Re: HMC woes WAS: RFE: Document how to migrate from 5733OPS to preferred distributions

On 4/17/2019 8:06 PM, Holger Scherer wrote:

That’s one of the big issues when a very big company with (some) very big customers designs a tool:
the forget about the big number of small and medium customers.

Agree for sure.

Some functionality of HMC enhanced+ interface might be useful if you manage 100+ boxes with 1000+ LPARs
(maybe), but if you’re some smaller with 20 boxes and 200 LPARs and you are used to the classic
interface, you’re lost. And (as written before) if you use some special features of IBM i, you’re lost, too,
because the IBM designers don’t know about IBM i.

Even 20 boxes and 200 LPARS is really a big shop all in. At least that that level you've likely got someone quite dedicated to infrastructure. The VAST number of smaller shops are really lost.

For vSCSI/vETH we use a 3 digit numbering scheme to have nice ranges, some spare number ranges,
and even on a 8 LPAR box the numbers go up to 300. Makes documentation much more easy and we
can go with a common standard. I cannot imagine what will happen if we need to accept a
given automatic numbering.

I do the same, it has a nice pattern to it and the the connections are very logical. Since you can have tens of thousands of virtual slots this is no issue whatever.

That’s one reason i created RFE 131932 just to push the HMC developers. Have direct contact now
but they are on easter holidays ;-)

And it's why I pretty much do all of this in CLI. Not likely they'll take that away from us!!

-h

Am 18.04.2019 um 01:57 schrieb Roberto José Etcheverry Romero <yggdrasil.raiker@xxxxxxxxx>:


But yes, It seems like it's trying very hard to be a cloud management
system instead of a HMC...

- Larry "DrFranken" Bolhuis

www.Frankeni.com
www.iDevCloud.com - Personal Development IBM i timeshare service.
www.iInTheCloud.com - Commercial IBM i Cloud Hosting.