Talk:IBM Sysplex
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Untitled
[edit]- Sysplexes can be broken down into LPARs, or logical partitions, each running a different operating system
I do not think a sysplex can be broken: a server can be broken into LPARs. Two or more LPARs (in same server or not) can build a sysplex. I mean server as a Mainframe, a Box, a physical computer, p.e.: 3081, 3090, Z990,...
- Sysplex name and CDS
CDS directs to the Wikipedia "CDS" disambiguation page but it's not clear to me which particular "CDS" this is supposed to direct me to (if indeed it exists in the Wikipedia) IanB 12:17, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
MGLP Comments
[edit]I agree with the point about "breaking down a sysplex into...". It's just plain wrong. It would be fair to talk of Sysplexes comprising a number of z/OS images, on one or more physical machines.
CDS should be Couple Data Set.
Martin Packer 13:55, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
- So to summarise, am I correct in understanding a sysplex as describing a number of LPARs loosely-coupled for communication and synchronisation purposes where each LPAR has its own operating system image, rather than a way of tying multiple frames together into a larger SMP or NUMA system running a single system image?
- Granted that IBM's terminology and some of the underlying concepts might differ from other manufacturers, but how big (in terms of the number of CPUs etc.) does the hardware that supports a single system image get, and how's it tied together? MarkMLl 17:14, 22 August 2007 (UTC)