Ehh ... docker version of z/OS (containerized z/OS) or a container daemon native to z/OS, i.e. building a OCI-compliant container daemon for z/OS, managing it with "RedHat's" podman and OpenShift/Kooberneetus?
That is, unlike zCX which is just adding support for running s390x images on z/OS, it's going to be native container targeting 'ibmz' or whatever, like s390x/x86/ARM. I think it's the latter. Should wash my hands for saying the C word these many times. - KB ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Saturday, July 4, 2020 1:41 AM, Mike Schwab <mike.a.sch...@gmail.com> wrote: > IBM is introducing a DOCKER version of z/OS, so you own that image and > it is loaded as needed. That should give you more isolation from PTFs > that IBM applies to their base docker image that customers start from. > > On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 7:15 PM ste...@copper.net ste...@copper.net wrote: > > > Years ago, in Silicon Valley, I worked on ACS/OBS WYLBUR. We had a P/390 > > that I had tuned the I/O for to really speed it up. ACS also sold time on > > their systems. > > Contractually, we were only allowed to charge access costs for the P/390. > > It was not to be a "production" machine. So developers could buy access to > > it, but not on a "per CPU time" charge and related. We did have a few > > takers for the P/390. > > The system Charles has mentioned has certain caveats and issues. One can't > > control their z/OS image, because the DASD for the RES is controlled by the > > data center. > > If one were to obtain a z/OS license, and were to get it to run under KVM, > > then one could have a "production" system, where all source is handled, > > compiles done, etc., while all system level testing is done on another > > image. > > There are costs with this that have to be overcome. > > Let's take a look into the future: IBM is going to put out a release of VM > > and/or z/OS that will not run on a z/?? CEC and that is the one you have > > (or SUSE/RHEL, etc. does the same with KVM etc.). You will now have to > > migrate to another machine. Can you get that machine on the used market at > > a good price? > > Meanwhile, you must have HLASM and probably want to have the toolkit > > (separately chargeable as I understand it). You will need all the compilers > > being used COBOL, PL/1, c/C++, etc.. Can you get them under a development > > license? > > Ok, let's say you can. You may need to have a small machine that is used > > for compiles so that you do not have to pay for the compilers on the bigger > > box. > > Given that you are going to have those who are doing development where they > > will need to have multiple CPUs, what you want is the slowest machine you > > can get (sub-model?) but with 4-6 General CPs for race condition testing. > > Now depending on the number of people/entities interested in this system, > > one may need multiple LPARs and possibly CECs to handle the workload. > > If I could (and because of who I work for, and for those of you who think I > > work for Humana, I did at one time, but things change...), I would go to a > > University or college and propose this: A Mainframe Academic center. And I > > would tie that with somehow teaching COBOL (it ain't dead, and it is still > > growing), and possibly CICS & DB2. If IBM still does an academic licensing > > thing, then this is the cheapest way to go that I am aware of. And if you > > can get the school to do an open semester year tuition allowing one to do > > self directed studies.... > > Believe me, with all the outsourced contractors I deal with who have > > degrees in IT Theory and absolutely no PROGRAMMING experience outside of > > some OO language, I could see this being something that might get some > > traction since with COVID-19 we just found out that we can do classes > > virtually to anywhere (those of us who have been working from Home for > > decades already knew that). > > And you might get certain companies to throw in their tools, such as z/XDC > > for a low price. > > Ok, maybe more than 2 cents, but these are my observations having done some > > of this before Outsourcing organizations became Cloud companies. > > THE HEADACHE not yet mentioned is, one may not be able to get support for > > this system. So one may have to wait until a production machine somewhere > > hits your problem to get an APAR/PTF. > > Regards, > > Steve Thompson > > --- charl...@mcn.org wrote: > > From: Charles Mills charl...@mcn.org > > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > > Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] Mainframe co-op > > Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2020 11:41:52 -0700 > > A model to look at might be the IBM Innovation Center, Dallas. > > The price is higher than what I picture as your target: $550/month and up > > IIRC. You get two dedicated VM virtual machines: one that runs CMS and that > > you use as a console. You can do limited console automation with Rexx. And > > one on which you IPL z/OS. The z/OS -- any current version that you want -- > > runs from shared read-only DASD that IBM maintains: PTFs and so forth are > > IBM's problem. You get just about every IBM product that you could possibly > > want -- again, read-only DASD, with IBM doing the PTFs. > > For $550 IIRC you get everything you "need." More DASD, lots and lots of > > CPU cycles, etc. entail an upcharge. > > You "own" the configuration. If you want to muck up SYS1.PARMLIB so that > > z/OS will not IPL, it's your gun, your bullet, your foot. I have never done > > it, so I don't know, but I would assume IBM has some way of getting you > > back running. You "own" RACF. You can have as many userid's as you care to > > define. If you want to experiment with permissions in any way you choose, > > go at it. IBM provides very limited support: (1) if you need help you can > > ask by e-mail: sometimes you get great help, sometimes not; (2) no PMR > > support. You are not a z/OS licensee and thus not entitled to PMR support. > > I would assume that if you had some fatal problem you could go route (1) > > and get IBM to address it somehow: I have no experience. > > It is a good option for an individual or small company just a little above > > your intended price point. You have to a certain extent the best of both > > worlds: you have a z/OS that you can do with as you wish just as if you > > owned the box; and you have IBM doing the z/OS PTFs and basic installs and > > volume backups and so forth that I at least don't care to do. You do not > > have to do any initial install: your z/OS will IPL on day one. > > It is current hardware. I believe we are currently running on a z14. > > There are also offerings for VM, VSE and Linux IIRC but I am not familiar > > with them. > > You cannot do "production." You can let customers on for demos, but that is > > it. (Speaking from memory; I am not an IBM attorney.) You have to be a > > "software vendor" developing a "mainframe product" but my impression is > > that IBM's bar is pretty low: you don't have to be BMC or CA. > > You might consider using that as a model. I think it is a GREAT starting > > point for thinking about this. You might ask yourself "how do we tune that > > model so that we could get the price down to $X?" ... whatever you think > > your $X should be. And if you wanted to involve IBM in your discussions the > > Dallas folks might be the right place to start. > > http://dtsc.dfw.ibm.com/MVSDS/'HTTPD2.ENROL.PUBLIC.SHTML(ZOSRDP)' > > Hopefully that link works. I am not sure PDS's make the best Web > > repositories. (Gasp! Mainframe heresy!) > > Charles > > -----Original Message----- > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > > Behalf Of Grant Taylor > > Sent: Friday, July 3, 2020 10:50 AM > > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > > Subject: Re: Mainframe co-op > > On 7/3/20 11:13 AM, Seymour J Metz wrote: > > > > > Interesting. Some questions come to mind. > > > > Discussion is good. > > > > > Would it have to have current software to attract the open source > > > community? > > > > I don't think that bleeding edge is needed in any way shape or form. > > My personal interest would be something in the z/OS family. The bottom > > end of what is still supported would be a minimum desired version. But > > I think anything in z/OS is better than was is readily available now. > > > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > -- > > Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA > Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
