RE: New system with Guested Lpar

Pete, there's a difference between "can" and recommended. IBM used to
recommend that, when lparing on an 8xx box that you use the controlling
partition for just bare OS. That way if it fell slightly behind on ptf's,
or could run backups less (that might interrupt the other lpar's) it would
be better.

The customer has to decide if that still holds true today.

If you're inflexible and insist on doing full system restricted saves on a
nightly basis on your hosting lpar then you better ensure that your
guested lpars can be down for that length of time also. I sure wouldn't
make one lpar the HA backup machine for the other one. Even for a
situation where you're only doing HA to minimize your backup window and
not for true DR stuff also. Then again, as a gent who's had to apply his
share of disruptive firmware upgrades, I'm not so keen on both lpars being
on the same box in the first place.

Since we have full intentions of being able to ipl our test lpar on a whim
we decided that it had better not be the controlling lpar, but a guested
lpar might work. However, with my luck, the first time I get V6R2 I'll
probably find out I can't put it on the guested lpar until the hosting
lpar is at that level or higher.

Rob Berendt