Ansicht
Dokumentation
04725 - LPAR question with respect to production vs test systems ...
Vendor Master (General Section) BAL_S_LOG - Application Log: Log header dataThis documentation is copyright by SAP AG.
LPAR question with respect to production vs test systems ...
Betsy,
Many people in the UNIX and NT world, they have long existed with a concept
of ' single application system, single server' . This has been strongly
encouraged by SAP as a method of isolating SAP problems, if they occur. I
think, in all systems environments, there is general agreement that
different types of workload are better placed in different 'areas' - so
OLTP (SAP R/3) is a different workload than OLAP (mySAP BI), and DEv/TEST
is a different workload than either of the previous two. The second
concept associated with this is risk - if DEV /Test fail, then the risk is
less than if BI fails, which again is less than if your OLTP fails. BUT
LPAR addresses all of these issues.
The third isue is that of 'Putting all your eggs in one basket'. Obviously
if that server fails, then all systems fail. However, separating into
different systems increases the risk of SOMETHING failing, as you have more
points of failure. As your critical system is R/3, which will always be on
dependant on a single server (the DB server component), I see a single
reliable, well managed, system environment ( either 2 tier or 3 tier) as a
much better option.
I cannot speak for your auditors, you should ask them. However, we should
look into the past for this answer, into the environment where LPAR
started. The zOS (OS/390 on the mainframe) used by the largest companies,
have long had separate partitions and a single server for all types of
different workload, inculding SAP R/3, and SAP Test and Development
(examples are Motorola, Vanity Fair, Whirlpool, Zurich Insurance etc). I
cannot believe their auditors give them a hard time about this unless they
do not understand what LPAR is.
Any activity in a given LPAR cannot affect activity in another LPAR.
PS. Why is Notes any better than DEV/Test.?
PPS: never make a decision based on rumour and 3rd hand comments ( even
from that famous IBM person - how come I never get the name!! - get me the
name and I'll get that person to expand his opinion to allow LPARs )
Jim Sanders
Product Manager
iSeries Marketing for mySAP.com
IBM/SAP International Competence Center
Altrottstrasse 31, 69190 Walldorf
Germany
Telephone: +49 (0) 6227 731033 Fax: +49 6227 731052
E-mail: jsandersZc...
Stay Calm, Be Brave... Wait for the signs
"Gary Hodge"
<GHODGEZcumberlan To:
<DoNotReply@consolut.eu>
dswan.com> cc:
Subject: RE: LPAR
question with respect to production
23.01.02 23:49 vs test systems ...
Please respond to
SAP on System i
Betsy,
We have an 830 LPAR with Legacy production systems(Infinium, Gentran,
etc..)on the number one partition and SAP PRD on partition two. We then
bought an 820 and have DEV/TST and QUALITY instances on the same box.
This provided separate systems and could handle our PRD should a
disaster occur on the production box. This passed our auditors
requirements. Having development and production on the same box should
something go awry, the whole box would crash no matter how many LPAR's
you have. But Stan raises a good thought, run it by the auditors first.
P.S. Love your wines.
Regards,
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: MCPARTLAND, Stan [mailto:stanley.mcpartlandZb...]
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 3:56 PM
To: sap400Zm...
Subject: RE: LPAR question with respect to production vs
test systems ...
Betsy,
We have n LPAR on our development box that we use as a second
application
server for production. I am not aware of any concern from our external
auditor. Since the issue has been raised I recommend that you run it by
your auditor. It would be hard for them to include anything in an audit
report when you've already discussed it with them and obtained their
approval.
Regards,
Stan
-----Original Message-----
From: Betsy Strebe [mailto:bstrebeZt...]
Sent: Wednesday, 23 January, 2002 1:21 PM
To: sap400Zm...
Subject: LPAR question with respect to production vs test
systems ...
Hi fellow Saplings:
I need your help again - especially Ron Schmerbauch and Jim Sanders from
IBM if I could get your comments.
Recently we ordered and received an 830 with the intention of moving all
three of our SAP systems there (DEV, TST & PRD) using LPAR of course
from
our respective 720 and 730 systems. In addition we have a 270 server we
use exclusively for Lotus Notes which was suppose to remain isolated
from
all of this.
Well, in the midst of our consolidation project, my boss visits with
someone from IBM in his Pittsburg, CA home/office and is told by him
that
this configuration would not pass an IS audit with test and production
on
the same box. Now my boss is looking at moving Lotus Notes to the 830
with
only our PRD system, and "growing" our current Notes server to house DEV
and TST. Back to the starting line.
From everything I have read and heard, LPAR on an iSeries chassis is the
same as separate systems and if that is true why wouldn't it pass an IS
audit?
Please any feedback from anyone is much appreciated...
Betsy Strebe
Manager, Information Technology
Trinchero Family Estates
Office: 707-963-3104 ext. 2439
Cell: 707-529-4305
Fax: 707-963-9264
e-mail: bstrebeZt...
web: www.tfewines.com
DoNotReply@consolut.eu
Your use of consolut is subject to
http://www.consolut.net
DoNotReply@consolut.eu
Your use of consolut is subject to http://www.consolut.net
Durban Tours - Südafrika Safari
rdisp/max_wprun_time - Maximum work process run time General Material Data
This documentation is copyright by SAP AG.
Length: 7615 Date: 20240602 Time: 014754 sap01-206 ( 3 ms )
