...individually could *not* meet the test... > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of Skip Robinson > Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2016 10:01 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [Bulk] Re: Deleting a dataset that GRS has enqueued. > > (Replying to my own post.) I looked more into the history BronzePlex. I think > the first published definition was in 2002's Redbook "Merging Systems into a > Sysplex" (SG24-6818-00). At one end is Platinum: everything that can be > shared is actually shared. At the other end is Bronze (see below). Gold is > somewhere in the middle. It's pretty clear that this distinction derived from > IBM's crackdown on shops that were benefitting from sysplex pricing but did > not qualify to the letter of the law: each qualifying CEC must host a portion > of > a single parallel sysplex such that each CEC's portion uses more than 50% of > that CEC's CPU resources. There can be other mono- or parallel sysplexes in > the configuration, but one parallel sysplex must dominate every CEC. > > In addition to the CPU test, the shop must certify that some parallel sysplex > function(s) are actually in use. GRS star is one candidate. Another is DB2 > data > sharing. Also JES checkpoint in CF--not just a common JESplex. You didn't need > all, but you needed (I think) at least one. Up to 2007 we had been informally > grandfathered by virtue of early adoption in the mid-90s. Then the hammer > came down. We brought out the power tools and bolted together two > sysplexes that individually could meet the test. BronzePlex is no longer > needed > here, but it persists till now for economic reasons. The obverse side of the > same old coin. > > "1.2.1 BronzePlex > "Some customers will want to move systems that are completely unrelated > into a sysplex simply to get the benefits of PSLC or WLC "charging. In this > case, > there will be practically no sharing between the incoming system and the > other systems in the target sysplex. This "is a typical outsourcing > configuration, > where the sysplex consists of systems from different customers, and there is > no sharing of anything "(except the minimal sharing required to be part of a > sysplex) between the systems. We have used the term “BronzePlex” to > describe this "type of sysplex." > > . > . > . > J.O.Skip Robinson > Southern California Edison Company > Electric Dragon Team Paddler > SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager > 323-715-0595 Mobile > [email protected] > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] > > On Behalf Of Skip Robinson > > Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2016 06:09 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: Deleting a dataset that GRS has enqueued. > > > > I don't know of a 'classic' definition. To me bronze-plex is a fully > > functional > > parallel sysplex that shares little or nothing more than what's required for > > sysplex, essentially the control data sets plus any others that might be > needed > > for 'qualifying' sysplex exploiters. JES is not on the list. My bronze-plex > > does > > indeed contain two different JES(2) nodes that communicate via NJE as if > they > > were 1000s of miles apart. > > > > OTOH I have run configurations before parallel sysplex even existed that > > contained two separate JES2 nodes. Never had a special name for that other > > than primary/secondary. In my mind, bronze-plex is a configuration born, > > like > > mine, of the need to qualify for parallel sysplex pricing. That actual need > > has > > long since disappeared due to configuration changes, but splitting the > bronze- > > plex apart would require additional hardware resources--at least CF engines > > and maybe memory plus effort to accomplish--that so far have not seemed > > compelling. > > > > . > > . > > . > > J.O.Skip Robinson > > Southern California Edison Company > > Electric Dragon Team Paddler > > SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager > > 323-715-0595 Mobile > > [email protected] > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM- > [email protected]] > > > On Behalf Of Ed Jaffe > > > Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2016 03:16 PM > > > To: [email protected] > > > Subject: [Bulk] Re: Deleting a dataset that GRS has enqueued. > > > > > > On 1/30/2016 8:47 AM, Tom Marchant wrote: > > > > However, I believe that skip had written in an earlier append that hos > > > > bronzeplex was a combination of two sysplexes. If that is the case ... > > > > > > A "classic" bronzeplex is two or more JESplexes within a single sysplex. > > > > > > -- > > > Edward E Jaffe > > > Phoenix Software International, Inc > > > 831 Parkview Drive North > > > El Segundo, CA 90245 > > > http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
