Are there any guidelines for assigning virtual machine size to a 2nd
level VM system that will run a few Linux guests?
I am running a standard zVM 5.2 system with the usual service
machines. It is also running a ZOS guest with 500m virtual machine
size and another ZOS guest with 1024m
A 'few Linux guests' is a little vague. What are these guests going to
be doing, how important are they, how big are they?
Duane Weaver wrote:
Are there any guidelines for assigning virtual machine size to a 2nd
level VM system that will run a few Linux guests?
I am running a standard zVM
Are you saying you want to run a second level production z/VM? Why?
-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Duane Weaver
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 9:52 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: VM size for a 2nd level VM
for a 2nd level VM
Are there any guidelines for assigning virtual machine size to a 2nd
level VM system that will run a few Linux guests?
I am running a standard zVM 5.2 system with the usual service
machines. It is also running a ZOS guest with 500m virtual machine
size and another ZOS guest
On Thursday, 08/28/2008 at 12:00 EDT, Kris Buelens
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Linux guests under secondlevel z/VM would incurr high CPU overhead,
50% for example. The current z series supports 2 layers of
virtualization. LPAR uses the first layer, a z/VM guest the second.
These days a
@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: VM size for a 2nd level VM
Are there any guidelines for assigning virtual machine size to a 2nd
level VM system that will run a few Linux guests?
I am running a standard zVM 5.2 system with the usual service
machines. It is also running a ZOS guest with 500m virtual
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Duane Weaver
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 1:54 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: VM size for a 2nd level VM
Well here is the scoop. We acting as a DR site for another
university. The other university wants to bring in their zVM 5.3 and
run it under
On Aug 28, 2008, at 10:54 AM, Duane Weaver wrote:
Well here is the scoop. We acting as a DR site for another
university. The other university wants to bring in their zVM 5.3 and
run it under our zVM 5.2 system.
Our z800 is running in basic mode with 1 lpar, running the zVM 5.2.
Shouldn't
At 01:54 PM 8/28/2008 -0400, Duane Weaver wrote:
Well here is the scoop. We acting as a DR site for another university.
Easy answer (chant it with me!): Disaster Recovery is not 'business
as usual.'
If they're in DR mode, they should just be happy to be up. Period.
Once they've recovered
I thought z800's and above were LPAR only, no more basic mode.
Steve
-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Michael Coffin
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 2:00 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: VM size for a 2nd level VM
Thornton
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 2:05 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: VM size for a 2nd level VM
On Aug 28, 2008, at 10:54 AM, Duane Weaver wrote:
Well here is the scoop. We acting as a DR site for another
university. The other university wants to bring in their zVM 5.3
The z890/z990 and higher are LPAR only.
Gentry, Stephen wrote:
I thought z800's and above were LPAR only, no more basic mode.
Steve
--
Rich Smrcina
VM Assist, Inc.
Phone: 414-491-6001
Ans Service: 360-715-2467
rich.smrcina at vmassist.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/richsmrcina
Catch the
level VM
I thought z800's and above were LPAR only, no more basic mode. Steve
-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Michael Coffin
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 2:00 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: VM size for a 2nd
13 matches
Mail list logo
