RE: Force fed LPAR

This is a multipart message in MIME format.
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
You are not necessarily saving money versus multiple machines on software
cost.
BPCS charges per user, not tier pricing.  Therefore it is a wash.
EDI charges per tier.  Therefore a separate machine is often cheaper.


Rob Berendt
--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin




Glenn Ericson <Glenn-Ericson@att.net>
Sent by: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com
11/08/2002 01:58 PM
Please respond to midrange-l

        To:     midrange-l@midrange.com, <midrange-l@midrange.com>
        cc:
        Fax to:
        Subject:        RE: Force fed LPAR


--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
For  every LPAR partition  above the first you are saving a lot on
the  repeated software costs if these were  physically separate systems.
Inter LPAR  communications is  magnitudes faster then or inter systems
communications and  Virtual LAN is free, OptiConnect is minimal.

We've  done several  systems and it is great and  getting better every
release.
         Glenn
Glenn Ericson

OS Solutions International
NYC Phone (718)898-9805  Fax 718 446 1150
http://www.os-solutions.com
mailto:gericson@os-solutions.com

At 12:23 PM 11/8/2002 -0600, McGivern, Tom wrote:
>It all depends on WHY you are considering Lpar...  If you can run it on
>a single Lpar (or system), then great.
>I'm reading through the thread of folks who have consolidated 15 systems
>into 1..
>We have an 830, with 4 lpars...  One in english, 2 in DBCS (Simpl. And
>trad. Chinese), 1 boot.
>Now, you say you can have Multiple DBCS languages on a single system...
>But it's not supported with JDE OW.
>
>We'll be adding an additional Lpar for another english system, not
>because it technically can't fit with the other english, but that we'd
>be running everyone from Austrailia, Mexico, US, and Europe all on one
>system.  This limits our outage window for backups and PTFs, and thus,
>LPAR increases uptime from a user perspective.
>
>So.. Timezones.. .Languages..  Lpar answers our needs...
>
>Could we do this across multiple systems?  Yes.. But since we're dealing
>with timezones.. When Austrailia is in their backup window... I can
>swing the processors/memory over to the US/Europe Lpar..   Same with
>China, Taiwan..
>Lpar has worked great for us...
>
>Any additional disk you say?  Well, some for the LIC and OS.. But what's
>the cost of an 8GB disk, 4K?
>The tape controller IOP is switched between the lpars.. No additional
>cost  (where if it were separate systems it would cost us... So in this
>since, we're saving money..)
>
>
>We're looking at upgrading to the 890, 8 lpars...
>
>Maybe it's not for everybody, but I'm very pleased with it.  If they
>could only get the Z-series Prism logic to dynamically adjust CPU
>allocation..
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: rob@dekko.com [mailto:rob@dekko.com]
>Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 3:44 PM
>To: midrange-l@midrange.com
>Subject: Force fed LPAR
>
>
>This is a multipart message in MIME format.
>--
>[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
>IBM is really pushing LPAR.  Probably for a number of reasons.
>A)  It sells disk and more cards.
>B)  It increases complexity of your operation, thus perhaps selling
>services.
>C)  It drastically increases the amount of your downtime.  Perhaps
>selling High Availability solutions, which may help sell services.  For
>instance, if I run 4 partitions on V5R2 and I want to go to the next
>release, won't I have to do 4 upgrades?  IBM charges $3,500 a upgrade
>therefore wouldn't they get 4 times what they would have gotten out of a
>single partition machine?  Granted, we do our own upgrades, but I don't
>think you can upgrade all partitions at once.
>
>We've recently consolidated multiple machines onto one.  IBM's
>insistence that we use LPAR to 'reduce cost' of some of their products.
>Their insistence that we run LPAR if we want to currently run the latest
>and greatest Domino, Sametime and Quickplace on one iSeries.  And other
>attempts to ram LPAR down our throats is upsetting.
>
>Rob Berendt
>--
>"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
>safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin
>_______________________________________________
>This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
>list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com To subscribe,
>unsubscribe, or change list options,
>visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
>or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
>Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
>at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
>
>
>
>This communication is confidential and may be legally privileged.  If you
>are not the intended recipient, (i) please do not read or disclose to
>others, (ii) please notify the sender by reply mail, and (iii) please
>delete this communication from your system.  Failure to follow this
>process may be unlawful.  Thank you for your cooperation.
>_______________________________________________
>This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list
>To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
>visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
>or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
>Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
>at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
--

_______________________________________________
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.