RE: as/400 / linux / lpar

--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
Folks  this is  getting  a bit long
Tell yeah  what- If this is a disbelief that IBM can  & will run fractional
processors on the older systems, then rather then debate it  why not  try
it and report on the results.

One  caution-  a later PTF or   system code  change might  take you down & our.

If it  is a need/value  statement  do a side by  side test with cost
analysis. of   a  4 processor vs a uni processor. ..  Like
to  hear  your  results.

  Andy Nolen-Parkhouse wrote:
>I've had a long and successful career dealing with the IBM midrange and
>have never heard of an MSR-bit.  I would not be qualified to answer your
>questions.  It strikes me as intuitively correct that some provision
>should be made within silicon when two operating systems are sharing the
>same processor, whether there are new instructions or not.  My
>understanding is that Linux is talking directly to the hardware, not
>riding on top of the MI level of OS/400.  I realize you are looking for
>more than non-technical intuition and I hope you get your answers.
>
>Your point on fractional LPAR is valid.  Yes, it isn't just Linux and
>yes a customer could save some money if they had partition requirements
>for partial processor allocation.  I've partitioned a few boxes and it
>was very frustrating (and expensive) to allocate an entire processor to
>a partition which did not need that much power.
>
>Regards,
>Andy
>
> > What would IBM rather have: 1) a customer running Linux (and remember
> > that the issue is not Linux but fractional LPARs) on an older box, or
>2)
> > a customer buying a new box because fractional LPARs (according to
> > Glen saves you a LOT of money)?
>
> > Subject: Re: as/400 / linux / lpar
> >
> > From: Andy Nolen-Parkhouse <aparkhouse@attbi.com>
> > > Those are my thoughts.  Aside from a basic distrust of large
> > > corporations, why do you think that IBM would intentionally disable
> > > support for Linux on partial processors in older machines?
> > >
> >
> > I didn't say (or meant to say) that. To me Linux was not the issue.
> > The issue was: do you NEED special hardware to run fractional
> > partitions. What does hardware provide for this that can't be done
> > in software? This question has not been answered. All I hear is that
> > people "believe" this or that, or "have heard" this or that, or "IBM
> > says" this or that. No valid technical reason (to my satisfaction)
> > has been given. So, when the claim is fractional partitions won't
> > work on older processors, it means to mean that some software
> > must prevent that since the hardware does not. All it takes for
> > me to shut up is that someone tells me specifically what NEW/different
> > instruction(s) or MSR-bit(s) is/are used by/for fractional LPARs.
>
>_______________________________________________
>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.
--