RE: Death of SNA? -- MIDRANGE-L

Rob,

You are correct that firmware updates to the FSP are
disruptive to the partitions - although I have been
told, "Watch this space" for changes in that arena.  
But the HMC which is the point that facilitates
resource movement, partition creation/deletion, etc
can be updated, re-booted and generally maintained
without affecting the partitions.
One of the major reasons for having a skinny primary
is so that no applications or production work occurs
in it, providing less chance of a problem occuring
that will bring down the partition and any
secondaries.

>From a cost perspective, I have to disagree with you.
Our typical primary consisted of
1 RAID card - $7200
4 x 4319 dasd units - $3000
2 x 2838 LAN cards, 1 x network, 1 x LAN console -
$800
I am already over 10K, and that is without factoring
in the cost of a partial processor, half a GB of
memory, some sort of tape card to back the thing up,
plus I need to get another CD drive as the primary
wants to keep the CD drive in the CEC all to itself. 
I also have to supply a PC to act as the console,
along with a copy of Windows, plus Anti-virus
software, plus, plus, plus.
My HMC cost $3,800 for rack mount, or if I want to be
cheap and get desktop, its only $1,800.

Even with one i5, I still think it is a bargain.

Note: All prices quoted are list prices :)

Regards

Pat.

Patricia Garrity
Garrity Systems

--- rob@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

> Patricia,
> 
> I'll agree that it would allow you to do away with
> the hardware required 
> for the controlling partition.
> However I'm not sure if I'd agree if it allows you
> to do away with the 
> dependencies of the controlling partition.  After
> all, you still have the 
> dependency of the firmware on the FSP.  Firmware
> updates to the FSP still 
> are as disruptive as OS updates to a controlling
> partition.
> And if you are a shop with only one box I am not
> sure that the payback is 
> there in the reduction of hardware needed for a
> controlling partition vs 
> the cost of a HMC.  Makes more of a difference in a
> multiple box shop.
> 
> Rob Berendt
> -- 
> Group Dekko Services, LLC
> Dept 01.073
> PO Box 2000
> Dock 108
> 6928N 400E
> Kendallville, IN 46755
> http://www.dekko.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Patricia Garrity <patricia_grrty@xxxxxxxxx> 
> Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> 05/23/2005 03:47 PM
> Please respond to
> Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
> <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> 
> To
> Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
> <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> cc
> 
> Subject
> RE: Death of SNA?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Al,
> 
> I still am not clear why you would tell someone that
> they should "take joy in the fact that they cannot
> use
> an HMC".
> If your product that programs to the HMC requires a
> minimum level of code on the HMC, I could see that
> being a concern for your product, but not for the
> HMC
> and its function.
> The HMC has been stable since V4R3.2 which was
> released late last year - nearly six months ago. It
> was around the same time that the HMC supported the
> scheduled movement of I/O and processing resources,
> a
> function that had been missing up to that point.
> I have been using the HMC for nearly a year now.
> While
> I agree that there were some teething troubles in
> the
> begining, those issues have certainly been addressed
> and the HMC now has the stability and functionality
> that it requires.
> It has allowed us to consolidate several move
> systems
> and do away with a total of 4 managing primary
> partitions and removed the dependancy that the
> numerous secondaries had on those primaries.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Pat
> 
> Patricia Garrity
> Garrity Systems.
> 
> --- Al Barsa <barsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > I was one of the first customers in the world to
> > have an HMC, and to be
> > polite, it didn't work well in the beginning.
> > 
> > I own a product that programs to the HMC, and it
> > will be fully functional
> > when the 4/25 release of the HMC's closed
> > proprietary software, which has
> > not yet shipped.
> > 
> > The product was shipped clearly 6 months to a year
> > before it was ready, and
> > IBM's reaction was to emulate a river in Egypt.
> (Da
> > Nile)
> > 
> > No, I'm not happy about it.
> > 
> > Al
> > 
> > Al Barsa, Jr.
> > Barsa Consulting Group, LLC
> > 
> > 400>390
> > 
> > "i" comes before "p", "x" and "z"
> > e gads
> > 
> > Our system's had more names than Elizabeth Taylor!
> > 
> > 914-251-1234
> > 914-251-9406 fax
> > 
> > http://www.barsaconsulting.com
> > http://www.taatool.com
> > http://www.as400connection.com
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >              Patricia Garrity 
> > 
> >              <patricia_grrty@y 
> > 
> >              ahoo.com> 
> >                    To 
> >              Sent by:                  Midrange
> > Systems Technical 
> >              midrange-l-bounce         Discussion 
> > 
> >              s@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 
> > 
> >                    cc 
> > 
> > 
> >              05/23/2005 08:11 
> >               Subject 
> >              AM                        RE: Death
> of
> > SNA? 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >              Please respond to 
> > 
> >              Midrange Systems 
> > 
> >                  Technical 
> > 
> >                 Discussion 
> > 
> >              <midrange-l@midra 
> > 
> >                  nge.com> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Al,
> > 
> > Yes - the question I was asking was why you would
> > say
> > "You should take joy in the fact that you can't
> use
> > one!"  when refering to the i5 and HMC.
> > 
> > Regards
> > 
> > Pat
> > 
> > Patricia Garrity
> > Garrity Systems
> > 
> > 
> > --- Al Barsa <barsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > >
> > > Pat,
> 
=== message truncated ===



                
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new Resources site
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/