←back to thread

169 points rbanffy | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
noworld ◴[] No.43620370[source]
The successor IBM Mainframes are still alive... for the time being.

https://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redbooks/pdfs/sg248329.pdf

replies(2): >>43620494 #>>43623210 #
froh ◴[] No.43620494[source]
oh, they'll stay around for another while.

they also moved on three more CPU generations since that redbook, to z17.

I think it's Linux on Z that makes it sexy and keeps it young, in addition to a number of crazy features, like a hypervisor that can share CPUs between tenants, and a hardware that support live migration of running processes between sites (via fibre optic interconnect) and the option to hot swap any parts on a running machine.

It's doing a number of things in hardware and hypervisor that need lots of brain power to emulate on commodity hardware.

_and_ it's designed for throughput, from grounds up.

Depending on your workload there may be very good economical reasons to consider a mainframe instead of a number of rack-frames.

replies(7): >>43620580 #>>43620589 #>>43620617 #>>43620927 #>>43621478 #>>43621799 #>>43623708 #
1. rbanffy ◴[] No.43620580[source]
> I think it's Linux on Z that makes it sexy and keeps it young

They feel fantastic when running Linux, but, if you don't need all the reliability features that come with the platform, commodity hardware might be a better choice for the kind of workload that has evolved on Linux.

> Depending on your workload there may be very good economical reasons to consider a mainframe instead of a number of rack-frames.

Absolutely - it makes a lot of the administrative toil disappear. I know clusters are sexy, but getting the job done is always better.