What would be the minimum acceptable value for CYCLES(x) to ensure data was not
retrievable?
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Aria Bamdad
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 10:36 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.
Thank you to all who have responded. What follows is the latest feedback from
the person tasked with fixing this problem:
Today we were able to re-allocate 512m of central storage to the Linux guests.
This will place us comfortably below the 2gig available for VM.
We performed this by a shut
I made the mistake of believing what I was told.
cp q storage
05:57:21 STORAGE = 2G
Ready; T=0.01/0.01 05:57:21
cp q virtual storage
05:57:35 STORAGE = 128M
Ready; T=0.01/0.01 05:57:35
cp q srm
06:01:42 IABIAS : INTENSITY=90%; DURATION=2
06:01:42 LDUBUF : Q1=100% Q2=75% Q3=60%
06:01:42 STORBUF:
ssage-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C]
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 1:37 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Performance problem Linux under Zvm
Our shop is new to Zvm and Linux. We have a very small number of L
55905 /( )\
-^^-^^
"In theory, theory and practice are the same, but
in practice, theory and practice are different."
On 3/20/08 12:36 PM, "O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C]"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Our shop is new to Zvm and Linu
Our shop is new to Zvm and Linux. We have a very small number of Linux users
who are reporting significant response time problems. It almost seems as if
each stops running for a period of time and is then re-dispatched.
Is there a VM parameter that we might have taken the default on that needs
