,
Richard Schuh
-Original
Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating
System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On
Behalf Of Jim Bohnsack
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 1:18
PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: z/VM I/O Concurrency
Wasn't that
the one with the single read/write head on an arm
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 2:34
PM
Subject: Re: z/VM I/O Concurrency
And
I thought I was the only one left that remembered the six foot tall disk drive
on the RAMAC 305.
-Original Message-From: The IBM z/VM Operating
System [m
/VM Operating System
[
mailto:IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU]On
Behalf Of Schuh, Richard
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 1:13 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: z/VM I/O Concurrency
Regards,
Richard Schuh
. Again, this is a HARDWARE restriction that goes back to the dark ages
of
s/360.
Or fart
Do you
also still have a 601?
Regards,
Richard Schuh
-Original
Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating
System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On
Behalf Of Bruce Hayden
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006
12:04 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: z/VM I/O Concurrency
We still
Title: z/VM I/O Concurrency
It’s not VM that limits the I/O
traffic, it’s the underlying hardware I/O architecture – z/OS and
VSE have the same limitation at the hardware level. That’s why PAV exists
– to get around that.
Multiple LPARs…geez. If you have
infinite money, sure, go ahead
We still have one in the museum (also known as the heritage center) here at Endicott... :-)On 4/25/06, Huegel, Thomas <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
And I
thought I was the only one left that remembered the six foot tall disk drive on
the RAMAC 305.
-- Bruce HaydenIBM Global Technology
@LISTSERV.UARK.EDUSubject: Re: z/VM I/O
Concurrency
Regards,
Richard Schuh
. Again, this is
a HARDWARE restriction that goes back to the dark ages of
s/360.
Or farther. Anyone remember the disks used
by the 1410 (the model number escapes me, as do so many
: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: [IBMVM] z/VM I/O Concurrency
David, would it be possible for you to collect some performance data on
the i/o improvements you're seeing there? Perhaps some CP MONITOR data
that we could analyze? It would be nice to know if PAV is really
something that
VMS). Works
well.
I look forward to seeing this soon with my Oracle servers. David
-Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on
behalf of Raymond Noal Sent: Tue 4/25/2006 1:45 PM To:
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: [IBMVM] z/VM I/O Concurrency
Dear List,
I was following a top
Title: Message
Regards,
Richard Schuh
. Again, this is a
HARDWARE restriction that goes back to the dark ages of s/360.
Or farther. Anyone remember the disks used
by the 1410 (the model number escapes me, as do so many
things of late) or the RAMAC 305? Besides, the S/3
Tue 4/25/2006 1:45 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: [IBMVM] z/VM I/O Concurrency
Dear List,
I was following a topic thread on the IBM-MAIN list server where someone
wanted to create multiple Linux LPARs instead of running Linux under
z/VM. One respondent stated that z/VM only allows one I/O
/VM
Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Raymond
NoalSent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 12:46 PMTo:
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDUSubject: z/VM I/O
Concurrency
Dear List,
I was following a topic
thread on the IBM-MAIN list server where someone wanted to create multiple Linux
Title: z/VM I/O Concurrency
Dear List,
I was following a topic thread on the IBM-MAIN list server where someone wanted to create multiple Linux LPARs instead of running Linux under z/VM. One respondent stated that z/VM only allows one I/O to a “disk” at a time. Is this really true (Allan
13 matches
Mail list logo
