My take on the DR scenarios is that unless you are building your own
recovery site to match your production site, you can never guarantee the
device addressing. So, you need to build address configuration changes in
to
your DR Plan. You may not need to change some addresses from exercise to
I tend to agree with all those that say it is difficult to keep your
production system in step with your physical infrastructure at DR. You
also have the whole pain of doing stand-alone restores to get started.
My cut would be to have a simple VM hypervisor (that has simple restore
facilities)
at home with regards to
performance and capacity.
Dennie
-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Thomas Kern
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 7:35 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Disaster Recovery Scenarios
My take on the DR
To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc
Subject
Re: Disaster Recovery Scenarios
My take on the DR scenarios is that unless you are building your own
recovery site to match your production site, you can never guarantee the
device addressing. So, you need to build address configuration changes
Associates.
Thomas Kern [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
03/12/2008 07:34 AM
Please respond to
The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc
Subject
Re: Disaster Recovery Scenarios
My
Thanks for the responses to my DR question.Helpful information!
So basically, I have 2 methods of bringing z/VM up at our DR site:
1) Run it under the z/VM Floor System (we use Sungard as our DR service).
2) Bring z/VM up in an LPAR.
To me, option one is probably the BEST and EASIEST to
1) I need to change my VM directory so that I have DEDICATE VOLID
yy rather than DEDICATE (which is what we're doing
now).
One possible preparation: If you consistently do not use the last
cylinder of every volume, you could restore your disks into minidisks on
the VM
On Mar 11, 2008, at 6:59 AM, Karl Kingston wrote:
Thanks for the responses to my DR question.Helpful information!
So basically, I have 2 methods of bringing z/VM up at our DR site:
1) Run it under the z/VM Floor System (we use Sungard as our DR
service).
2) Bring z/VM up in an
I missed this before. If you are going to have *AN LPAR* at the D/R
site and you have, it sounds like, a VM lpar and z/OS lpars to restore
for you D/R test, you really don't have any choice but to run your D/R
test under a VM system. That way the VM and z/OS systems you restore as
virtual
Jim Bohnsack wrote:
I missed this before. If you are going to have *AN LPAR* at the D/R
site and you have, it sounds like, a VM lpar and z/OS lpars to restore
for you D/R test, you really don't have any choice but to run your D/R
test under a VM system. That way the VM and z/OS systems you
This is incorrect or at least incomplete... (Sorry Adam)
If you are talking about CP's performance, or even CMS' performance,
then yes, it's a minor performance hit.
If you are talking about your Linux guests under your VM under their VM
under LPAR, then it is a very substantial hit.
@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc
Subject
Re: Disaster Recovery Scenarios
On Mar 11, 2008, at 6:59 AM, Karl Kingston wrote:
Thanks for the responses to my DR question.Helpful information!
So basically, I have 2 methods of bringing z/VM up at our DR site:
1) Run it under
@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
03/11/2008 01:08 PM
Please respond to
The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc
Subject
Re: Disaster Recovery Scenarios
OK we are running zLinux under zVM here. So from what I'm reading, z/vm
- z/vm - zlinux is not a very good idea
Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc
Subject
Re: Disaster Recovery Scenarios
OK we are running zLinux under zVM here. So from what I'm reading, z/vm
- z/vm - zlinux is not a very good idea???
Adam Thornton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: The IBM z/VM
@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc
Subject
Re: Disaster Recovery Scenarios
OK we are running zLinux under zVM here. So from what I'm reading, z/v
m
- z/vm - zlinux is not a very good idea???
Adam Thornton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008, Karl Kingston wrote:
OK we are running zLinux under zVM here. So from what I'm reading, z/vm
- z/vm - zlinux is not a very good idea???
I have to back what Adam said from a managerial context.
There has been much discussion in recent weeks about virtualization
as to how
16 matches
Mail list logo
