RE: Why do companies partition their Power Servers?

That is an absolutely valid way to do it, and it has its advantages.

But, if you are hosting customers all over the globe, scheduling maintenance windows can become a nightmare. Customer X can allow an outage in the middle of the night, but customer y is getting started with their work day at that time. Then customer z runs 2 shifts that overlap both previous customers.

Not arguing, just food for thought.

:)

Brian May
IBM i Modernization Specialist
Profound Logic Software
http://www.profoundlogic.com
937-439-7925 Phone
877-224-7768 Toll Free



Modernization Made Easy!
www.profoundlogic.com
         


-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Nathan Andelin
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 10:55 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: Why do companies partition their Power Servers?

I myself would love to have a completely isolated test partition
where I can use library lists that are exactly the same as
production library lists, user profiles secured the exact same way
as production user profiles, and so on.

I agree that partitions are a viable solution for that. Just save data and configurations on one partition and restore them to the other. But I don't think that partitions are the best solution.

We never hard code library names in program code, except for temporary overrides to QTEMP - or such. We always manage Library Lists through configuration files and occasionally via traditional *JOBD objects. Library names are always soft-coded and easily maintainable so that authorized users might point "applications" to libraries that they are authorized to.

We recently configured 180 new IBM i subsystems, 60 new HTTP server instances, 60 new instances of our Web portal, and 60 new sets of Libraries, for 60 separate state agencies, to enable each to run "isolated"
environments on a single IBM i partition. Each agency manages their own users, user groups, user authorities in configuration files in separate libraries and IFS directories.

I believe it will be much easier to to manage 60 such soft-coded environments than 60 LPARS.

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