Not across a WAN. Latency is a real enemy of this technique.
That's why I suggested the netinstall technique would likely not be
successful.
--
Jim Oberholtzer
Agile Technology Architects
-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rob
Berendt
Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2017 11:32 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Migrating extant system to new hardware
Again: "alternate IPL device" vs "alternate installation device".
Would that make a difference?
Rob Berendt
--
IBM Certified System Administrator - IBM i 6.1 Group Dekko Dept 1600 Mail
to: 2505 Dekko Drive
Garrett, IN 46738
Ship to: Dock 108
6928N 400E
Kendallville, IN 46755
http://www.dekko.com
From: DrFranken <midrange@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Rob Berendt <rob@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: 12/20/2017 11:47 AM
Subject: Re: Migrating extant system to new hardware
Sent by: "MIDRANGE-L" <midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
I have never hit a limit of virtual optical total capacity of the image
catalog and I have migrated multi-TB systems this way.
The biggest thing is having enough disk space.
The second is enough network to push it all.
The third is a place to boot the new system from whether that is an
image catalog on VIOS, a network based catalog on the existing system,
or a physical disk. DO NOTE I have seen in this thread references to
'far far away' and if you are trying to IPL from the network to install
IBM i LIC using TFTP/NFS that is across the country that will with high
probability fail across a WAN. It IS sensitive to latency. I do it
across the state of MI but that's on dedicated private fiber with 4ms
latency, It sometimes fails over the link to my home office with a 15ms
latency. So be warned.
- Larry "DrFranken" Bolhuis
www.Frankeni.com
www.iDevCloud.com - Personal Development IBM i timeshare service.
www.iInTheCloud.com - Commercial IBM i Cloud Hosting.
On 12/20/2017 11:01 AM, Rob Berendt wrote:
<snip>
I have not researched inherent limit of virtual optical but I do like
that
idea of backing everything
up and transmitting an image then installing raw from the image. I've
never done that, but it really works?
Again, is there a limit to the size of the virt opt image?
</snip>
It's pretty darn big if there is a limit.
Keep in mind that virtual optical is an "image catalog". Very important
term.
Each "image catalog" has multiple "image catalog entries".
I have one image catalog composed of 6 image catalog entries. Each
entry
is between 1-4GB. This is just the latest PTF cume and groups.
Name Size
CUME_1.bin 4,145,152K
CUME_4.bin 3,801,088K
CUME_5.bin 3,784,704K
CUME_3.bin 3,407,872K
CUME_6.bin 2,048,000K
CUME_2.bin 1,392,640K
I've done OS upgrades with a LOT more entries.
I think there's a limit of 1TB on each image catalog entry.
https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/ssw_ibm_i_73/rzamp/rzampother
.htm
You might want to verify that for 7.1. Just change the dropdown on the
left.
Rob Berendt
midrange.com
