Hi Tom,
I am sharing 2 OSA with 4 z/OS and 2 z/VMs.
Each z/VM is using its own VLAN using VLAN tagging and the z/OS is using its
own VLAN as a native VLAN.
The VSWITCH is using both OSA devices: one as the primary and the second as
the backup device.
The VSWITCH is forwarding the packets to the Li
We are currently using TPC asyncronous replication with a 30 second consistency
group to a remote shark for our zOS disaster recovery. We would like to do the
same with our new zVM and Linux system. What do I need to look out for as
potential problems? Will I have problems with zVM or Linux o
We currently have a z10 with 2 IFL's driving one LPAR running zVM and Linux
images. The LPAR has 18GB of real storage and 6 GB of expanded storage
assigned to it.
We are wanting to run four images Linux with TSM as the application. In the
TSM literature it states that we should have 12GB of r
Hi Ruddy,
I am running TSM V6.1 on a z9 with 2 IFL's. The production TSM runs with a
Vsize of 5GB. This one is moving a backup load of ~ 8TB a day and is rather
maxed out. Most of the LPAR is running SAP and that takes up most of the real
memory of 23GB with 1GB expanded. Another tip: do yourse
Listeners,
I have a strange problem again...
on my lpar for development, i have now queue E3, each time a run #cp q exp i
have a different machine on this queue...
i look for cpu usage, is "acceptable" at this time, mean an 80, 90% cpu
usage... memory is a lot free, and no hard i/o activity
You do realize that you're announcing that your house is empty and available
to rob... Right?
--
Robert P. Nix Mayo Foundation.~.
RO-OE-5-55 200 First Street SW/V\
507-284-0844 Rochester, MN 55905 /( )\
-^^-^^
On Wednesday, 06/02/2010 at 09:49 EDT, Offer Baruch
wrote:
> I am sharing 2 OSA with 4 z/OS and 2 z/VMs.
> Each z/VM is using its own VLAN using VLAN tagging and the z/OS is using
its
> own VLAN as a native VLAN.
In general, host traffic should not use the native VLAN. There are
switch-switch p
Most products stated requirements assume that they will be running on an
Intel box as the only "guest", and without any hypervisor support. The
likely need is for disk buffering; hopefully, the actual code doesn't need
12GB to run in.
In z/VM, you already have disk buffering at a minimum of two le
On Wednesday, 06/02/2010 at 02:00 EDT, Shane G
wrote:
> C'mon Alan, enough of the equivocation.
> Try and give us at least a semblance of what you *really* think about
this ...
> ;-)
>
> Shane ...
>
> On Wed, Jun 2nd, 2010 at 6:49 AM, Alan Altmark wrote:
>
> > Multinetting is a Bad Idea, to be sto
CKD http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqRXJtPwqOk
-Original Message-
Alan Altmark
>
> On Wed, Jun 2nd, 2010 at 6:49 AM, Alan Altmark wrote:
>
> > Multinetting is a Bad Idea, to be stomped out of existence and never
> > mentioned again in polite company. Or, to quote The Robot, "Crush.
> >
You'll have to do a FORCE start, and you'll lose open spool files. I've
never had an SFS server complain, but our CMS workload is rather light.
Linux will want to fsck its filesystems. I've really never had a
problem and we've done 4 or 5 DR tests with this configuration (all ext3
filesystems).
Alan, I always wondered where those noises were coming from when I would put
two subnets on one link segment. Now I know! :-)
Aria
> -Original Message-
> From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:linux-...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of
> Ken Porowski
> Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 12:26 PM
> To:
Jonathon is correct. VM will need a force start and Linux will fsck. We've
done more than a dozen tests and have had no issues with either. This is with
SLES 9 and 10 and ext3 file systems.
Marcy
"This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you
are not the
I've got a TSM server running on Linux under z/VM for backing up
internal test systems and it's happily running in 512 MB of Storage.
If the disk and tape subsystems are fast enough you can make it pretty
small and still be OK. It depends on your daily load. Mine is pretty
light.
--
Jay Brenneman
Hi,
Just to be clear... I think we are talking about different things... when
defining a port at the switch level you can define 1 or more VLANs in trunk
mode and 0-1 VLAN in access mode. I called the access mode VLAN as the
native VLAN...
z/OS was working in access mode (not VLAN 1) before z/VM c
We have a sles9 box that we need to enlarge a filesystem.
The fs is ext3.
I know I have to add it VM, done already
Now shutdown db2(fs we need to increase) and umount -l the fs
Do the mknod to the packs to partition.
Then go into yast and do a few incantations, which I have written down
after it h
You added packs. Nervous twitch: mkinitrd and zipl?
I think you can do the filsystem stuff with yast as well, by increasing the lv.
Van: Linux on 390 Port [linux-...@vm.marist.edu] namens LJ Mace
[ljmace1...@yahoo.com]
Verzonden: woensdag 2 juni 2010 21:31
Using ext2online, I was able to recently increase the /var filesystem on
one of my images. After increasing the LV size obviously.
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:linux-...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of LJ
Mace
Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 3:31 PM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MAR
Caveat: My last TSM experience was with release 5.3, over a year and a half
ago...
Begin at, well, the beginning. The TSM server admin should be watching the
buffer pool hit ratio, and expand (or contract) the database buffer pool size
to achieve 98% (is that still the ROT?). Similar rules g
I don't thinst ext2online is available on a SLES 9 server. It is available
on SLES 10.
Calvin Fisher
--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO
>>> On 6/2/2010 at 03:39 PM, "Harder, Pieter"
wrote:
> You added packs. Nervous twitch: mkinitrd and zipl?
> I think you can do the filsystem stuff with yast as well, by increasing the
> lv.
If he does everything within YaST, that will be done automatically for him.
Mark Post
---
>>> On 6/2/2010 at 03:31 PM, LJ Mace wrote:
> We have a sles9 box that we need to enlarge a filesystem.
> The fs is ext3.
> I know I have to add it VM, done already
> Now shutdown db2(fs we need to increase) and umount -l the fs
> Do the mknod to the packs to partition.
> Then go into yast and d
> We are wanting to run four images Linux with TSM as the application.
> In the TSM literature it states that we should have 12GB of real
> storage for each image. Is this virtual mamory or do we need 12 times
> 4 for 48 GB REAL memory to accomplish this scenerio? Has anyone tried
> this before?
23 matches
Mail list logo
