1 INFO-VAX	Sat, 28 Dec 2002	Volume 2002 : Issue 718       Contents:3 ";*" vs. ".*" (Was: Re: is VMS really easy to use?) 7 Re: ";*" vs. ".*" (Was: Re: is VMS really easy to use?) / Apache support ,was: is VMS really easy to use? 3 RE: Apache support ,was: is VMS really easy to use? ; Re: Broken Links on N. Rieck's Web Page (was: Re: Spamtrap) ; Re: Broken Links on N. Rieck's Web Page (was: Re: Spamtrap)  Re: is VMS really easy to use? Re: is VMS really easy to use? Re: is VMS really easy to use? RE: is VMS really easy to use? Re: is VMS really easy to use? Re: is VMS really easy to use? Re: is VMS really easy to use? Re: is VMS really easy to use?1 Re: Of Galaxy, Infiniband and Distributed Caching 1 Re: Of Galaxy, Infiniband and Distributed Caching  Re: OpenVMS Branding Query Re: OpenVMS Branding Query Re: OpenVMS Branding Query RE: OpenVMS Branding Query' Re: printing of string descriptors in C " Re: SMP Alphaserver 4100 CPUBAD??? Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth  Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth  Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth  Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth  Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth  Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth  Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth  Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth  Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth  Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 13:49:59 +0100 9 From: Jan-Erik =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=F6derholm?= <aaa@aaa.com> < Subject: ";*" vs. ".*" (Was: Re: is VMS really easy to use?)' Message-ID: <3E0C4C77.C32FAB35@aaa.com>    matt wrote:  > + > [1] or '.*' - does anyone ever use this ?   ? Sure, it's faster to type (single-finger) without shifting (but > I'm using the ";*" format in command files just to be sure...)  4 But this might be a Swedish-keyboard-layout-thing...   Jan-Erik Sderholm.    ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 13:03:05 +0000 (UTC) " From: "matt" <matt987@hotmail.com>@ Subject: Re: ";*" vs. ".*" (Was: Re: is VMS really easy to use?)/ Message-ID: <auhj28$9v4$1@helle.btinternet.com>   3 "Jan-Erik Sderholm" <aaa@aaa.com> wrote in message ! news:3E0C4C77.C32FAB35@aaa.com... 
 > matt wrote:  > > - > > [1] or '.*' - does anyone ever use this ?  > A > Sure, it's faster to type (single-finger) without shifting (but @ > I'm using the ";*" format in command files just to be sure...) > 6 > But this might be a Swedish-keyboard-layout-thing... >  > Jan-Erik Sderholm.   J It must be a slow day today 'cos now I'm intrigued enough to find out when and why this syntax got added.  K Its a bit like dev:<dir> rather than dev:[dir] which most famously appeared  in STABACKIT.COM.   I Time for some digging (although it'd be a lot easier just to ask Hoff :-)    Matt.    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 18:40:05 +0100 6 From: Martin Heller <martin.nospam.heller@mheller.org>8 Subject: Apache support ,was: is VMS really easy to use?* Message-ID: <3E0DE1F5.6080605@mheller.org>   Michael Austin schrieb: 	 [big cut] I > Althugh I was trying to figure out if Apache is "formally supported" or G > is As-is with informal support,  because I don't recall ever seeing a 8 > line item on any support contract for that support...   C Most of the Apache developers work for Covalent (www.covalent.net). F Covalent offers support for Apache. HP, Deutsche Bank, Morgan Stanley,E FedEx, Visa, Fidelity Investments are Covalent clients as an example.    Yours,
 Martin Heller    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 12:52:40 -0500 ' From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> < Subject: RE: Apache support ,was: is VMS really easy to use?T Message-ID: <BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4023D9AA5@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net>    Re: Apache support on OpenVMS=20  
 Reference:H http://www.openvms.compaq.com/openvms/products/ips/apache/csws_problems. html  F "Support for Compaq Secure Web Server for OpenVMS Alpha is provided byA Compaq under existing OpenVMS service agreements through standard  support channels.=20  B See Compaq support for worldwide support center telephone numbers. =20 ? If you do not have a support contract and are not interested in G acquiring one, you can informally exchange information with other users ; in the OpenVMS newsgroup comp.os.vms, and in the newsgroups % comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix and * comp.infosystems.www.servers.ms-windows. "   Regards   
 Kerry Main Senior Consultant  Hewlett-Packard (Canada) Co.! Consulting & Integration Services  Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax   : 613-591-4477 Email: kerryDOTmain@hpDOTcom-     (remove the DOT's and replace with "."'s)    -----Original Message-----@ From: Martin Heller [mailto:martin.nospam.heller@mheller.org]=20  Sent: December 28, 2002 12:40 PM To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com 8 Subject: Apache support ,was: is VMS really easy to use?       Michael Austin schrieb: 	 [big cut] I > Althugh I was trying to figure out if Apache is "formally supported"=20 H > or is As-is with informal support,  because I don't recall ever seeing  9 > a line item on any support contract for that support...   C Most of the Apache developers work for Covalent (www.covalent.net). F Covalent offers support for Apache. HP, Deutsche Bank, Morgan Stanley,E FedEx, Visa, Fidelity Investments are Covalent clients as an example.    Yours,
 Martin Heller    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 12:19:44 -0500 ) From: "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca> D Subject: Re: Broken Links on N. Rieck's Web Page (was: Re: Spamtrap)9 Message-ID: <S2lP9.5442$oW.1133381@news20.bellglobal.com>   1 "Michael Unger" <unger@decus.de> wrote in message % news:00A1915B.7E259E89.11@decus.de...    [...snip...]   > 1 > Did you really manage to download the files ???  > A > Clicking on the documents mentioned there resulted in a browser B > redirection to "alphapowered.com/presentations/..." (PDF and PPT3 > files) and finally in a "server not found" error.  > 	 > Michael   : Yes, when I surf to the following link (beware of wrap)...  N http://web.archive.org/web/20010203183000/alphapowered.com/alpha_tech_presents .html   $ ...I can download PDF and PPT files.G BTW, there is a PPT presentation on EV7 (Alpha 21364) which is what the  original thread requested.    
 Neil Rieck Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,  Ontario, Canada.! http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 12:31:15 -0500 ) From: "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca> D Subject: Re: Broken Links on N. Rieck's Web Page (was: Re: Spamtrap)9 Message-ID: <FdlP9.5448$oW.1134939@news20.bellglobal.com>   1 More Alpha chip info with the way-back machine...   # Surf over to http://www.archive.org   G Then enter one of the following old links into the way-back search box:   7 http://www.compaq.com/hpc/ (high performance computing) " http://www.compaq.com/alphaserver/      Neil Rieck  Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,  Ontario, Canada.! http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 20:14:25 -0800  From: "AG" <ang@xtra.co.nz> ' Subject: Re: is VMS really easy to use? 4 Message-ID: <0acP9.19246$kq6.292135@news.xtra.co.nz>  5 "Bill Gunshannon" <bill@cs.uofs.edu> wrote in message / news:aui74c$7etlu$2@ID-135708.news.dfncis.de... ) > In article <3E0C9534.BE8DE2AC@fsi.net>, 5 > "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes: L > > 2. IMO, "HELP" is more intuitive than "man", unless you're trying figureK > > out something and think, "man, what the hell command do I use here??!!"  > C > We've been through this already.  intuiticve is in the eye of the F > beholder.  "man" is merely short for "manual" and the command prints > out "manual pages"  I It can also be short for "mangle" or "mismanage" or tons of other things. H If you were to walk out into the street and ask the passers-by what that= word means, chances are, you wouldn't get the correct answer. @ However, it would be rather hard to find any other than standard  definition of the word "help"...   ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 12:15:13 +0000 (UTC) " From: "matt" <matt987@hotmail.com>' Subject: Re: is VMS really easy to use? 0 Message-ID: <auhg8h$sib$1@sparta.btinternet.com>  5 "Bill Gunshannon" <bill@cs.uofs.edu> wrote in message / news:augh08$73t0o$1@ID-135708.news.dfncis.de... 3 > In article <aufdt7$8g7$1@knossos.btinternet.com>, & > "matt" <matt987@hotmail.com> writes:# > > At least with VMS you can't do:  > >  > >     rm *.tmp > > 1 > > and fumble the '.' key and accidentally type:  > >  > >     rm *>tmp > > J > > like I did once !  Similaly it'd be a bugger if you typed 'rm -r' when you  > > meant 'rm -f'. > E > I keep hearing about this mythical accidental "rm -r" that destroys D > the system.  I've been using Unix for over 20 years and have neverE > had it happen.  It is much more a reflection on the person than the B > OS.  Remember, a subtle mistake you don't know you made that hasB > later (and more longterm) effects is probably worse than the oneG > that is obvious from the very start.  Precision is the responsibility E > of the user, the machine can only do (and should be expected to do)   > exactly what it is told to do. >   I But does making a simple novice mistake and losing all your data make VMS  less easy to use ?  L In fact, I always suspected that the safeguards built into VMS not only madeL it more user-friendly, but also reduced the number of 'my files just deleted& themselves' sort of calls to the CSC !  G This is why 'DELETE *' or 'DELETE *.*' doesn't work either; and I found J eventually your fingers realised the significance of the extra ';*' [1] asG this was about the only time you ever needed to type it, and it gave my 8 brain a few vital milliseconds to think 'are you sure' !  J Even 'PIP *.*/DE' didn't work in the old days, and I suspect /LI was added/ as a synonym for /DI to avoid a few accidents !    Some people of course put:       $ DEL*ETE=="DELETE/CONFIRM"   F in their LOGIN.COM (or worse, system manglers put it in SYLOGIN) which, buggers up DELETE/QUEUE and DELETE/SYMBOL !)  I Then MS-DOS went way over the top because there was no ';*' so we got the J 'Are you sure' prompt instead. Irritated the hell out of me (had to do DELK *.* < YES.DAT etc. until we got the /Y switch), but probably saved me hours  of time rebuilding users PCs !  L Precision is the responsibility of the user... but clearing up the mess, and) the cost of lost production often isn't !    Matt.   ) [1] or '.*' - does anyone ever use this ?    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 12:51:57 -0000 ! From: Z  <zarlenga@conan.ids.net> ' Subject: Re: is VMS really easy to use? / Message-ID: <v0r7jdlgk2sc71@corp.supernews.com>   - Bill Gunshannon <bill@gw5.cs.uofs.edu> wrote: D : I guess we have different concepts of Enterprise Critical quality.C : I hardly consider something with memory leaks big enough to drive G : a Mack truck thru to be even close.  I only work with it here because B : I have to, and I spend a lot of time lobbying to replace it withH : one of the current Unix flavors now that they have a quite respectable* : Office Suite that can even read MS docs.  9 Where in Win 2000 or NT is this huge memory leak you keep 
 referring to?    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 09:27:44 -0500 ' From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> ' Subject: RE: is VMS really easy to use? T Message-ID: <BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF402660C55@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net>   Bill,   F <<< Not my point.  What percentage of the several million computers inB use today would actually benefit from being a cluster instead of a single machine?<<<  : Any of them concerned about server high availability or ITC Consolidation. I know these are critical issues for Universities as  well.=20  E And before you start jumping on the "we have high availability today" 0 bandwagon, let me expand on what I mean by this-  H High Availability (Business Continuity) - Worst case scenario for ANY ITG department with ANY OS's is an overnight fire in the datacenter and all H other building facilities are not touched. User facilities are fine, butD the systems are gone. The fire also wiped out the daily backup tapesC that had been done, but not yet transferred to the offsite archive.   ; And final exams or September registration begins today. =20   H Now, the entire focus of the University/Business is on the IT departmentH and how quickly they can restore their IT services and all the data from the day before.=20  D Can you get by with standby servers and tapes or replicated storage?F Sure, the question is how much data are you willing to risk and do youE want to actually use those remote servers or just have them idling or B running some small jobs in the background waiting for something toD happen. Keep in mind that those remote servers may have to carry theG entire workload for weeks and/or months until the primary datacenter is  restored.=20  H And this applies to fault tolerant solutions as well since they could be taken out in a datacenter fire.   F I am assuming such an event right around the beginning of September orB final exams would have a significant impact on your University.=20  A A similar, but potentially more likely, event would arise if some G hardware problem started to appear on some important server. Remember - F ALL platforms have the potential for hardware issues, so hope and pastH experience are not strategies for the future. This is especially true as systems start to get older.   F Question - If your most important UNIX server goes down hard (no boot)F the day after you go on vacation for two weeks (or you are unavailableE for an extended period for whatever reason), then could the operators H you have on your staff move all the workloads to some other server for a? few days while some hard to get part is ordered by your service G provider? What about all the batch jobs that were in the queue for that / downed server that is now not available at all?   F IT Consolidation - While it might not be an issue where you are, it isF absolutely one of the hottest IT projects these days in most medium toH large companies - on ALL platforms. Companies want to reduce the people,D process and technology costs associated with managing and supportingF many servers. While the lack of network bandwidth and reliability made@ this difficult in the past, in today's world, network costs have; plummeted as competition and technology have both increased  exponentially.  F However, Consolidation 101 basics says never consolidate to one systemD and/or one site as the potential of one system and/or one site going, away is to high for the business to risk.=20  E Bottom line is that clustering is a high priority for ALL OS's - even ? Sun is trying to catch up with its recent cluster offerings.=20   H At some point in the future, they may even have a native clustered batchD system which allows jobs to run anywhere in the cluster on the leastH loaded system in either datacenter (multi-site cluster) without worryingB about device names, logicals etc that are normally associated withD different individual systems. [sorry, couldn't resist that plug] :-)  C You can argue which is better - UNIX or OpenVMS clustering, but the C generic cluster vs. single system argument does not hold much water G these days as the business dependence on IT services is now much higher  than in the past.=20  C Btw - Here is a good whitepaper on the state of clustering and high ) availability / business continuity today: H http://www.tru64unix.compaq.com/unix/illuminata_dt_unix_research_note.pd f    Regards   
 Kerry Main Senior Consultant  Hewlett-Packard (Canada) Co.! Consulting & Integration Services  Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax   : 613-591-4477 Email: kerryDOTmain@hpDOTcom-     (remove the DOT's and replace with "."'s)        -----Original Message-----2 From: Bill Gunshannon [mailto:bill@cs.uofs.edu]=20 Sent: December 27, 2002 4:59 PM  To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com ' Subject: Re: is VMS really easy to use?     3 In article <170Hpfry8N24@eisner.encompasserve.org>, . 	young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) writes:H > In article <aui5re$7etlu$1@ID-135708.news.dfncis.de>, bill@cs.uofs.edu   > (Bill Gunshannon) writes: 6 >> In article <6sWBm5K1PAVC@eisner.encompasserve.org>,1 >> 	young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) writes:  >>> In article=20 H >>> <2D75787AAF09C64481BDFD89113BE6D5B35FE7@ac2kama0102.ac.lp.acml.com>,7 "Bochnik, William J" <William_Bochnik@acml.com> writes: H >>>> I think what he was trying to say is setting up a series of SYMBOLS  G >>>> not LOGICALS to emulate unix command on VMS is a bad idea as it=20 D >>>> promotes lazyness, as well as a problem if you go to another=20H >>>> machine with a diff account that doesnt have all your fancy symbols  H >>>> set up. Just think about trying to get a machine working at 2am and you can't remember the correct& >>>> VMS command to do something.  =20 >>>>=20  >>>=20A >>> 	Another fellow here has a  command for everything.  I'm sure * >>> 	many of us have something similar to: >>>=20 >>> 	$ sq :=3D=3D show queue >>>=20A >>> 	We are saving keystrokes, nothing wrong with that.  Unix has C >>> 	you saving keystrokes up front and forcing you to remember the  >>> 	insanity. >>=20 D >> So, let's see if I have this right.  Unix created really short=20J >> commands because of the high cost (particularly in time) of entering=20J >> these commands and that is now seen as a bad thing.  But today, when=20I >> that cost is minimal to non-existant it's a good thing when someone=20 H >> does it themself??  You can remember that "sq" means "show queue" but  J >> the average Unix user is totally baffled by the idea that "rm" means=20 >> "remove".  Amazing. >>=20  >=20@ > 	If you got tired of typing grep, you could create an alias=20? > 	"g".  A twisted point you are attempting to make, I suppose. C > 	Unix commands are crap and you have to know what they really map  to. =20 > > 	Delete in VMS maps to delete.  If you are tired of typing $
 delete =20F > 	... you could create a symbol $ d :=3D=3D delete.  If you are tired of=20 C > 	typing rm in Unix, you are probably a very tired person I guess.    Or you could type:   alias delete rm 6 (assuming some version of Unix less than 10 years old)2 and then it would be just like VMS (well, kinda!!)   >=20 >>>=20E >>> 	In the "why Unix sucks wars" we end up at the shell or CLI.  The @ >>> 	reasons are there in a minor sense, but not many.  The real reasons E >>> 	Unix is inferior are deeper than the CLI and Unix is now less=20 B >>> 	inferior as Sun almost has a good cluster now it appears.  Or@ >>> 	good marketing.  Didn't Sun recently invent long distant=20 >>> clustering?  >>=20 H >> So you think Unix inferiority is all tied to the lack of clustering?? >=20* > 	Not only.  That is a good point though. >=20> >> Just how many computer users today actually need clusters?? >=20@ > 	As many that could use high availability with quick recovery." > 	Yes, there are other solutions.  F Not my point.  What percentage of the several million computers in useE today would actually benefit from being a cluster instead of a single  machine?   >=20 >> I canJ >> assure you that in my environment they offer absolutely no advantage=20E >> and that means the added complexity is a minus rather than a plus.  >>=20  >=20? > 	I would suggest you don't have a good clustering solution in  > 	mind.  H No, I don't have a need for higher reliability than I get now that couldH possibly justify the increase in cost and complexity.  And I suggest theH same is true for the majority of systems in use today.  We're not all=20 running stock exchanges.   >=20 >>>=20- >>> http://news.com.com/2100-1001-963615.html  >>>=20 >>> October 28, 2002 >>>=20D >>> "Sun Microsystems has come up with a way to insulate computer=20J >>> networks from fires, floods and bomb attacks: Split up the machines=20' >>> and put them in different cities. "  >>=20 D >> I run a collection of servers (about 12 at this point) for the=20I >> academic department of a small University in NEPA.  How would being=20 C >> able to have multiple servers in remote locations make this work  better?? >=20@ > 	Better isn't the operative word.  More available is.  Is more2 > 	available a good thing?  I would suggest it is.  G See what I said below.  If the building I'm in is destroyed by and form C of disaster, Who is going to need to access the computers?? I don't D offer my services to people outside this area.  If the University is5 shut down by some disaster then I have no more users.    >=20 >> If there F >> is a flood (we're on the 4th floor and the building is over 500'=20H >> higher than the nearest water that is likely to flood), or a fire, or  E >> a bomb or an earthquake or a [m]ine subsidence (the most likely=20 ? >> around here) it won't do much good having servers in Denver.  >=20; > 	Denver PA or Denver CO?  Denver CO makes no sense as you < > 	wouldn't be clustering 1800 miles away.  But if you had a computer? > 	room fire, having clustered servers elsewhere would make you  look > 	good.  F If there was a computer room fire (unlikely as there really isn't muchD of anything in there to burn beyond the computers themselves) no oneC would be allowed in the area until it was cleaned up and thus there D would be no users.  Also, I can replace all of the computers in lessG than 48 hours and replace all the software and files in about another 4 C hours.  It would take longer than that to repair the physical plant E (like electricity).  It took me years to convince them that a DAT was G worth the investment.  Do you really think I am likely to convince them E to spend the 10's (or is it 100's) of thousands of dollars needed for C equipment and networking to actually have a remote slustered site?? ' We're not even a for profit business!!!    >=20 >> we will be shut down and H >> have no users.  Oh yeah, my uptime performance is much beter than the  H >> campus network so there's another reason not to bother worrying about   >> clusters. >>=20  >=20 > 	Too bad.  >=20@ > 	I get around network problems by having a point to point link< > 	via Memory Channel with fibre option and it has saved the
 cluster=20 > 	on more than one occasion.   D And how much does that point to point link cost you??  Porbably moreE than my departments entire annual budget (of which my share is only a  small fraction).  E >                                   Of course you couldn't get to the 
 cluster=20. > 	for a time, but jobs were still running :-)  F And, again, of the millions of systems worldwide, how many really need that??   bill   --=20 C Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three  wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |C Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>  =20    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 16:52:36 GMT 1 From: Michael Austin <maustin@firstdbasource.com> ' Subject: Re: is VMS really easy to use? 2 Message-ID: <3E0DD67E.D88A9D51@firstdbasource.com>   Larry Kilgallen wrote: >  <snip>- > > And most applications on a Linux machine.  > > @ > > It seems to me the same standards that prohibit VMS Freeware@ > > should prohibit all of Linux.  But I thought your outfit ran! > > Linux.  Or is that just Unix.  > >>   Bill Gunshannon wrote:D > >> We were talking about VMS here.  All of Linux is non-commercial( > >> so the argument hardly makes sense.  F Not quite true...  any time you have to pay for a set of CD's and haveB the opportunity to purchase support, I believe it IS commercial --% whether or not they want to admit it.   E I believe the arguement here is that companies (mine included) demand A that no freeware be run/used on production machines.  Freeware is @ defined as software produced and released without FORMAL supportE channels with or without sources.   Most flavors of Linux such as Red H Hat, Caldera, etc... have some type of formal support channel available. Some are better than others.    F When an system crashes or an application dies, they don't want to weedG through all of that source code and try to determine what failed.  They G just want it to work and they want some company to be "on the hook" for 
 that support.   E While Columbia and OSU don't have "formal" channels, they have proven A that when a problem arises, it is corrected with a few emails and ; possibly a phone call -- if you know who to talk too... :)    E All of that being said, there is a lot of freeware that makes the sys G admin's life much easier. If it doesn't work, we (sys admins) don't use B it. But generally speaking, our user base is not dependent on that% freeware to do their day-to-day jobs.   G Althugh I was trying to figure out if Apache is "formally supported" or E is As-is with informal support,  because I don't recall ever seeing a 6 line item on any support contract for that support...    --   Regards,  6 Michael Austin            OpenVMS User since June 19847 First DBA Source, Inc.    Registered Linux User #261163    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 18:21:28 +0100 6 From: Arne =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk>' Subject: Re: is VMS really easy to use? ' Message-ID: <3E0DDD98.50104@vajhoej.dk>    Michael Austin wrote:   I > Althugh I was trying to figure out if Apache is "formally supported" or G > is As-is with informal support,  because I don't recall ever seeing a 8 > line item on any support contract for that support...   > I think that is the difference between CSWS and Apache. Apache& you try the net. CSWS you call Compaq.   Arne   ------------------------------   Date: 28 Dec 2002 18:39:11 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)' Subject: Re: is VMS really easy to use? 5 Message-ID: <aukr4f$83lbf$2@ID-135708.news.dfncis.de>   4 In article <QAbP9.19180$kq6.291770@news.xtra.co.nz>, 	"AG" <ang@xtra.co.nz> writes: > 7 > "Bill Gunshannon" <bill@cs.uofs.edu> wrote in message 1 > news:aui4o1$6tfih$3@ID-135708.news.dfncis.de...  >  >> (I also disagree withG >> teaching that n! = "the product of all integers from 1 to n" because B >> although it is correct in all but one case, it is still wrong.) > B > That's nothing, a quick search on the net turned up a definitionC > that n! is a product of itself and all whole numbers below it ... ; > Now I'm greasing my abacus since calculating 1! obviously A > requires going to minus infinity, not that it's gonna make much < > difference since zero is also included, or does it? ... :) > ? > On the other hand, your statement about "all but one case" is @ > also not correct it seems (assuming you allow an integer to be > negative) ...    OK, I should have made that:@          n! = "the product of all positive integers from 1 to n"  = But my point was that the above is not a true definition of a = factorial even though that is what most people learn up to at = least the 12th grade. The one case that disproves this is, of  course, "0".  !0 == 1.      bill     --  J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------   Date: 28 Dec 2002 18:45:04 GMT, From: bill@gw5.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)' Subject: Re: is VMS really easy to use? 5 Message-ID: <aukrff$83lbf$3@ID-135708.news.dfncis.de>   / In article <v0r7jdlgk2sc71@corp.supernews.com>, $ 	Z  <zarlenga@conan.ids.net> writes:/ > Bill Gunshannon <bill@gw5.cs.uofs.edu> wrote: E >: I guess we have different concepts of Enterprise Critical quality. D >: I hardly consider something with memory leaks big enough to driveH >: a Mack truck thru to be even close.  I only work with it here becauseC >: I have to, and I spend a lot of time lobbying to replace it with I >: one of the current Unix flavors now that they have a quite respectable + >: Office Suite that can even read MS docs.  > ; > Where in Win 2000 or NT is this huge memory leak you keep  > referring to?   : Not having the source, how could I possibly know?? But, as9 I mentioned a few messages ago, if I leave the lab locked 8 for more than aweek I return to find an error message on; the screen of every machine stating that virtual memory has : been exhausted.  If an unused machine with nothing running; but the login screen saver runs out of virtual memory, what  would you attribute it to?   bill   --  J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------    Date: 27 Dec 2002 10:18:30 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) : Subject: Re: Of Galaxy, Infiniband and Distributed Caching3 Message-ID: <LChUYQzjHNW$@eisner.encompasserve.org>   _ In article <XbucnYGGuNz05JSjXTWc2Q@metrocast.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:  > : > "Rob Young" <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote in message/ > news:5n776H2yH2Pp@eisner.encompasserve.org...  >>C >>         Recently we heard rumors of Galaxy not making its way to B >>         Itanium.  This is either true or not, doesn't matter to >>         what might be...  >>D >>         Looking at a few wrinkles that may make Galaxy less of an >>         advantage.  > M > Surely this cannot be the same Rob Young who not so long ago was trumpeting L > the inevitable victory of ADMP (an acronym which HP's web site is not ableJ > to find, nor is Google in anything but French and German) over all other > mere MP boxes? >   D 	Well... spelling it correctly would help.  It isn't ADMP.  Victory?D 	Not sure I used that word.  I'm still a big Galaxy fan, still a big% 	Alpha fan, still a big VMS fan, etc.   G > No matter, since the comment is the same regardless:  Galaxy/ADMP and N > Infiniband are complementary technologies with virtually no overlap, so ADMP; > is worth exactly as much, or as little, as it always was.   ; 	That was the point of my posting.  Showing advantages and   	disadvantages.   L > Something as low-latency and high-bandwidth as Infiniband is, as you note,L > extremely attractive for things like distributed caches (or caching at theF > storage device), but in no way helps a system dynamically reallocate > resources.  ? 	Galaxy in its current incarnation doesn't dynamically allocate C 	much at all, other than CPUs.  Sure, you can change things but you D 	are at a console prompt when you do it.  There were Galaxy futures C 	that showed memory being dynamically moved around, but that isn't  
 	here yet.  B >  And IB is not fast enough to support anything but distressinglyJ > NUMA distributed shared memory (why you think that 2 - 10 us. latency isB > comparable to EV7's 390 ns. worst-case latency in a 64-processor$ > configuration is not clear at all)    D 	Part of what I included was application.  Certainly for HPTC GalaxyD 	would be a winner, but as Andrew points out that is a small segment3 	of the market.  HPTC and VMS?  Very small segment.     " > , so IB does not allow effectiveN > connection of bunches of small SMP boxes into something equivalent to an EV7L > mesh (though it does allow them to be connected into extremely interestingA > solutions for problems which do not require the homogeneity and < > inter-processor communication/shared memory speed of EV7). > J > When memory and processors become too cheap to worry about, ADMP will beL > valueless.  Until then, it will have at least some value (though partially8 > offset by being a more complex environment to manage). > ; > By the way, at the moment IB appears to be heading toward K > low-volume/high-price niche status very much like Itanic, which will help L > keep large SMP/NUMA boxes competitive with clustered groups of smaller SMPL > boxes for a while yet even when the clustered solution can handle the load > effectively. >    	More of the advantage of IB.   = 	Again, XFC would use all free memory.  Galaxy can't/won't in @ 	its current incrarnation so you have more memory available as a@ 	file cache (mentioned that earlier).  The latency of Infiniband> 	is very tolerable for remote reads of file cache (from what I* 	understand, correct me if I'm off there).  B 	Greatest advantage though is recoup or protecting CPU investment.? 	Meaning that like CI it will offload IO and messaging to lower < 	cost cards.  Querying someone about why they were using theD 	much slower CI as an interconnect, I was told Memory Channel would @ 	saturate their CPUs and I know of another situation where that B 	happened.  I have no experience with Galaxy SMCI but since it is C 	memory to memory and no helper chips, it too has to be pretty CPU s 	intensive.s  ; > By the way, at the moment IB appears to be heading towarda% > low-volume/high-price niche status y  @ 	Regarding IB niche status.  There is a lot of mythology out andC 	about here and you appear to have bought into it.  A lot of folks  @ 	are scared of new things and you have networking guys saying:  = 	"we do IP, Infiniband? ... shiver me timbers, I'm scared."  h  D 	Seriously, nothing will be able to compete with IB for price until E 	about 2006 for high-end interconnect.  IB is certainly cheaper than sH 	10 Gbit ethernet at an average of $50000 per port for 10 Gbit ethernet:  [ http://www.computerworld.com/networkingtopics/networking/lanwan/story/0,10801,76979,00.html    I "Although most 10 Gigabit Ethernet offerings fall into the $50,000 range,aO Enterasys Networks' recent rollout, priced under $30,000, could be the start ofe a downward trend in pricing."e  [ http://www.computerworld.com/networkingtopics/networking/lanwan/story/0,10801,76977,00.html2  K "But even though the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.aM approved the final 10 Gigabit Ethernet standard last June, the price of entryDJ -- at an average of $50,000 per port -- has kept most organizations on the sidelines."t  / 	Compare and contrast that to Infiniband today:   * http://www.gridtoday.com/breaking/309.html  G "The Paceline 4100, priced at below $1,000 per port, is described as anbM 'intelligent' InfiniBand switch because it includes the company's Apex fabric J management software. It is an eight-port, 4x (10Gbps) switch that provides/ 160Gbps total throughput in a 1U-sized cabinet.M  N List price is $8,000, and general availability is set for the first quarter ofK next year. Paceline's starter kit for supercomputer users includes four HCAmE cards and support for the widely used message passing interface (MPI) L clustering protocol, supplied by MPI Software Technology (MSTI). The starter, kit costs $10,000, including a 4100 switch."  = 	That fact that Dell is jumping on Infiniband is an indicatoru? 	that it is cost effective.  Per port prices will be better foroA 	10 GBit Ethernet by 2006 falling somewhere in the $5000 per portn/ 	range according to that ComputerWorld article.   [ http://www.computerworld.com/networkingtopics/networking/lanwan/story/0,10801,76977,00.htmlo  G "By 2006, the cost will be $5,000 to $6,000 per port," predicts Chandra-H Kopparapu, director of product marketing at San Jose-based switch vendor Foundry Networks Inc."  A 	So for the next 3 years+, IB is definitely a better interconnectsG 	for CPU offload reasons, latency reasons, and cost!  By the time 2006  : 	rolls around, IB will be up to 12x or 3 GByte per second F 	bi-directional.  So the Ethernet lads will be back around:  "Oh wow, H 	we now have 100 GBit Ethernet at $50000 per port!!"  Infiniband should H 	have a superior cost structure for quite some time, have no idea where D 	people (yourself included) get this idea that IB will be at a cost C 	disadvantage, if nothing else, that certainly isn't the case.  AresB 	you comparing to Gbit Ethernet?  Cost the same, IB is much faster 	(10 Gbit versus Gbit).  	  	So ... coming back around...i  = 	What about Infiniband advantages versus Galaxy?  If you lash D 	together 16 - 4 CPU servers with Infiniband, would that "do" Oracle@ 	better than a Galaxied partitioned 64 CPU server?  Wouldn't you< 	get more CPU with IB helping, therefore better performance?   				Robs   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Dec 2002 12:29:49 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)u: Subject: Re: Of Galaxy, Infiniband and Distributed Caching3 Message-ID: <iJ1huM49hvj+@eisner.encompasserve.org>i  a In article <zUavRscexpo8@eisner.encompasserve.org>, young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) writes:t   >>   > D > 	I'm still a "bit" skeptical as to the CPUs not being impacted.  IA > 	do know the old crusty CI can be fastpathed, here is referencei- > 	to that earlier mention of CPU saturation:e > o > http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=cf15391e.0109260649.40446623%40posting.google.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain& > H > "Given that you have 10-CPU SMP boxes, and 4 CI adapters per box, it'sG > quite possible that you are currently using Fast_Path on CI to spread-F > CI interrupt workload across non-primary CPUs.  Be aware that MemoryB > Channel does not support Fast_Path (and since no new MC hardware? > development is planned, and there's thus no incentive for VMSsF > Engineering to dive back into the driver code, it's unlikely it everE > will support Fast_Path).  I worked at a site where we tried to moveiE > from CI to MC for SCS traffic in a large cluster (16 6-CPU GS-140s)nG > and our plans failed due to saturation of CPU 0 in interrupt state onrF > lock-master nodes for hot application files.  They had to rip the MCF > hardware back out and go to 6 CIs instead.  As a test, you might tryG > turning off Fast_Path on CI in your current configuration and measure-$ > peak CPU 0 interrupt-state usage." > : > 	So to further beat the horse, if SMCI can't or won't be= > 	fastpathed then is IB the answer and we would assume it isa= > 	fastpathed from the outset.  Since SMCI has 94 us for lockl@ > 	latency and MC II 120us, one would hope IB comes in somewhere: > 	less than 200us  (i believe from memory Gbit is 230us). > = > 	If SMCI is or can be fastpathed, Galaxy is a much strongeri@ > 	interconnect as you would have less risk of saturating a CPU.D > 	Of course, there is a few other angles here... since it is shared< > 	memory you certainly don't have to build up and tear downB > 	checksummed message packets do you?  Maybe you can run 10 timesE > 	as many lock requests through shared memory on a single CPU.  ThatnF > 	and the fact you wouldn't have 16 CPU partitions, maybe 4 is ideal.D > 	Perhaps Galaxy is far superior all the way around.  That would be
 > 	cool.   > = > 	Disclaimer:  I dawdle.  If you really want or need to knowt= > 	what it is all about, contact HP.  I'm not an HP employee,- > 	just a usenet denizen.2 >   @ 	Adding to this, having thought about it a bit.  Much of the SCS? 	traffic in the example above may have been remote reads/writesg? 	via MSCP.  Since instances in a Galaxy wouldn't be doing MSCP,a> 	this is probably less of an issue.  The primary or designatedD 	lock CPU in a 4 CPU instance may not even be at risk of saturation.$ 	Probably an interesting study/test.   					Rob   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 10:07:00 GMT 1 From: LESLIE@JRLVAX.HOUSTON.RR.COM (Jerry Leslie)i# Subject: Re: OpenVMS Branding Queryn; Message-ID: <8JeP9.58479$6H6.2113584@twister.austin.rr.com>e  / Peter LANGSTOEGER (peter@langstoeger.at) wrote:  :  : I use it (too).e2 : Just to decrease the name similarity with MVS... : $ IIRC, MVS was (is?) known as OpenMVS  2 --Jerry Leslie   (my opinions are strictly my own)9   Note: leslie@jrlvax.houston.rr.com is invalid for email8   ------------------------------   Date: 28 Dec 02 13:03:18 +0100) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture)t# Subject: Re: OpenVMS Branding Querye) Message-ID: <AzcQ36pOgFpu@elias.decus.ch>h  o In article <8JeP9.58479$6H6.2113584@twister.austin.rr.com>, LESLIE@JRLVAX.HOUSTON.RR.COM (Jerry Leslie) writes:o1 > Peter LANGSTOEGER (peter@langstoeger.at) wrote:o > :  > : I use it (too). 4 > : Just to decrease the name similarity with MVS... > : & > IIRC, MVS was (is?) known as OpenMVS > 0 I've never come across that one before, but from  7 http://www.ti-leipzig.de/os390/book/openmvs/openmvs.htm   3 we see "OS/390 Unix System Services" documentation.o  1 and from http://www.planetmvs.com/links/unix.html   ; "OS/390 Unix System Services - The subsystem formerly known54 as OpenEdition and OpenMVS.", from which I read that= OpenMVS is/was a _subsystem_ sitting on MVS proper, much akini$ to the way Posix used to sit on VMS.   -- n
 Paul Sture Switzerlande   ------------------------------    Date: 28 Dec 2002 07:17:10 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) # Subject: Re: OpenVMS Branding Query:3 Message-ID: <Y3A8$ieiYFsG@eisner.encompasserve.org>   o In article <8JeP9.58479$6H6.2113584@twister.austin.rr.com>, LESLIE@JRLVAX.HOUSTON.RR.COM (Jerry Leslie) writes:c1 > Peter LANGSTOEGER (peter@langstoeger.at) wrote:  > :  > : I use it (too).f4 > : Just to decrease the name similarity with MVS... > : & > IIRC, MVS was (is?) known as OpenMVS   MVS Open Edition   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 10:10:20 -0500n' From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com>,# Subject: RE: OpenVMS Branding QuerymT Message-ID: <BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF402660C56@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net>   Hans,i  E >>> I happen to work for a site that used to have an AXP/NT installed,0 base. Just up to the moment AXP got murdered.<<<  F Just curious, but did you also work for any companies when IBM did theD same thing i.e.. dropped NT support for their PowerPC RISC platform?  1 Or perhaps when Motorola also did the same thing?l  ? Here is extract from a Dec 1996 article (url expired or moved):h  A "Motorola Corp. has followed IBM's lead and dropped its plans forCC support of Windows NT on the PowerPC because of poor sales. CompanynG officials said Monday that Motorola will continue to support NT 4.0 anda@ subsequent maintenance releases but will stop short of releasingF machines with NT 5, which is due around the end of next year. The onlyA Motorola product to be affected is the PowerStac II workstation."e  F "...According to a spokesman with IBM's RS/6000 division, the decisionE to discontinue sales PowerPC-based NT systems was mutually decided byLD IBM and Motorola. Although the RS/6000 division manufactures PowerPCG systems that run either AIX or NT, AIX-based systems accounted for more 0 than 90 percent of sales, company sources said."   Regards,  
 Kerry Main Senior Consultant  Hewlett-Packard (Canada) Co.! Consulting & Integration Servicesc Voice: 613-592-4660d Fax   : 613-591-4477 Email: kerryDOTmain@hpDOTcom-     (remove the DOT's and replace with "."'s)e       -----Original Message-----* From: Hans Vlems [mailto:hvlems@iae.nl]=20 Sent: December 27, 2002 5:56 PMu To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com-# Subject: Re: OpenVMS Branding Query       ? "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca> schreef in berichti) news:3E0B3E1B.6516263A@vl.videotron.ca...r > Hans Vlems wrote:rF > > Right, VMS ownership might change again in the future. But what=20G > > company would desire that? Don't mention IBM, they will kill VMS=20n > > overnight to gainG > > marketshare, especially the financial segment like stock exchanges.o > H > Au contraire. I think that *IF* IBM were to acquire VMS, they would do   > so withF > full knowledge of the past mistakes done on VMS and it would buy VMS because G > it would see the potential to make lots of money simply by fixing itst imagee  > (and dropping the silly open).  F IBM has no commercial purpose for VMS. IBM is actually quite sure thatH their current line up of S/390, AS/400 and RS/6000 systems addresses theH marketplace just fine. IBM sales reps are actively looking for customersF to lure them away from wandering competitors (if HP et al deserve that name).  I > IBM would be aware that customers need a trustable vendor who really=20  > does puttI > its money where its mouth is and doesn't just do empty promises that=20i > VMSy will > be taken seriously.   D IBM takes its products seriously. That's why they have problems withE retiring products. A couple of years I attended a VSE seminar. The VPlG for VSE stated outright: VSE will be around well beyond your retirementn> age. The announcement came across as 100% sincere and exceededH everything (in terms of customer relations) than anything I've seen from VMS owners in the past 8 years.s  G > Of course, IBM would port VMS to Power which would give VMS a huge=20kH > edge against HP-UX and Tandem which will be stuck on the failing IA64.   > VMSn could H > then also so battel against Tandem. And I suspect that the "VAX-FT"=20 > mightU beE > resurected on Power. As long as VMS is owned by the same company ase Tandem, ? > VMS won't really get much more "fault tolerance" added to it.   G IF IBM would buy VMS then would not port VMS to Power. It would perhapsn@ keep Alpha alive and possibly consider porting VMS to the S/390.E Unfortunately IBM has AS/400, a well loved platform by its customers.eG More important, OS/400 works the way IBM customers think: each functioniD has a screen and a well hidden batch job behind it. Now VMS could beC modified to behave like that of course, but why would IBM spend the D money? IBM managed to do what DEC achieved 10 years ago: IBM can nowB speed up its processors at the pace of double the performance at a/ slightly higher price. Their customers love it.a  H And do not forget that the S/390 has a kind of hardware clustering builtE in that appeals to IBM customers: availability solved in hardware notl	 software.t  J > Note that I emphasised the *IF*.  IBM is not the type of company that=20F > does things halfway. If they decide to bu VMS, it is because they=20I > intend to do something with it. They would know that buying VMS just=20 H > for the customers would not work because customers would be very angry   > if the new owner didn't > take good care of their VMS.  6 IBM is a professional company, I fully agree with you.  E > Right now, IBM might stand to gain more by letting HP stumble sincem	 acquiringv? > the VMS customers who would not trust HP would be quite easy.   E Sure, by not buying VMS they just lure ex-VMS customers. Dead easy. IfE happen to work for a site that used to have an AXP/NT installed base.iA Just up to the moment AXP got murdered. They swapped all their NTu systems for Netfinity's.  F > It would be strange hower to think of Sue as an IBM employee, and=206 > receicve marketing material with the IBM logo on it. >o :-)s >aG > Come to think of it, it would have made sense for Compaq to have beene brokenH > up. The ex-Digital part (which HP isn't doing much with) would have=20 > gone to> > IBM while the Compaq and Tandem parts would have gone to HP.  E Agreed, if IBM would buy VMS then they'd have a commercial reason fornC doing so and VMS would have been safe with a secure future. But I'mm afraid it won't happen.w   Hans   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 12:27:02 -0400i0 From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca>0 Subject: Re: printing of string descriptors in C/ Message-ID: <3E0DD0C7.9DBF6895@vl.videotron.ca>    "Ruslan R. Laishev" wrote: > : >         printf("%*.s",zz.dsc$w_length,zz.dsc.a_pointer);    F Thanks. Just wish there were a way to do this without having to supplyL individual members of the descriptors (to save on typing/space). But this is> much better than having to manually null-terminate the string.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 19:45:42 +0200 @ From: Veli =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=F6rkk=F6?= <Veli.Korkko@kolumbus.fi>+ Subject: Re: SMP Alphaserver 4100 CPUBAD???c+ Message-ID: <3E0DE346.49BBB8AF@kolumbus.fi>    Steve Fournier wrote:i > Q > i have recently acquired a 4 processor 4100 as a backup to an online production L > system.  all 4 processors are supposedly 400 Mhz B3004-AA processers.  theL > first 3 have the part number 36-46665-06-A01 printed on them.  the 4th hasQ > 36-46665-06-B01 on it.  unfortunately, on VMS 6.2-1H3 bootup, the 4th processoriP > refuses to start with SMP-F-CPUBAD message because it is a different type thanP > the primary one.  does anyone know the differences here?  can i get all 4 cpus > running in VMS?   B There are two types of 400MHZ cpus for As4100, namely B3004-AA and	 B3005-AA. H But it is unclear if you really have here 3 cpu of type B3004-AA and one of type(E B3005-AA or just four B3004-AA of which three are rev A01 and last isd rev B01.  G Anyway, you might need ALPCPU1601_071 patch, this patch applies to V6.2n also.m   _velio   ------------------------------    Date: 27 Dec 2002 13:00:53 -00004 From: Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]>& Subject: Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth5 Message-ID: <20021227130053.2181.qmail@nym.alias.net>i  + On Fri, 27 Dec 02, jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:r0 >In article <3E0B3AD7.15EC47E2@vl.videotron.ca>,5 >   JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca> wrote:  >>Dennis Grevenstein wrote:m5 >>> I really like the feature of the guest account atu< >>> vax6k.openecs.org. You can log in and see how VMS looks.  K >>We could troll other newsgroups to advertise the availability of this VMSeL >>machnine so that non-believers could give it a try. That would help bring  >>some visibility back to VMS.  I JF, I don't really approve of "trolling" other newsgroups to promote VMS. > By all means participate in other groups and take advantage ofK opportunities to promote VMS, but posting pro-VMS material without actually @ regularly using a group will, quite justifiably, get you flamed.  J >>Of course, such a machine woudl probably require much maintenance since " >>there is bound to be some abuse. >iA >That's a snide remark.  You start out by pretending to wish that @ >VMS be made visible; then you infer that it's not fit for a netB >because of security and user protection problems.  VMS was pretty" >good at preventing both of these.  I It's certainly a lot easier to run a public-access VMS system than an *ixeI one. Both would be subject to abuse, but locking down the VMS system is a B lot easier. So far I've had to make outbound telnet and use of IRCH available to users who are granted special rights identifiers. That cutsK out virtually all the abuse by Script Kiddies trying to hide their locationy& when accessing their "0wn3d" machines.     Doc. -- c: Time and money, the psychotropics of the business world...K ~ VAXman                                             https://vmsbox.cjb.nety   ------------------------------  ! Date: Sat, 28 Dec 02 10:36:57 GMT  From: jmfbahciv@aol.comh& Subject: Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth+ Message-ID: <auk0pd$jk7$2@bob.news.rcn.net>u  / In article <3E0C9C07.3EDB5E56@vl.videotron.ca>, 4    JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca> wrote: >jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote: C >> That's a snide remark.  You start out by pretending to wish thatfB >> VMS be made visible; then you infer that it's not fit for a netD >> because of security and user protection problems.  VMS was pretty$ >> good at preventing both of these. >oG >Just because it is good doesn't mean that it is invincible. Opening a   machineiI >to the whole world of script kiddies etc means that you have to be much e moreC >careful compared to just letting serious folks access the machine..  B DEC sold its high end machines to _universities_.  I guarantee you; that was a good test against people more clever than those y categorized as script kitties.   /BAH  ' Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.a   ------------------------------  ! Date: Sat, 28 Dec 02 10:41:29 GMT  From: jmfbahciv@aol.come& Subject: Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth+ Message-ID: <auk11t$jk7$3@bob.news.rcn.net>n  8 In article <u87p0vo7li69tv93llahe71ofkoj95uhoe@4ax.com>,8    Brian Inglis <Brian.Inglis@SystematicSw.ab.ca> wrote:9 >On Fri, 27 Dec 02 11:45:12 GMT, jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:y >A1 >>In article <3E0B3AD7.15EC47E2@vl.videotron.ca>,s6 >>   JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca> wrote: >>>Dennis Grevenstein wrote:6 >>>> I really like the feature of the guest account at= >>>> vax6k.openecs.org. You can log in and see how VMS looks.h >>>yI >>>Perhaps it would be worth it for the VMS group to fund that VAX since   that= >>>would allow anyone to play with it to get a feel for VMS. > >>> L >>>I know that there are official "test drive" machines available, but they  >>>are more "serious". >>>vI >>>We could troll other newsgroups to advertise the availability of this e VMSlG >>>machnine so that non-believers could give it a try. That would help o bring  >>>some visibility back to VMS.l >>>aK >>>Of course, such a machine woudl probably require much maintenance since n# >>>there is bound to be some abuse.f >>B >>That's a snide remark.  You start out by pretending to wish thatA >>VMS be made visible; then you infer that it's not fit for a nethC >>because of security and user protection problems.  VMS was prettyh# >>good at preventing both of these.  >o? >ISTM that was not the poster's intent -- the implication I gott? >was that the accounts would have to be administered to preventt@ >abuse likely in any free public access system -- and that maybe? >the poster's first language is not English, from the incorrecte@ >use of "troll" relative to the rest of the sentence, the phraseA >"much maintenance", and the knowledge that videotron is a Quebec  >ISP. I could be wrong. ;^>s  C The person I chastized was that guy who has been  throwing darts ato? the products since I got on-line and not the guy who is trying eA to get this system up and running.  I've looked at the attributesi< and, somehow, they don't show the guy I thought I was tryingA to correct.  I may have made a mistake.  If I have, my apologies.    /BAH  ' Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.u   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 17:34:37 +0100 6 From: Arne =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk>& Subject: Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth) Message-ID: <3E0DD29D.4060908@vajhoej.dk>o   Peter da Silva wrote:e  J > I don't think the VAX ever had "impressive performance". What it had wasM > a large address space and legacy support for RSX-11 software via a hardware M > PDP-11 emulator, and a complex OS that you either love or hate (or love AND  > hate).  : Actually I think the VAX 8650 was pretty fast in its days.   Arne   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 17:31:32 -0000T% From: Pete Fenelon <pete@fenelon.com> & Subject: Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth/ Message-ID: <v0rnvksr4bcu40@corp.supernews.com>h  > In alt.folklore.computers Arne Vajh?j <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote: > < > Actually I think the VAX 8650 was pretty fast in its days. >   F Its day was about 2-3 years before it was introduced, in that case. ;)   pete --  E pete@fenelon.com "there's no room for enigmas in built-up areas" HMHBl   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 18:43:29 +0100t6 From: Arne =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk>& Subject: Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth) Message-ID: <3E0DE2C1.3080507@vajhoej.dk>    Pete Fenelon wrote:l  @ > In alt.folklore.computers Arne Vajh?j <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:< >>Actually I think the VAX 8650 was pretty fast in its days.    H > Its day was about 2-3 years before it was introduced, in that case. ;)  > A lot of those was used for number chrunching at universities.   What were the alternatives ?   Arne   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 18:01:20 -0000r$ From: "David Wade" <g8mqw@yahoo.com>& Subject: Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth4 Message-ID: <aukotk$82bqm$1@ID-40235.news.dfncis.de>  0 "Arne Vajhj" <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote in message# news:3E0DE2C1.3080507@vajhoej.dk...  > Pete Fenelon wrote:  >xB > > In alt.folklore.computers Arne Vajh?j <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:> > >>Actually I think the VAX 8650 was pretty fast in its days. >a   It was.    > J > > Its day was about 2-3 years before it was introduced, in that case. ;) >n@ > A lot of those was used for number chrunching at universities. >t  G At this it was great. Unfortunatley in many cases they were not used as(G number crunchers more as general purpose interactive machines. And thiseH tended to not show them at their best performance wise. For example whenD running the VMS Editor each character was echoed back to the user atE Application not OS level. So each time a user typed a character theireL program needed  to be unswapped, and dispatched to, all so it could echo theJ character back to the user. On a reasonable busy machibe this would result/ in the dreaded "Type Behind" so loved by users.    > What were the alternatives ? >   9 Small IBM machines such as the 4381 ?  PR1ME 9000 series?d   > Arne >v   ------------------------------   Date: 28 Dec 2002 18:28:42 GMT, From: bill@gw5.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)& Subject: Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth5 Message-ID: <aukqgl$83lbf$1@ID-135708.news.dfncis.de>t  4 In article <aukotk$82bqm$1@id-40235.news.dfncis.de>,' 	"David Wade" <g8mqw@yahoo.com> writes:o2 > "Arne Vajhj" <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote in message% > news:3E0DE2C1.3080507@vajhoej.dk...o >> Pete Fenelon wrote: >>C >> > In alt.folklore.computers Arne Vajh?j <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:o? >> >>Actually I think the VAX 8650 was pretty fast in its days.s >> > 	 > It was.  >  >> >> What were the alternatives ?. >> > ; > Small IBM machines such as the 4381 ?  PR1ME 9000 series?J >   : Funny you should mention this.  Back inthe days before the8 demise of Prime or DEC I worked with both.  Prime almost; always beat the VAX on benchmarks (even when DEC fudged thee< numbers)  but DEC still almost always won the procurements. - Why??  Because DEC had much better marketing.uB Too bad DEC didn't see what bad marketing did to Prime and learned from their mistakes.   bill   -- tJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   -   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 13:57:47 -0400s0 From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca>& Subject: Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth/ Message-ID: <3E0DE606.707C053F@vl.videotron.ca>P   David Wade wrote:wF > running the VMS Editor each character was echoed back to the user atG > Application not OS level. So each time a user typed a character theirsN > program needed  to be unswapped, and dispatched to, all so it could echo the > character back to the user.e    K Not quite. The terminal driver has a lot of smarts built into it. While the I driver does do the echoing, it is possible to code a QIO to complete only M after X characters have been typed (for instance fill a line), or whenever anm" escape sequence has been entered.   N Also, with shared images, one can save heaps of memory since the same piece of' code is used by all users as they type.   I Here is a good example of "smart" coding. WPS-PLUS on a VT100 versus Datai" General's WORD. (nothing like MS).  J I was able to support 12 users on a microvax II on an RD54 drive. Not onlyL because of shared memory , but also because WPSPLUS used the terminal driverL in a smart way: let the user type and don't bother reformatting the documentK until he moves down one line or press some control key, at which point, youaB just reformat the line above to make sure it fits the margins etc.  K But the DG version has more marketing humph in it: it reformatted the wholeoM document in real-time as you added text in a paragraph, reflowing everything.vL End result: on the DG you needed the equivalenmt of a VAX9000 to support the5 12 users that ran fine with WPSPLUS on a Microvax II.    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 18:59:23 -0000j% From: Pete Fenelon <pete@fenelon.com>e& Subject: Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth/ Message-ID: <v0rt4bpoofv9d9@corp.supernews.com>u  K In alt.folklore.computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca> wrote:w > K > Here is a good example of "smart" coding. WPS-PLUS on a VT100 versus Datac$ > General's WORD. (nothing like MS).  E ISTR that WordPerfect started on DG hardware - a reaction to DG's owne product? :)   y pete -- iE pete@fenelon.com "there's no room for enigmas in built-up areas" HMHBl   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2002.718 ************************