspect that there may be a
few reasons, including:
1- It's an Architectural Level Set, requiring a z10. A big deal. A
version number increment may help make that more obvious (to those with
IBM history).
2- It's the base for the z/VM Single
I updated smtp config adding a couple of ids to the smsgauthlist
smsgauthlist
tcpmaint
user1--added
user2--added
end
saved the file
smsg smtp reboot (from tcpmaint)
still cannot smsg smtp from user1
what have I done wrong?
thanks jim
-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System
[mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Mike Walter
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:55 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: z/VM 6.1 G.A. targeted for this Friday, Oct 23
I don't have any IBM inside
Is Single System Image conceptually akin to z/OS's Parallel Sysplex?
IMHO, the direct answer is It depends (TM Bill Bitner). I doubt you
could call Parallel Sysplex and SSI akin. Not even close enough to be
called kissing cousins.
There's no Coupling Facility support defined in the
So if that's all there is, why would anyone bother to install z/VM 6.1?
1. To keep your capacity planning people from moving your system to an old z9
that they're trying to find a use for.
2. Performance improvements for virtual switch.
3. To have something to put on your performance plan.
Mike,
I'm not sure what should be understood by Single System Image ?
Could you give me a brief explanation of this meaning ?
The french guy
Alain
Le 21 oct. 2009 à 17:55, Mike Walter a écrit :
I don't have any IBM inside information, but I suspect that there
may be a
few reasons,
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 12:21 PM, Mike Walter mike.wal...@hewitt.comwrote:
SSI appears to provide a means of using communications architectures to
couple up to 4 (maximum: FOUR) z/VM systems into one Single System Image.
Heh. I remember when ISF (the same idea, badly done, on HPO) was
Alain,
Basically, it allows a customer to connect up to 4 z/VM systems (even on 4
separate CECs, i.e. separate z10's) into more of a single system, but not
exactly. Many userids can be moved from one system to another, without
taking them down to move them. The z/VM systems will not need to
I will be out of the office starting 10/21/2009 and will not return until
10/26/2009.
I will respond to your message when I return.
*** IMPORTANT
NOTE* The opinions expressed in this
message and/or any attachments are those of the author and
18 matches
Mail list logo
