The issue is performance. Depending on what you are doing, the degraded performance may be acceptable.
-- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Laurence Chiu [lch...@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, March 5, 2023 2:05 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Running a Coupling Facility using a CP for a test Parallel Sysplex 0 anyh gotcha's? The debate I am having with the outsourcer is whether or not it's feasible or even practical to run a test CF on a general purpose engine. They say it requires a dedicated engine and I think that is nonsense! If I can get that over the line (and that is the challenge) then I can suggest what you recommended below. And since I don't need one CF, I might need even fewer resources. On Sun, Mar 5, 2023 at 5:39 PM Mike Schwab <mike.a.sch...@gmail.com> wrote: > To avoid impacting other systems, I would drop your LPAR weights by a > total of 6%, trim your LPAR memory to reuse for the ICFs, then create > your two ICF partitions with 3% of 1 CPU and the reclaimed memory.. > > On Sat, Mar 4, 2023 at 2:55 PM Laurence Chiu <lch...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Thanks for the input. > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 5, 2023 at 7:41 AM Mike Schwab <mike.a.sch...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpublication%2F342570694_Coupling_Facility_Configuration_Options_-_Updated_2020&data=05%7C01%7Csmetz3%40gmu.edu%7C436800a18ba54430093908db1daca96d%7C9e857255df574c47a0c00546460380cb%7C0%7C0%7C638136399655620282%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=HYoo%2FosMEZw5JHKVlB0T%2F2llYz5vokvdUSyxKpIB3Do%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > I am familiar with that document and even provided a copy to our > outsourcer > > to read but clearly they hadn't > > > > This is a direct link to IBM for that document. > > > > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ibm.com%2Fdownloads%2Fcas%2FJZB2E38Q&data=05%7C01%7Csmetz3%40gmu.edu%7C436800a18ba54430093908db1daca96d%7C9e857255df574c47a0c00546460380cb%7C0%7C0%7C638136399655776514%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=tnP0qr0DTsTupn4v2ayadx5%2FmP%2BKlg8RXncytv1PUiA%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > > > CF is not counted on SCRT, shown on RMF reports. > > > Won't cost you on z/OS, may on some vendors. > > > > > > > I don't care so much as this CF is only System B and for development so > > using a general purpose engine is not an issue for us. The MSU charges > are > > going to be low and we are prepared to pay those if it gets us our > parallel > > sysplex > > > > > > > > > Thin CFs go to enabled wait when work is completed, restart when > > > interrupt says there is work. > > > > > > Estimate is 3% light sharing to 13% heaving sharing (of z/OS workload). > > > > > > Thin CF would use internal links so no I/O overhead to another CPU. > > > > > > For the testing CF on the same system as the test Sysplex that is fine. > > But they say there are no spare links from System B to System A if I > wanted > > to run a test Sysplex on System B and access a CF on System A. > > > > This is their response I had to manage > > > > > > To give an idea of what I am facing, this is their response to my > proposals. > > > > Using a General Purpose CP (GCP) as a coupling facility on System B(z13 > at > > WithDrawn From Marketing Licensed Internal Code) > > • There are no spare unallocated GCP on System B i.e no “parked” GCP. > > • All GCP’s, on System B, are allocated as shared, across all LPARS. i.e. > > no dedicated GCP’s. > > • Sharing GCP’s to use for z/OS and as a coupling facility is strongly > not > > recommended FYI coupling facility engines run CFCC (coupling facility > > control code) rather than z/OS. > > • This possibly I believe is now exhausted. > > > > I think all these points are contestable, specially after reading the IBM > > document from a specialist in this area > > > > I just need to get some authoritative voice onto the case, ideally the > > author of the document but that might not be easy. > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
