Linux on AS400

F.Langner

unread,

Sep 7, 2001, 12:05:01 PM9/7/01

to

I just tried to do the configuration on a 270 with 2431 proc..
I followed all the options in configuring Linux on AS400.. but I want to do
it in a Hosted Partition
so it said change this to option 2...and then press F10 to work with shared
procs.. but there was none yet.....
ok so I pressed enter. pressed F3 and then f5 to create new partition did
guest and it said id and name.. and then use shared proc pool to 2 (NO) ..
is that right.. I do not know..

so, has someone done this task already...so i followed the remaining
instrucktions...createt nwsd and so on..tried to vary it on.. but got
returncode 0009 ok. forgot to saaign part to host... tried again....0007 no
boot... but I want to install..
so i tried to figure out what IPL source i should take for first
boot..again... so i changed to *stmf... but no help..

again, descriptions from manual are differen from online help...D in book
says.. for future use.. in onlin says C is that type...
what an easy task....

would be nice if someone can help

greetings

fred

F.Langner

unread,

Sep 10, 2001, 4:13:47 AM9/10/01

to

I am really surprised...seems like I am the only one worldwide to do
something with this
fantastic enhance of OS/400...
when it was anounced I heard from IBM the whole world is waiting for it...
now it works...and it will be the most used enhancement since Os400 exists.
big surprise to me that there is no answer....*smile

.
F.Langner <f.la...@tcs-gmbh.com> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
9narhs$6db76$1...@ID-88630.news.dfncis.de...

Gerhard Possler

unread,

Sep 10, 2001, 5:18:47 AM9/10/01

to

F.Langner wrote:

> I am really surprised...seems like I am the only one worldwide to do
> something with this
> fantastic enhance of OS/400...

no, you are not alone .... ;-)

> when it was anounced I heard from IBM the whole world is waiting for it...
> now it works...and it will be the most used enhancement since Os400 exists.
> big surprise to me that there is no answer....*smile
>
> .
> F.Langner <f.la...@tcs-gmbh.com> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
> 9narhs$6db76$1...@ID-88630.news.dfncis.de...
>
>>I just tried to do the configuration on a 270 with 2431 proc..

unfortunately I cannot test "shared processors" because we have an 820 with 2398
proc (4x). But i will try to get an 270 for some tests.

>>I followed all the options in configuring Linux on AS400.. but I want to
>>
> do
>
>>it in a Hosted Partition
>>so it said change this to option 2...and then press F10 to work with
>>
> shared

first you must have all needed PTF's (that's the first answer from any
IBM-Support team ;-), in this case it is very important...)

Bradley V. Stone

unread,

Sep 10, 2001, 9:15:59 PM9/10/01

to

>I am really surprised...seems like I am the only one worldwide to do
>something with this
>fantastic enhance of OS/400...
>when it was anounced I heard from IBM the whole world is waiting for it...
>now it works...and it will be the most used enhancement since Os400 exists.
>big surprise to me that there is no answer....*smile
>

Curious, did you use Linux before the iSeries? If not, why? What do
you feel makes Linux better on the iSeries than on a standalone box?

Just curious, that's all. :)

Brad

Beat Rubischon

unread,

Sep 11, 2001, 2:58:28 AM9/11/01

to

Hello!

Am 10.09.01 schrieb F.Langner:

> I am really surprised...seems like I am the only one worldwide to do
> something with this
> fantastic enhance of OS/400...

Well, you are not alone. I have done this task last week on our
270 following the informations out of the redbook:

http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redpieces/pdfs/sg246232.pdf

The only thing which cost me some time: You have to allocate 1
CPU to both partitions and slice them up.

Config of the PRIMARY partition:
---8<---
Change Partition Processing Resources
System:
CHPHYS01
Type changes, press Enter.

Partition identifier and name . . . . . . . . : 0 PRIMARY

Current / available number of processors . . . : 1 / 0
New number of processors . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Minimum / maximum number of processors . . . . . 1 / 1
Use shared processor pool . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1=Yes, 2=No
New shared processor pool units . . . . . . . 0 . 50
Minimum / maximum processor pool units . . . . 0 . 10 / 1 . 00

Current / available size of main storage (MB) : 264 / 0
New size of main storage (MB) . . . . . . . . . 264
Minimum / maximum size of main storage (MB) . . 264 / 512

Current / available interactive feature . . . : 100 / 0 %
New interactive feature . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 %
Minimum / maximum interactive feature . . . . . 18 / 100 %
---8<---

Config of the LINUX1 partition:
---8<---
Change Partition Processing Resources
System:
CHPHYS01
Type changes, press Enter.

Partition identifier and name . . . . . . . . : 1 LINUX1

Current / available number of processors . . . : 1 / 0
New number of processors . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Minimum / maximum number of processors . . . . . 1 / 1
Use shared processor pool . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1=Yes, 2=No
New shared processor pool units . . . . . . . 0 . 25
Minimum / maximum processor pool units . . . . 0 . 10 / 0 . 80

Current / available size of main storage (MB) : 124 / 0
New size of main storage (MB) . . . . . . . . . 124
Minimum / maximum size of main storage (MB) . . 72 / 512
---8<---

I needed many IPLs to understand this setup ;-)

My source for the installation was S.u.S.E. -Linux from

ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ppc/boot/iSeries/

Now, I'm porting Debian GNU/Linux to this box...

Sincerly Beat

--
Beat Rubischon \|/ See http://www.rubis.ch/~beat/ for
<be...@rubis.ch> ( 0^0 ) snail- & e-mail, phone, fax & PGP
---------------oOO--(_)--OOo----------------------------------
# wigwam.lugs.ch, Linux 2.4.6, up 59 days, 3:56, load: 0.00

F.Langner

unread,

Sep 12, 2001, 3:29:13 AM9/12/01

to

>
> Curious, did you use Linux before the iSeries? If not, why? What do
> you feel makes Linux better on the iSeries than on a standalone box?
>
> Just curious, that's all. :)
>
> Brad

its not me... its the customer....and IBM that proudly say its better

Dieter Bender

unread,

Sep 12, 2001, 7:55:27 AM9/12/01

to

better for IBM, but the customer???

>

--
__________________________________________________________
News suchen, lesen, schreiben mit http://newsgroups.web.de

Bradley V. Stone

unread,

Sep 13, 2001, 5:55:55 PM9/13/01

to

On 12 Sep 2001 13:55:27 +0200, Dieter Bender <d...@bender-dv.de> wrote:

>"F.Langner" <f.la...@tcs-gmbh.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Curious, did you use Linux before the iSeries? If not, why? What do
>>> you feel makes Linux better on the iSeries than on a standalone box?
>>>
>>> Just curious, that's all. :)
>>>
>>> Brad
>>
>>
>>its not me... its the customer....and IBM that proudly say its better
>>
>
>
>better for IBM, but the customer???
>

My thoughts exactly. Some people live in a one track world, where all
input from IBM is good, and it is the only input they get. That needs
to change.

Gerhard Possler

unread,

Sep 17, 2001, 6:50:56 AM9/17/01

to

Bradley V. Stone wrote:

the reason for using Linux(or OS/400) in an LPAR is the scalability and
flexibility of such an system. I hope IBM will make LPAR more flexible, an
importat point is the "dynamicaly" allocation of resources.

if you have an standalone box (let's say an Intel-PC) you cannot allocate 30%
CPU for an running OS and the rest for an other (not yet ;-) )

for me is LPAR the most important change to the AS/400 since TCP/IP on AS/400!
(TCP/IP was not "naturaly" on AS/400 ;-)) )

> Just curious, that's all. :)
>
> Brad
>

Chuck Ackerman

unread,

Sep 17, 2001, 10:48:58 AM9/17/01

to

Gerhard,

"Gerhard Possler" <gpo...@suse.de> wrote in message news:3BA5D590...@suse.de...

| if you have an standalone box (let's say an Intel-PC) you cannot allocate 30%
| CPU for an running OS and the rest for an other (not yet ;-) )

Sure you can. I run Win98, Win2000 and DOS all at the same time, I'm not talking dual boot here, using Connectix's Virtual PC. Each operating system thinks they're talking directly to the CPU and other hardware. You can, in fact, run Linux in one of the partitions also.

You just create a partition, (a software partition, not a hard disk partition) tell it how much memory it gets, and install the OS. When you close the partition the memory reverts back to the host OS. Connectix actually has pre-installed partitions with the OS of your choice already installed that you can buy so that you don't even have to install the OS.

It's especially good for tech support personnel when supporting a mutli-OS desktop user base.

chuck
Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer.

Robert Dean

unread,

Sep 17, 2001, 11:05:56 AM9/17/01

to

Gerhard Possler wrote:
> Bradley V. Stone wrote:
> >>I am really surprised...seems like I am the only one worldwide to do
> >>something with this
> >>fantastic enhance of OS/400...
> >>when it was anounced I heard from IBM the whole world is waiting for it...
> >>now it works...and it will be the most used enhancement since Os400 exists.
> >>big surprise to me that there is no answer....*smile
> > Curious, did you use Linux before the iSeries? If not, why? What do
> > you feel makes Linux better on the iSeries than on a standalone box?
>
> the reason for using Linux(or OS/400) in an LPAR is the scalability and
> flexibility of such an system. I hope IBM will make LPAR more flexible, an
> importat point is the "dynamicaly" allocation of resources.
>
> if you have an standalone box (let's say an Intel-PC) you cannot allocate 30%
> CPU for an running OS and the rest for an other (not yet ;-) )
>
> for me is LPAR the most important change to the AS/400 since TCP/IP on AS/400!
> (TCP/IP was not "naturaly" on AS/400 ;-)) )

Gerhard,

First let me say it's good to see an employee of one of the Linux
distros in
this newsgroup, whether you're here in an official capacity or not.

Second, what, if any, are the differences between the "standard" x86
linux
kernel and the PowerPC linux kernel (as implemented on the AS/400)??

Finally, I agree with you about LPAR. iSeries is about manageability,
and the
LPAR functionality is very manageable. Running Linux under LPAR allows
Linux
to be managed the same way as any other partition.

Thanks!

Robert

Ugo Gagliardelli

unread,

Sep 17, 2001, 5:01:58 PM9/17/01

to

How many users can login in each of such partition?

--
Dr. Ugo Gagliardelli, Modena, Italy
Spaccamaroni andate a cagare/Spammers not welcome
Spamers iros a la mierda/Spamers allez vous faire foutre
Spammers loop schijten/Spammers macht Euch vom Acker

Chuck Ackerman

unread,

Sep 17, 2001, 7:00:36 PM9/17/01

to

Ugo,

I don't understand your question. If you're asking if I've tried Win 2000 server then my answer is that I haven't tried it. By nature, the amount of users a server can support is a function of how much memory is available to the server. The same would hold true to this scenario. The more memory available the more users could be simultaneously connected.

chuck
Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer.

"Ugo Gagliardelli" <sp...@yourself.please> wrote in message news:3BA664C6...@yourself.please...

Bradley V. Stone

unread,

Sep 17, 2001, 9:05:22 PM9/17/01

to

>the reason for using Linux(or OS/400) in an LPAR is the scalability and
>flexibility of such an system. I hope IBM will make LPAR more flexible, an
>importat point is the "dynamicaly" allocation of resources.
>
>if you have an standalone box (let's say an Intel-PC) you cannot allocate 30%
>CPU for an running OS and the rest for an other (not yet ;-) )
>
>for me is LPAR the most important change to the AS/400 since TCP/IP on AS/400!
>(TCP/IP was not "naturaly" on AS/400 ;-)) )
>

While I agree LPAR is an important change, the ability to run Linux on
it is not.

For the price of a small AS/400, you can set up 10 or more very
powerful linux boxes, with way more processing power than a partition
on a reasonably priced AS/400. Up the processing power to up the
partion to compensate, and you would be better off buying more Wintel
boxes instead. You also get your choice of distro, and maintenance
and upgrading is much easier.

Instead of wanting to allocate a certain percentage of CPU to an OS,
you can simply add more boxes, giving each OS 100% CPU at a fraction
of the cost and eliminate the need for hair-pulling PTFs that no doubt
will be needed. And end up with more power and not worry about a
single point of faliure.

LPAR is nice to run multiple versios of OS/400, that's about it, IMHO.

Brad

Gerhard Possler

unread,

Sep 18, 2001, 4:31:28 AM9/18/01

to

Hi Robert,

i will try to answer...;-)

Robert Dean wrote:

>
> Gerhard,
>
> First let me say it's good to see an employee of one of the Linux
> distros in
> this newsgroup, whether you're here in an official capacity or not.

Nobody requested (official site) from me to participate to this

news group so i speak for me.;-) I am AS/400 SE and I was in one "Support Team"
for the AS/400 for some years ago, I join this group since then but I am an
"bad" writer.

> Second, what, if any, are the differences between the "standard" x86
> linux
> kernel and the PowerPC linux kernel (as implemented on the AS/400)??

The main difference is the achitekture difference between PPC and x86 so there
are some differences in the kernel. But I am not an kernel developer so if you
have special questions about the kernel you can look at
http://www.mklinux.org , http://www.linuxppc.org or http://www.linuxppc64.org

you can also send me an email and I will try to contact our developers.

If you will develop some applications for LinuxPPC you can can do this on an x86
Processor and you have to cross-compile it for PPC 32 or 64-bit.

> Finally, I agree with you about LPAR. iSeries is about manageability,
> and the
> LPAR functionality is very manageable. Running Linux under LPAR allows
> Linux
> to be managed the same way as any other partition.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Robert

Ugo put the correct question:

> How many users can login in each of such partition?

>>Chuck Ackerman wrote:
>>
>> Sure you can. I run Win98, Win2000 and DOS all at the same time,

>>I'm not talking dual boot here, using Connectix's Virtual PC.

Yes, this is not the only one Software (VMware is an other one, I use this.)

but Win98, DOS and even Win2000 are mono-user OS's. You can create more then 1

user but 2 or more users cannot work at the same time. (ok win200 and TSE try
to implement multi-user support via ICA and RDP but the concepts behind this
are mono-user concepts.)
I use also VMware to run several OS's on my system but only for test and

support purposes, but productively with >1000 users that will be very hard!

Ugo Gagliardelli

unread,

Sep 18, 2001, 6:45:23 AM9/18/01

to

Chuck Ackerman wrote:
>
> Ugo,
>
> I don't understand your question. If you're asking if I've tried Win 2000 server then my > answer is that I haven't tried it. By nature, the amount of users a server can support is a > function of how much memory is available to the server. The same would hold true to this > scenario. The more memory available the more users could be simultaneously connected.

Actually I'm using vmware, my question intended to understand if the
product you are using is better then mine. Vmware is not suitable to be
accessed from other than the desktop user. I didn't try linux on lpar,
but I'm wondering that's capable to support multiple concurrent users
the same way OS400 do and linux on other server kind as well.

Ugo Gagliardelli

unread,

Sep 18, 2001, 7:13:36 AM9/18/01

to

Thank you, this was the answer. I was just wondering how to have a few
users (let's say 10/20) working with payroll-application (for example)
installed in the vmware-linux-box on my workstation. No way. Otherwise I
think it's possible in a lpar-linux-box on an iSeries.
Or not?

Gerhard Possler

unread,

Sep 18, 2001, 8:43:55 AM9/18/01

to

Ugo Gagliardelli wrote:

>
>>but Win98, DOS and even Win2000 are mono-user OS's. You can create more then 1
>>
>>user but 2 or more users cannot work at the same time. (ok win200 and TSE try
>>to implement multi-user support via ICA and RDP but the concepts behind this
>>are mono-user concepts.)
>>I use also VMware to run several OS's on my system but only for test and
>>
>>support purposes, but productively with >1000 users that will be very hard!
>>
>
> Thank you, this was the answer. I was just wondering how to have a few
> users (let's say 10/20) working with payroll-application (for example)
> installed in the vmware-linux-box on my workstation. No way. Otherwise I
> think it's possible in a lpar-linux-box on an iSeries.
> Or not?

Unfortunately not. VMware is only for Intel systems...they (VMware) have to
cross-compile it for PPC :-(

But there is an Server version try (only for Intel);-):

http://www.suse.de/it/prodotti/VMware/vmware_gsx_server.html

or http://www.vmware.com

Ugo Gagliardelli

unread,

Sep 18, 2001, 10:04:28 AM9/18/01

to

Gerhard Possler wrote:
>
> Ugo Gagliardelli wrote:
>
> >
> >>but Win98, DOS and even Win2000 are mono-user OS's. You can create more then 1
> >>
> >>user but 2 or more users cannot work at the same time. (ok win200 and TSE try
> >>to implement multi-user support via ICA and RDP but the concepts behind this
> >>are mono-user concepts.)
> >>I use also VMware to run several OS's on my system but only for test and
> >>
> >>support purposes, but productively with >1000 users that will be very hard!
> >>
> >
> > Thank you, this was the answer. I was just wondering how to have a few
> > users (let's say 10/20) working with payroll-application (for example)
> > installed in the vmware-linux-box on my workstation. No way. Otherwise I
> > think it's possible in a lpar-linux-box on an iSeries.
> > Or not?
>
> Unfortunately not. VMware is only for Intel systems...they (VMware) have to
> cross-compile it for PPC :-(

Well, maybe I wasn't so clear. I meant an application running in a
vmware linux box compared with the same application running on linux
installed in an lpar on an iSeries iron.

Chuck Ackerman

unread,

Sep 18, 2001, 10:29:01 AM9/18/01

to

Ugo,

Depending on the speed and amount of memory your PC has you could easily serve 10/20 users on a Virtual PC using Connectix.

But I have to ask: Why? Since your machine would be subject to usage by you then it will be subject to reboots, lockups, etc.

I'd recommend a simple standalone Linux box. Since your needs are primarily server based you don't need a high end machine. Just reuse one of the old Pentium machines you have lying around. That should work nicely. I worked for a company that supported about 100 users on a Linux application with a 250mhz Pentium.

Basic Linux doesn't use much of the CPU, it's very efficient.

chuck
Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer.

"Ugo Gagliardelli" <sp...@yourself.please> wrote in message news:3BA72C60...@yourself.please...

Chuck Ackerman

unread,

Sep 18, 2001, 10:32:50 AM9/18/01

to

Ugo,

Here's the short answer. Virtual PC virtualizes everything on the PC including the network card. Therefore, each Virtual PC you have running acts, looks and feels like a standalone PC. To the rest of the LAN it looks like a separate PC. As a result, yes, you can use it as a server if you run Linux or Win 2000 in a virtual PC.

chuck
Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer.

"Ugo Gagliardelli" <sp...@yourself.please> wrote in message news:3BA725C3...@yourself.please...

Larry Loen

unread,

Sep 18, 2001, 1:50:16 PM9/18/01

to

Gerhard Possler wrote:
[snip]

>
> unfortunately I cannot test "shared processors" because we have an 820 with 2398
> proc (4x). But i will try to get an 270 for some tests.
>

I have run shared processors for iSeries Linux LPAR. Works fine.

Larry Loen -- speaking on his own, as a partisan, but with experience
running Linux iSeries LPAR.

Tamas Feher

unread,

Sep 25, 2001, 9:59:49 AM9/25/01

to

Your entire topic was about adding more and more x86 boxes, instead of
buying a single larger AS/400 with LPAR. Well, many companies went
iSeries, because Windows and Linux PC servers were multiplying like
rabbits and growing costs on personnel and managability problems
forced them to rethink their "2 PCs bad, 4 PCs good, 500 PCs are even
better" approach.

A single AS/400 is more reliable than two dozen PC servers, that's
about the single point of failure.

Tamas Feher

unread,

Sep 25, 2001, 10:13:33 AM9/25/01

to

Hello all,

>Connectix's Virtual PC

That's only like the "normal" VMware. What you need to try to equal
LPAR is more likely VMware ESX/GSX. Sorrowfully it's not available via
the web, you have to buy a CD for lotsa bucks or arrange a trial via
phone to VMware Inc.

Sincerely: Tamas Feher.

Bradley V. Stone

unread,

Sep 25, 2001, 6:11:32 PM9/25/01

to

No it's not. The chances are nill that all 24 PC servers will go
down at once, compared to the slim chance that the AS/400 will.
Especially with V5R1.

The personnel and managability problems you speak of aren't because of
the hardware, they're because of the lack of experience, mainly. Look
at any PC farm shop. You have 20 or so 13 year old know it alls
running the show. I know, I work with them. It's amazing how they
don't think like us iSeries folks.

Anyhow, you shouldn't need 24 PC servers unless you're comparing it to
a big 24way. PCs are becoming much more competitive to the bigger
boxes these days.

Trust me, I'm still a loyal AS/400 fan and know it's rock solid, but
at that price, and with the competitive processing power of today's
ghz+ boxes, I'll stick with PCs for my personal use. If I could get a
270 for $1200, I'd buy it in a hearbeat.

Brad