Dec 08

System Values and LVLT4i

System values are an important part of the working environment on the IBM i, therefore it is important that are correctly set ready for whenyou move to a recovery system. LVLT4i is working in an environment where the setting of the System Values as part of the replication process is not an option in just the same way we cannot replicate Profiles and authorities. So we had to come up with a process which would allow us to build the required environment as part of the recovery process.

When we first looked at how we could use LVLT4i we were thinking that the recovery process would use a system save process to recovery the clients environment and then restore the iASP data over it to bring the client data and objects up to the last transaction. That was one of the reasons that the Recovery Time Objective was going to be so long, it takes quite some time to restore a system save. Even if we used Image Catalogs for the restore it was still going to take a significant amount of time, this encouraged us to start looking at the options we had.

One of the major advantages we wanted to push for LVLT4i is the ability to take a backup of a clients applications and data from the iASP and use it for things such as DR testing, application upgrade and OS upgrade testing. To do this we envisage the Managed Service Provider having a recovery partition running the correct level of OS for the clients, the back-up of the iASP could be copied over to the running environment and the client could do their testing without affecting their current DR position. Once the test was completed the system could be scratched and made ready for the next client to use. As part of the discussions we looked at how we could speed up the save and recovery processes (see our Blog entry on saving to a QNAP NAS) using the image catalog technology so that the Recovery Time Objective could be reduced to an absolute minimum. Those programs we created for the testing are actually in use in our environments and have significantly reduced the save times plus provide us with a much faster recovery time should we ever need to set in motion a recovery.

Profiles and Passwords were our first priority because they tend to change a lot, we came up with a process that allows the Managed Service Provider to restore the iASP data and then using automated scripts recover the User Profiles and Passwords before setting the authority. Profile recovery has already been implemented in LVLT4i and testing shows that the process is very effective and fast. The next item we wanted to cover was system values, again as with User Profiles they cannot be replicated to the target system from the client. Using the experience we gained with the storage of the profile data etc. we have now built a retrieval process that will capture all of the system values and then keep those system values in sync. When the client recovery is required scripts will be run that will allow all of the captured system values to be set on the recovery partition.

We believe that LVLT4i is a big step forward in being able to provide a recovery process for many IBM i users, even if they have an existing High Availability product in use today they will see many benefits from using it as their preferred recovery tool. We are noticing that many of those companies that implemented a High Availability Solution are not able to keep up with the changing technology being provided, this means that the recovery capabilities of the solution are being eroded and their value is no longer what it used to be. Data protection is the most important point of any availability solution so managing it needs to be a top priority, having a Recovery Time Objective of 4 – 12 hours should be more than enough for most of the IBM i community so paying for a Recovery Time Objective of minutes is not practical or beneficial.

LVLT4i when managed by a reputable Managed Service Provider should provide the users with a better recovery position and at a price that meets even the tightest of budgets. We believe that Recovery solutions are better managed by those who are committed to them and who continue to develop the skills to maintain them at all times. Although we are not big “Cloud” supporters, we think LVLT4i and the services offered by a Manage Service Provider could make the difference in being able to see value from a properly managed recovery process, offloading the day to day management to a service provider alone should show significant savings.

If you would like to know more about LVLT4i and its capabilities please call us and we will be happy to discuss. If you prefer to use Email we have a contact process on our website under contact us that you can use.

Chris…

Dec 02

Getting the most from LVLT4i

While it is early days for the LVLT4i product we have already had a number of interesting conversations with IBM i users and Managed Service Providers about how we see it being deployed to the smaller IBM i user base.

Price advantages
For the smaller IBM i user the thought of going to a full blown High Availability Solution has always been one that comes with thoughts of big budgets and lots of heartache. The clients need a duplicate system plus the infrastructure required to allow the replication processes to sync data and objects between the systems. Add to this licenses for the High Availability Product, OS and ISV software means that many clients believe availability protection at this level as a viable option.
Even if they identify a Managed Service Provider who could offer the target environment, they still see this is as something beyond their budget.
LVLT4i is aimed at easing that problem, this a Managed Service offering with subscription based pricing based on the clients system (IBM Tier group), this allows the MSP to grow the business without having to invest in up front licensing costs while providing a hardware platform which meets their customers requirements. The iASP technology also reduces the costs for the Managed Service Provider because they can run many clients on a single target LPAR/system removing the one to one relationship generally seen in this scenario. The client will only pay a monthly fee, he will have no upfront capital expense to get signed off and will probably find the target systems are much faster and newer than his existing systems.

Skills advantages
We have been involved with IBM i (and its predecessors) for nearly 25 years in the High Availability market and we have carried out a lot of High Availability software implementations. During that time we have seen a lot of the problems people encounter when trying to implement and manage a High Availability environment. Moving that skill requirement to a Managed Service Provider will bring a number of benefits. The client staff will not have to keep up with the changing capabilities of the High Availability Product, they can concentrate on their main focus which is providing a IT infrastructure to meet the business’s needs. Installation and ongoing management of the replicated environment will be managed by the Managed Service Provider, no more consultancy fees to the High Availability Software provider every time you need to make a minor change. The Managed Service Provider will have a lot of knowledge spread throughout their team and many of that team will have specialist skills that can be brought in to figured out problems.

Technology advantages
LVLT4i uses iASP technology on the target system, the clients system will continue to use *SYSBAS so no changes are required for the clients applications. When the client needs to test or recover the iASP data is saved and restored back to *SYSBAS. This brings some added advantages because the content of those iASP’s can be saved and restored at any time to another LPAR/System for testing. This will allow you to test a new release of software without impacting your current production or recovery position, LVLT4i will continue to keep the recovery partition in sync. Recovery testing will be improved because you will be able to check that the recovery procedures you have developed work, all of this while your existing recovery protection is maintained. Being able to check if a new application update works, check out your application on a new release, check the migration of data to a new release/application, all of these can be carried out without affecting your production or recovery position. If you need extra backups to be taken these can be carried out on the target system at any time during the day, suspending the apply processes while the backup is performed or doing a save while active is not a problem.
The technology which is implemented at the Managed Service Provider will probably be much newer and faster than the client would invest in, this means the advantages of running on the newer systems and OS could be shown to the clients management and maybe convincing them that their existing infrastructure should be improved.
JQG4i will be implemented for those who need job queue content recovery and analysis, this means you can re-launch jobs that did not complete or start using the exact same parameters they were launched with on the source.

LVLT4i is the next level of protection for those who currently use tapes and vaulting for recovery. The Recovery Point Objective is already the same as a High Availability offering (at the transaction level) while the Recovery Time Objective in the 4 – 12 hours which is better than existing tape and vaulting solutions. We are not stopping there, we are already looking at how we can improve the Recovery Time Objective through additional automation and new replication processes, in fact we have already added additional features to the product that will help reduce the time it takes to recover a clients system to the recovery partition at the Managed service Provider. The JQG4i offer adds a new dimension to the recovery process, it brings a very important technology to the users that is not available in many of the High Availability offerings today, this could mean the difference between being able to recover or not.

Even if you already run a High Availability solution today you should look at this offering, having someone else manage the environment and provide a Recovery Point Objective/Recovery Time Objective this offers could be what you need. Many are running a High Availability solution to meet the Recovery Point Objective and not interested in a Recovery Time objective of minutes, this could be costing you more than its worth to maintain. LVLT4i and a Managed Service could offer significant benefits.

If you are interested in knowing more about LVLT4i and the Managed Service Providers we are working with let us know. We are actively seeking more Managed Service Providers who are interested in helping us build a better recovery solution for the IBM i user base.

Chris…

Oct 20

New Product Library Vault, Why?

We have just announced the availability of a new product, Library Vault for IBM i (LVLT4i) which is aimed primarily at the Managed Service Providers. The product allows the replication of data and objects from *SYSBAS on a clients system to an iASP on a target system.

The product evolved after a number of discussions with Managed Service Providers who were looking for something less than a full blown High Availability Product but more than a simple Disaster Recovery solution. It had to be flexible enough to be licensed by the replication content not the systems being used to run it on.

We looked at our existing products and how the licensing worked, it became very apparent that neither would fit the role as they were both licensed at the system level plus HA4i was more than they needed because it had all bells and whistles associated with a High Availability product while DR4i just didn’t have the object capabilities required. So we had to look at what we could do to build something that sits in the middle and license it in such a manner that would allow the price to be fair for all parties.

Originally the product was going to be used in a LPAR to LPAR scenario because the plan was to use the HA4i product with some removed functionality, however one of the MSP’s decided that managing lots of LPAR’s even if they are hosted as VM’s under an IBM i host would entail too much management and effort. The RTO was not going to be the main driver here only the RPO, so keeping the overhead of managing the solution would be a deciding factor. We looked at how to implement the existing redirection process used for mapping libraries that HA4i and DR4i use, it soon became very apparent to us that this would not be ideal as each transaction being processed would require a lot of effort to set the target object. So we decided to look at how we could take the iASP technology we had built many years ago for our RAP product and structure it in such a manner which would meet all of the requirements.

After some discussion and trials we eventually had a working solution that would deliver an effective iASP based replication process. Next we needed to set the licensing to allow flexibility in how it could be deployed. The original concept would be to set the licensing at the library level as most clients would be basing their recovery on a number of libraries so adding the ability to manage the number of licenses against the number of libraries was started. What at first seemed to be a simple task soon threw up more questions than answers! The number of libraries even with a range was not going to be a fair practice for setting our price, some libraries would be larger than others and have more activity which would generate more activity for the replication process. Also the IFS would be totally outside of the licensing as it has no correlation with a library based object (nesting of directories) so it would need to be managed separately. We also recognized that the Data Apply was based solely on the Journal so library based licensing would not work for it either.

The key to getting this to work would be flexibility, we needed to understand this from the MSP’s position, the effort required to manage the set up and licensing had to be simple enough for the sales person to be able to go in and know what price he should set. So we eventually came back to the IBM tier based pricing, even though we have the ability to license all the way back to the object, CPU, LPAR, Journal etc. We needed to give the MSP flexibility to sell the solution at an affordable price without complex license charts. We also understand that a MSP would grow the business and probably have additional resources available for new clients in advance, so we decided that the price had to be based on the clients system and not on the pair of systems being used.

LVLT4i is just getting started, its future will be defined by the MSP community who use it because they will drive the development of new features. We have always felt that Availability is best handled by professionals because Availability is not a one off project, it has to evolve as the clients requirements evolve and develop. Our products hopefully give clients the ability to move through a natural progression from DR to HA. Just because you don’t need High Availability today doesn’t mean you wont later, we have yet to find anyone who doesn’t need to protect their data. Having that data protected to the nearest transaction at an affordable cost is something we want to provide.

If you feel LVLT4i is right for you let us know, we will be happy to put you in touch with one of the partners we are working with to discuss your needs. If you would like to discuss other opportunities for the product such as data aggregation or centralized storage let us know, we are always happy to see if the technology we have, fits other interests.

Chris…

Jun 24

New RDX Drive not supported by the BACKUP menu commands on our V7R1 Power 720

When we read that IBM was recommending users who are currently using the DAT160GB tape system move to the RDX drive system for backup purposes, we decided we would give it a try. First of all we checked with a number of people that the RDX drives were a suitable backup device and to make sure it was going to be supported on our small 720 system (IBM seemed to be positioning at our size of company and hardware) before we placed the order. We placed the order over a week ago and the drive finally arrived today.

After finding out that our planned move to VIOS based partitioning was flawed and not possible with internal disk, we had high hopes that the support for RDX technology would be a big step forward from our current backup technology (tape is painfully slow and error prone) especially as we have multiple partitions. We made the decision to purchase the enclosure and 2x320GB drives at the same time we purchased the hardware/software to support the move to VIOS partitions. We understood the ethernet card and PowerVM licenses were now extra to requirements, but we still hoped that the investment in the new drive technology would be worthwhile.

All of the hardware and software turned up today so we unpacked the drives and enclosure and attached it to the IBM i via the front USB port. It was powered on and the drive inserted which showed all green lights on the front of the enclosure.

First problem we came across was the drive would not show up in the hardware configs, when we previously migrated back to i-hosting-i we did not allocate the USB adapter in the hardware profiles, so a quick configuration update was made and the drive finally showed up in the available resources on the partition. Next we decided to test moving the drive between partitions (systems) using the DLPAR options, it all seemed to work fine as long as we ensured the device was varied off prior to the DLPAR move request. It did take some time for the adapter to move and even longer for the device to show up in the partitions.

Once we were happy with the ability to move between partitions we formatted the drive in anticipation of using it for our daily/weekly backups. The format was very quick and showed the correct 320Gb of available space on the drive. We then tried to add it to the backup schedule in place of our tape device was where we came across the biggest problem, the IBM i BACKUP options provided with the OS only support tape drives!! So we are now faced with having to develop our own backup processes to allow us to use it the drive for our backups.

We are still unsure how the backup will be stored on the drive, IBM has indicated that it should function in the same manner as a tape meaning that it will allow multiple saves to be carried out to the same device and write to the end of the last save. We now have to build the save processes and set them up to replace the OS based solution that we have today. Once we get the save processes developed we will report back just how good the drives are and how easy they will be to use for our simple backup requirements. Have to stick with Tape for now unless IBM adds support for the RMS devices in the OS BACKUP solution in the near future. Yet again our IBM connections really didn’t know the capabilities of the RDX drives in an IBM i environment, maybe we can come up with some answers…

Chris…

Jun 23

Annoying CPF9E7F message fixed

After the attempted migration from i-hosting-i to a VIOS based partition configuration and subsequent rebuild of the i-hosting-i partitions, we found that the QSYSOPR message queue was being sent CPF9E7F messages constantly. We checked the HMC configurations and everything looked OK because we had configured 4 partitions with a total of 2 Processors out of the 4 we have available. We had upgraded the system to have 4 available processors ready for the VIOS configurations where we intended to use 2 for IBMi, 1 for AIX and 1 for Linux.

We asked our sales rep what the problem was especially as we have a license for the additional AIX core which we wanted to implement as well, his response was to speak with support as it looked like we were exceeding our licenses. Eventually we raised a PMR and spoke with IBM, they informed us that while we were not technically exceeding our entitlement the way the IBMi OS calculated the available CPU cores meant it saw a problem. The answer was pretty simple to implement, we had to set up Shared Processor Pools and allocate a maximum number of available cores to that pool. Then we then had to make each partition use that pool so that we could not exceed our entitlement. This was done using the Shared Processor Pool Management option in the HMC where we created the new pool and set the partitions to use that pool. That fixed the immediate problem, but the partition profiles also needed updating and the to be re-booted for the changes to take permanent effect.

When we created the IBM i shared pool we also took the opportunity to create a AIX pool and a Linux pool so that when we add those partitions to the system we can correctly allocate the additional processors to them.

We no longer see the CPF9E7F messages and everything runs just the same as it always did. We continue to learn just how capable the IBM i Power system can be, the downside to that is just how complex it can be as well. We hope to set up the AIX partition and Linux partitions in the near future, we will post our experiences as we go along.

Chris…

Jun 12

Issue with ‘restore 21′ resolved, everything running

The problems with the restore 21 of the partition data have been resolved and all of the partitions are now up and running.

The problem which gave us the most grief was the update to the content of the partition which was running V7R2. For some reason the restore operation kept hanging at different spots in the restore 21 process. One of the problems seemed to be with damaged objects on the system which caused the restore to hang and required a forced power off of the partition (SYSREQ 2 did nothing). We cleaned up the damaged objects and started the restore again only to hang again while restoring the IFS only this time we could end the restore operation with SYSREQ 2 and get back to a command line. There was nothing in the joblog to show why the restore was hanging so we eventually manually run the command to restore the IFS. We then started the partition and everything looked OK, but when we tried to start the HTTP server (we like the mobile support so we needed it running) it kept ending abnormally, turns out we forgot to run the RSTAUT command. Restore 21 does this after the RST for the IFS completes. After we ran the RSTAUT the jobs all started up correctly and we had the partition up and running again.

The other problem we had was with a V6R1 partition, it refused to start complaining about a lack of resource (B2008105 LP=00004). As this was a deployment of a running configuration so we thought nothing had changed and wondered why it would no longer start up. In the back of our minds we had a vague recollection that setting up partitions for V6R1 on Power7+ systems required the RestrictedIO partition flag to be set so we looked through the partition profile to find where it was set without success. We discovered that it is not part of the profile, you have to set the flag in the properties for the partition. Once we had done this the partition came up without any further problems and we now had all of our original configuration up and running.

We made a couple of additional changes to the configs because one of the reasons we really liked the VIOS option was being able to start everything up at once. With our set up we were powering up the host partition and then powering up each of the clients manually. We wanted to be able to power on the system and all of the partitions would fire up automatically. Also when we wanted to power down we just wanted to power down the host partition and it would take care of all the hosted partitions, the answers is the Power Controlling settings. We set up each of the NWSD objects in the hosting server to be Power Control *YES, we then updated the profiles for the hosted partitons to be Power Controlled by the hosting partition. After initializing the profiles with the NWSD object varied off and shutting down the profiles we then varied on the NWSD objects and the partitions automatically started up. Now when we start the main partition the other partitions all start once the NWSD is activated (they are all set to vary on at IPL). We also set the hosting partition to power on when the server was powered on and the server to power off when all of the partitions were ended. We have not tested the power down sequence to make sure the guest partitions are ended normally when we PWRDWNSYS *IMMED on the hosting partition but it should shut down each partition gracefully before shutting itself down.

Now its back to HA4i development and testing for the new release, manuals to write and a new PHP interface to design and code. Even though we like the Web Access for i interface it is not as comprehensive as the PHP interface in terms of being able to configure and manage the product.

If you are planning a move to partitioning your Power system we hope the documenting of our experiences is helpful.

Chris…

Jun 11

Rebuild of the i-hosting-i underway.

We have finally started the rebuild of the data for the i-hosting-i partitions and came across a few problems.

First problem was to do with the system plan. Before we started down the VIOS route we created a system plan from the existing partition and system information and checked it to make sure we had no errors logged. Nothing was shown as a problem so our plan was to use it to deploy again if we could not get the VIOS set up functioning. As it turns out we could not use the system plan, the deployment failed every time because of adapter issues which did not show up when we viewed the plan on the HMC.

This required us to edit the system plan which required us to use the system planning tool. We downloaded the SPT to a PC and installed it, a slight issue with Windows 8 meant we had to run the program in Windows 7 mode to get it to install, but once it was up and running we managed to import the original system plan. Even though the system plan was created from a running system with active partitions the planning tool threw up a lot of errors. We had problems with the addition of the internal SATA tape drive blocking the USB adapter and so on which took a pretty long time to understand, in the end we just configured few things we must have to export the plan and exported it ready for import to the HMC. Eventually the plan did deploy on the HMC so it looked like we were ready to go.

We did an IPL D using the SAVSYS tape and all seemed to go well until we got to the DASD configuration in DST. We had the LIC installed the first drive as the load source but we needed to add all of the other drives and Raid protect them. As we progressed through the DST options we kept getting errors about connections being missing, a search using Google turned up nothing so decided to take the F10 option (ignore the message and continue). It turned out to be a problem because we only had one of the Raid cards set up, not have both (I thought we only had one but 2 show up in the hardware list) so when we took the option to add the drives to ASP1 and then started Raid protection it took hours (IBM support did try to help by DLPAR’ing the additional Raid card but we were too late to gain any benefit) so 6 hours later we had the drives set up and protected.

Because this is the hosting partition the other partition data was restored at the same time which took about 5 hours to complete. We checked the NWSD objects for the hosted partitions were restored correctly and configured, we saw that they were were in a VARIED OFF state so we VARIED them ON and watched as they became ACTIVE, so far so good.

At this point we thought OK we are now ready to start the other partitions. We took the option to activate the first partition profile on the HMC but it quickly came to a grinding halt! the SRC code displayed was B2004158 LP=0002, not much information turned up with a Google search so I tried to get a console up to see what was actually going on. It appears that when you first start the partition you need to specifically set the advanced start up parameters the first time (the normal setting is do not override the Mode and source settings), we just set it to B,N and the partition started up.

We still have one partition which fails to start, this is a V6R1 partition and while we did see some reference in the VIOS configurations to dedicated IO for V6R1 on Power 7+ we know this was running before so we think it was damaged on the restore of the NWSD? We have a full system save on tape for it so as soon as everything else is fixed we will try a IPL D with the SAVSYS and rebuild the data.

After over a week of fighting with IBM to get the right hardware and software to run a VIOS based partitioned system we have accepted that i-hosting-i will be the solution for now. We have already started to look at SAN in the hopes of one day having enough bandwidth to trek down this road again, this time we know that internal disks are not for VIOS partitioning! Pity the IBM sales team didn’t know that before we ordered the additional hardware for Ethernet and the additional core activations for PowerVM. I am sure that with enough trail and error you could get a VIOS running with internal disk running, but if the performance is degraded as IBM suggests (they don’t say by how much) I think it may be a futile exercise?

Hope you find the information useful, maybe it will help you avoid some of the pitfalls we came across and save you time and money :-).

Chris..

Jun 10

Its a bust!

Finally we get the answer we have been looking for..

Generally we don’t recommend VIOS and virtualised partitions using internal disks.
Usually organisations are using VIOS with external storage.
There are many reasons – performance, benefits, etc.

Yep, mostly for performance reasons, its i-hosting-i on internal disk, vios for external disk…..The big problem with that is that very few people are crossing those boundaries.

So all of the work so far to get the VIOS set up has been in vain.. Well not entirely because we have learned a lot of very good lessons about the AIX/VIO interfaces and how to set up and install. But for now we are just going to back peddle and use i-hosting-i until we can get a SAN to test out what a VIOS implementation can provide. I am also interested in how we could set up the internal disks to run IBM i hosting while having a single drive for VIOS that could manage the external drives (if that is in fact possible).

If we do actually get to the stage of implementing we will again publish our experiences. May take us a while to get back to this as we need to ensure the HA4i product release is put back on track.

Keep watching.

Chris…

Jun 10

Setting up the new VIOS based Partitions in question

We have been trying to migrate our existing IBM i hosting IBM i partitions to a VIOS hosting IBM i, AIX,Linux configuration. As we have mentioned in previous posts there a re a lot of traps that have snagged us so far and we still have no system that we can even configure.

The biggest recommendation that we took on board was to create a Dual VIOS setup, this means we have a backup VIOS that will take over should the first VIOS partition fail. This is important because the VIOS is holding up all of the other clients and if it fails they all come tumbling down. As soon as we started to investigate this we found that we should always configure the VIOS on a separate drive to the client partitions, my question is how do we configure 2 VIOS installs (each with its own disk) that addresses the main storage to be passed out to the client partitions. We have a Raid controller which we intend to use as the storage protection for the Clients Data but we still struggle with how that can be assigned to 2 instances of the VIOS?? The documentation always seems to be looking at either LVM or MPIO to SCSI attached storage, we have all internal disk (8 SAS drives attached to the raid controller) so the technology we use to configure the drives attached to the raid controller as logical volumes which are in turn mirrored via LVM is stretching the grey matter somewhat? If in fact that is what we have to do? I did initially create a mirrored DASD pair for a single VIOS in the belief that if we had a DASD failure the mirroring would help with recovery, however The manuals clearly state that this is not a suitable option (I did create the pair and install VIOS which seemed to function correctly so not sure why they do not recommend?).

The other recommendation is to attach dual network controllers and assign them to each of the VIOS with one in standby mode which will be automatically switched over should a failure occur on the main adapter. As we only have a single adapter we have now ordered a new one from IBM(we have started the process and it has taken over 1 week so far and the order is still to be placed..) Once that adapter arrives we can then install it and move forward.

Having started down this road and having a system which is non functioning I have to question my choices. IBM has stated that the VIOS will be the preferred choice for the controlling partition for Power8 and onwards, but the information to allow small IBM i customers to implement (without being a VIOS/AIX expert) in in my view very limited or even non existent. If I simply go back to the original configuration of IBM i hosting IBM i, I may have to at some time in the future bite the bullet and take the VIOS route anyhow? Having said that, hopefully more clients would have been down this route and the information from IBM could be more meaningful? I have read many IBM redbooks/Redpapers on PowerVM and even watched a number of presentations on how to set up PowerVM, however most of these (I would say all but that may be a little over zealous) are aimed at implementing AIX and Linux partitions even though the IBM i gets a mention at times. If IBM is serious about getting IBM i people to really take the VIOS partitioning technology on board they will need to build some IBM i specific migration samples that IBM i techies can relate to. If I do in fact keep down this path I intend to show what the configuration steps are and how they relate to an IBM i system so they can be understood by the IBM i community.

We have a backup server that we can use for our business so holding out a few more days to get the hardware installed is not a major issue, we hope that by the time we have the hardware we have some answers on how the storage should be configured to allow the VIOS redundancy and make sure we have the correct technology implemented to protect the client partitions from DASD failure.

If you have any suggestions on how we should configure the storage we are all ears :-)

Chris…

Jun 06

Why do I do it…

Well this week has been a total write off, having spent 4 days trying to get the systems ready to migrate from IBM i based partitioning to VIOS based partitioning (IBM had incorrectly configured the core activations and it took 4 days to get me the information to correct it!) I finally got to a state where I could start the VIOS install.

I had the trusty Red Books on hand and decided to follow one of the set ups described, I removed the existing system definitions and partitions definitions from the HMC (I have backed up the partitions individually and created a system plan) so I felt secure that if required I could simply deploy the system plan again.

I created a single VIOS partition definition as per the manual and started the installation process. The HMC level we have has an option to install the VIOS as part of the partition activation which is not noted in the manuals, this came to a grinding halt with a message about incorrectly formatted commands??? So we went back and followed the instructions on installing the VIOS using the SMS install and a terminal. Next mistake was trying it from a remote HMC connection (you have to be on the main HMC display to allow the terminals to be launched) so we them moved to the main HMC display. Everything started to look good, the SMS installations screens came up and we dutifully selected the options to install from the DVD. Again the install just hung, so we rebooted and tried again, this time we noticed that the installation could not find the Disk to install the VIOS on.

I am not sure why, perhaps its because the system was installed with a single Raid6 setup with IBM i as the controlling partition? But no matter which options we looked at we cannot find the method to re-initialize the disk to allow the VIOS to install.

Logged a support call and waiting for the support gods to give us a call and hopefully get past this stage. Once we get the information I will be sure to write it up :-)

Chris…