We took an approach where for each plex we had CF defined on two cec's as that 
make sense :

1. Systems defined in the plex are defined on both CEC ...i.e. Say we have plex 
of 4 systems (SYS1,SYS2,SYS3,SYS4), each with 2 systems on one CEC1(SYS1 & SYS2 
Active(Normal running)  the rest 2 in Inactive state on CEC1 (SYS3 & SYS4) , 
similar definition goes other way ....which is CEC2(SYS3 & SYS4 Active(normal 
running) & rest 2 in inactive state on CEC2(SYS1 & SYS2) .... This provide 
resiliency in terms of whole CEC Going down ...Now both have CF Definition for 
the Plex on both CEC which provide resiliency for the CF as well with 
Structures defined in duplex mode ...This we have been running for years and 
provide us various benefits example say we are applying or doing microcode 
upgrade or for various other reason require structures to move around ...those 
all features can be exploited when we have structures defined in the duplex 
mode with hardware split over two separate physical box....
So simple rule and policy and commonsense work here ....

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to