1 INFO-VAX	Fri, 04 Jul 2003	Volume 2003 : Issue 366       Contents: Re: cxx performance  Free Alpha 2100 in Las Vegas Hardware Games - Guru needed... # Re: Hardware Games - Guru needed... # Re: Hardware Games - Guru needed... # Re: Hardware Games - Guru needed... I Re: HP Webcast this morning on Next-Generation Intel Itanium 2 processors I Re: HP Webcast this morning on Next-Generation Intel Itanium 2 processors I Re: HP Webcast this morning on Next-Generation Intel Itanium 2 processors # Re: HP World (was HP to drop hpux?) # Re: HP World (was HP to drop hpux?)  Re: iSCSI anyone?  Re: iSCSI anyone?  Re: iSCSI anyone? @ Re: More than VMS is required, but VMS is a great starting point@ Re: More than VMS is required, but VMS is a great starting point@ Re: More than VMS is required, but VMS is a great starting point@ Re: More than VMS is required, but VMS is a great starting point Re: New OpenVMS-to-Itanium FAQ Re: New OpenVMS-to-Itanium FAQ Re: New OpenVMS-to-Itanium FAQ RE: New OpenVMS-to-Itanium FAQ& Re: OpenVMS FAQ and FAQ Website Errata& Re: OpenVMS FAQ and FAQ Website Errata& Re: OpenVMS FAQ and FAQ Website ErrataP Re: OpenVMS Pearl - OpenVMS V8.0, first release on Itanium, ships today!!! todayP Re: OpenVMS, and Itanium2 and Itanium2 6M (was: Re: HP Webcast this morning on NP Re: OpenVMS, and Itanium2 and Itanium2 6M (was: Re: HP Webcast thismorning on Ne powerterm and the euro sign $ Q on TS10 emulator: only TEXT BASED?( Re: Q on TS10 emulator: only TEXT BASED? Re: Running VMS off CD Re: Running VMS off CD Re: Sign of the demise of Alpha  Re: Sign of the demise of Alpha  Re: Sign of the demise of Alpha  Re: Sign of the demise of Alpha & StorageWorks RAID Software for OpenVMS* RE: StorageWorks RAID Software for OpenVMSJ Re: Tri-architecture cluster demonstrated at DECUS Ottawa Technical UpdateP RE: Tri-architecture cluster demonstrated at DECUS Ottawa Technical Update UpdatP Re: Tri-architecture cluster demonstrated at DECUS Ottawa Technical Update UpdatP Re: Tri-architecture cluster demonstrated at DECUS Ottawa Technical Update UpdatF Re: VAX support (was: Re: OpenVMS Technical Seminar Highlights (some))8 Re: VAX Vup Listing not available on HP - where is it ??8 Re: VAX Vup Listing not available on HP - where is it ??8 Re: VAX Vup Listing not available on HP - where is it ??8 Re: VAX Vup Listing not available on HP - where is it ??8 Re: VAX Vup Listing not available on HP - where is it ??= Re: VMS makes "General News" section of HP's "Customer Times" = Re: VMS makes "General News" section of HP's "Customer Times" = Re: VMS makes "General News" section of HP's "Customer Times" = Re: VMS makes "General News" section of HP's "Customer Times" = Re: VMS makes "General News" section of HP's "Customer Times" = Re: VMS makes "General News" section of HP's "Customer Times" = Re: VMS makes "General News" section of HP's "Customer Times" = Re: VMS makes "General News" section of HP's "Customer Times" = Re: VMS makes "General News" section of HP's "Customer Times"  VMS-Upgrade from disk? Re: VMS-Upgrade from disk? VMS-Upgrade from disk? Re: VMS-Upgrade from disk?" XFC, IO Size and Backup - Take Two  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:22:22 -0500 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>  Subject: Re: cxx performance' Message-ID: <3F05A9BE.A406E5CC@fsi.net>    Eric Johnson wrote:  > [ > Nic Clews <sendspamhere@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message news:<bdu8hu$375$1@lore.csc.com>...  > J > > WSDEF and WSQUO, do they have to be so different? For a process to useL > > its quota and to grow to it, the process needs to pagefault above PFRATHE > > every AWSTIME each QUANTUM to have a single WSINC which means the J > > swapper may have to consume operating system overhead, add to that theH > > real time which passes while the process gets itself "up to size". AH > > WSQUO = WSDEF means that the process does not have to go through theL > > working set growth phase, only if there is 'free memory' to grow towards
 > > WSEXTENT.  > E > These are good thoughts, unfortunately persuing them will take some = > time so I won't be able to provide a response anytime soon.   H Actually, its not that complex. WSDEF harks back to the days when memoryB was expensive and tended to be somewhat dear. Now that VMS is moreF frequently found on memory-rich systems, it makes sense to let WSDEF =C WSQUOTA in such cases. That way, the working set doesn't have to be F expanded just to do useful work. You can set it to a value most likelyH to be needed. Then, when an image is activated, all the system has to do8 is read it in - no need to expand the working set first.  G Remember that this will also apply to the corresponding PQL_D and PQL_M 5 system parameters. If you have the memory, go for it!    --   David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 08:46:08 -0700* From: "Jack Peacock" <peacock@simconv.com>% Subject: Free Alpha 2100 in Las Vegas 2 Message-ID: <5uKdnR6IcaAIPJiiRTvUqg@mpowercom.net>  K Would you like to own your very own Alpha?  And help save a bit of computer L history in the process?  Well if so, and you can find your way to Las Vegas,H Nevada, then there's a running Alpha 2100 server waiting for you to haul away.   H It has two 200Mhz CPU boards, a 128MB RAM board, a 64MB RAM board, SWXCRH RAID controller (EISA version), 10Mbit Ethernet (DE450 I think), and the@ original video (Compaq EISA VGA card).  The motherboard SCSI andJ serial/parallel work too.  Dual power supplies and dual drive racks.  Even relatively clean inside.  B I have two RZ28 drives (2GB each) and several more empty SBB greenG canisters.  There are also two RZ74 (3.5GB) drives in unknown condition J (old, lotsa hours on them).  It has an old CD-ROM drive (RRD40?) which may or may not be working.  I I also have a few spare parts (front panel display, CD-ROM mounting tray, J odds and ends).  The disks may be old but the machine runs fine.  FirmwareK is recent and it will run VMS or NT4, or anything else that supports a 2100 J Alpha.  No licenses come with it, and of course the warranty is a complete% refund of the selling price ($0 USD).   I We've kept it as an emergency spare in case a customer lost a machine but J now the boss says get rid of it.  So it either goes to the junk yard or toJ someone's extra bedroom.  The only catch is you have to haul it away; bossK won't go for the hassle of crating and shipping it.  If you've never seen a I 2100 think of a PC on steroids.  It weighs in at over 100lbs.  I doubt it : would fit in a car but it would fit in the back of an SUV.  G So if you live somewhere near Las Vegas and thinking about a road trip, I here's your chance to acquire a piece of 64-bit computer history.  If you J are interested contact Jack Peacock at peacock@simconv.com to make a deal.G I'd rather not part out the machine so it's all or nothing.  Preference H given to someone who wants to keep it running, or needs it as spares for their DEC museum.   L It's free, but if you happen to have a few odds or ends to trade it would beJ appreciated (not a requirement though).  I can always use 9GB+ SCSI drives or DVD/CD-ROM drives.   J And as an special incentive to come get it, I'll throw in a real DEC AlphaJ Multia, in running condition.  Just the main box, no hard drive or CD-ROM,1 but it does have 64MB of RAM and SCSI controller.       Jack Peacock    ------------------------------   Date: 4 Jul 2003 03:20:34 -0700 ' From: timasmith@hotmail.com (Tim Smith) ( Subject: Hardware Games - Guru needed...= Message-ID: <a7234bb1.0307040220.5b785f75@posting.google.com>    Hi,   ( Trying to build my own play VMS machine.  ? So I have purchased an alpha powered Digital Server 3000, model 6 FR-K7F2W-WC and there is a great picture and specs at:> http://h18002.www1.hp.com/products/quickspecs/SOC/QB00EJPF.PDF It turns on (and beeps a lot)   F I also purchased a Wyse WY-520 Terminal with keyboard, DECVT400M WY-609 compatible which turns on and I can access the setup menu   D The terminal has a 25 pin / phone like cable from the main port to aB 25 pin male which supposedly goes to the console though as per theB spec above the only 25 pin female is the printer which is no good.  B 1) Can I get a 25 to 9 adapter and somehow use the 'Remote Console Port'?$ 2) Do I have to find MMJ data leads?> 3) Are there any other options for connecting up the terminal?   thanks!    Tim    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:36:00 +0100 * From: Nic Clews <sendspamhere@[127.0.0.1]>, Subject: Re: Hardware Games - Guru needed...' Message-ID: <be3lg0$oqh$1@lore.csc.com>    Tim Smith wrote:   * > Trying to build my own play VMS machine.   Welcome to the flock, brother.  A > So I have purchased an alpha powered Digital Server 3000, model 8 > FR-K7F2W-WC and there is a great picture and specs at:@ > http://h18002.www1.hp.com/products/quickspecs/SOC/QB00EJPF.PDF > It turns on (and beeps a lot)  > H > I also purchased a Wyse WY-520 Terminal with keyboard, DECVT400M WY-60; > compatible which turns on and I can access the setup menu     The SETUP of the WYSE I take it.   F > The terminal has a 25 pin / phone like cable from the main port to aD > 25 pin male which supposedly goes to the console though as per theD > spec above the only 25 pin female is the printer which is no good.   D > 1) Can I get a 25 to 9 adapter and somehow use the 'Remote Console > Port'?& > 2) Do I have to find MMJ data leads?@ > 3) Are there any other options for connecting up the terminal?  G Your first problem I think is that the Alpha will want a screen plugged 9 into the VGA port, and a keyboard (PC will do) and mouse.   D I don't know if these systems have an onboard VGA disable, my AS1000A does, so that would force it to use a serial line for the console F (unless you've put another graphics card in). A >>> SET CONSOLE SERIALH and power cycle is the method if you cannot disable the VGA by a jumper.  D The 9 way to 25 way, a standard PC wired version will do, but you'll6 also need a null modem. You can I think avoid the MMJ.  D I can't comment on running VMS on this, the doc you've pointed me at> just talks about NT, and I've not researched this any further.  G Assuming you get further, you may also need an ECU and firmware. You're  not even having fun yet.   --  ? Regards, Nic Clews a.k.a. Mr. CP Charges, CSC Computer Sciences  nclews at csc dot com    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:40:10 GMT 4 From: brad@.gateway.2wire.net (Bradford J. Hamilton), Subject: Re: Hardware Games - Guru needed...+ Message-ID: <uIdNa.8747$Ix2.2748@rwcrnsc54>   T In article <be3lg0$oqh$1@lore.csc.com>, Nic Clews <sendspamhere@[127.0.0.1]> writes: >Tim Smith wrote:  > + >> Trying to build my own play VMS machine.  >  >Welcome to the flock, brother.  <snip> > E >I can't comment on running VMS on this, the doc you've pointed me at ? >just talks about NT, and I've not researched this any further.   H There is a thread, archived in Google, which talks about converting thisO machine to run (Open)VMS.  Look for "Jeff Campbell" and "3000" in Google Groups > for comp.os.vms.  I'd post the actual URL, but it's messy.	:-)   > H >Assuming you get further, you may also need an ECU and firmware. You're >not even having fun yet.  >  >-- @ >Regards, Nic Clews a.k.a. Mr. CP Charges, CSC Computer Sciences >nclews at csc dot com  A _________________________________________________________________ 0 Bradford J. Hamilton			"All opinions are my own"? bMradAhamiPltSon-at-coMmcAast.nPeSt	"Lose the MAPS, and replace 3 (please note the new e-mail address)	'-at-' with @"    ------------------------------   Date: 4 Jul 2003 12:12:41 -0000 4 From: Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]>, Subject: Re: Hardware Games - Guru needed...5 Message-ID: <20030704121241.2588.qmail@nym.alias.net>   J On Fri, 04 Jul 2003, brad@.gateway.2wire.net (Bradford J. Hamilton) wrote:M >In article <be3lg0$oqh$1@lore.csc.com>, Nic Clews <sendspamhere@[127.0.0.1]>  >writes: >>Tim Smith wrote: >>  , >>> Trying to build my own play VMS machine. >>  >>Welcome to the flock, brother. ><snip>  >>F >>I can't comment on running VMS on this, the doc you've pointed me at@ >>just talks about NT, and I've not researched this any further. > I >There is a thread, archived in Google, which talks about converting this P >machine to run (Open)VMS.  Look for "Jeff Campbell" and "3000" in Google Groups? >for comp.os.vms.  I'd post the actual URL, but it's messy.	:-)    Would this do?  D http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=<3C850833.43B7E72C@ins-msi.com>   Google is hackable. :)     Doc. --  K OpenVMS.         Eight out of ten hackers prefer *other* operating systems.    ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 05:02:49 -0400* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>R Subject: Re: HP Webcast this morning on Next-Generation Intel Itanium 2 processors2 Message-ID: <QfycncmLYrdc35iiXTWJgQ@metrocast.net>  3 "Rick Jones" <foo@bar.baz.invalid> wrote in message + news:YE_Ma.3909$Yn3.865@news.cpqcorp.net...    ...   D > I'd probably hold that 10% was not noise but would agree that veryG > small single digits would be. 3% would probably be my limit; the line F > being somehwat fuzzy.  We'll just have to see if AMD comes up with aD > 2.0 GHz Opteron system with a SPECweb99_SSL result that closes the > gap.  H A leak pounced upon by The Inquirer suggests that it may appear in early& August - just too late for that lunch.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 10:24:00 +0100 O From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> R Subject: Re: HP Webcast this morning on Next-Generation Intel Itanium 2 processors0 Message-ID: <be3h3h$fj1$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Rick Jones wrote: + > Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote:  > B >>It ties POWER4+ in SPECweb99_SSL and only slightly beats Opteron >>there  >   7 Its an interesting discussion but largely irrelevant to 7 the market that consumes the systems that the benchmark  tries to model.   7 The assumption that size matters in this case is wrong, 1 cost and footprint a rather more important and at 2 ~$47,000 dollars for a 2 way 1.5 GHz Itanium based4 HP server you will be counting the number of systems5 actually being used by people to do HTTP/HTTPS on the - fingers of one hand, SSL accelerators or not.    Regards  Andrew Harrison  > B > It ties POWER4+ at 1.7 GHz when POWER4+ is using a dedicated SSLB > accelerator.  We do not have data from IBM on the performance of= > POWER4+ at 1.7 GHz on SPECweb99_SSL without a dedicated SSL  > accelerator.   > H > The last non-accelerated POWER4+ results were for a p630 with 1.45 GHzD > POWER4+ CPUs where the SPECweb99_SSL score was 1988.  That was one9 > minor release of Zeus behind (4.2r1 rather than 4.2r2).  > = > I'll have to leave the back of the envelope calculations to F > guesstimate how much of the p655's SPECweb99_SSL score came from the& > SSL accelerator card to the readers. >  > @ >>(and if Opteron hits 2 GHz this month as it's supposed to this >>lead should evaporate).  >  > F > And I'll be willing to buy you lunch, should we both manage to be inF > the same place at the same time :) If Opteron does not hit 2GHz this7 > month, maybe you could stop calling Itanium Itanic?-)  > C > To get to 3700, based on the currenly published 1.8 GHz result of H > 3498, they need just shy of another 6%.  Going from 1.8 GHz to 2.0 GHzH > increases clock by just over 11%.  The published 64-bit 1.8 GHz figureH > was 3498 SPECweb99_SSL.  The published 64-bit 1.4 GHz figure was 3124.C > So, when clock increased just shy of 29%, the SPECweb99_SSL score B > increased by just shy of 12%, less than half the clock. All elseC > holds, looks tight to get there on clock alone. Presumeably, some A > folks are busy looking for additional software tunes.  As are I F > suspect everyone else doing SPECweb99_SSL benchmarking :) Or perhapsG > AMD are busily writing Linux drivers for the IBM SSL accelerator card  > :) >  > rick jones   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 10:47:14 +0100 O From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> R Subject: Re: HP Webcast this morning on Next-Generation Intel Itanium 2 processors0 Message-ID: <be3if3$g08$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Rick Jones wrote: , > Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@mimer.se> wrote:4 > I guess that depends on whether or not Apple wants > C >>Going from 8MB L3 to 32MB L3 give a pretty significant speedup in C >>SPECfp2000 on POWER4+ 1450Mhz. 8MB L3 gives 984 and 32MB L3 gives  >>1091.  >  > H > I suspect that parts of SPECfp2000 are addressing "things" larger thanF > SPECweb99_SSL.  The "average" URL being requested and thus encrypted@ > is on the order of 14-15KB - the full distribution of URL's isC > described somewhere on www.spec.org.  I'm not sure what the cache C > footprint for SSL key generation might be - perhaps some academic E > papers out there discuss the various algorithms.  The SPECweb99_SSL - > documentation states what ciphers are used.  >   ? SPECfp2000 isn't one benchmark but a number of indevidual tests C run sequentially where the result is a geometric mean of the scores  for each of the tests.  B Each test has a quite different memory footprint ranging from ~2MBB up to ~200MB, each of the indevidual tests are designed to run on  systems with 256 MB of RAM.   A Power4 is available in a number of different packages for example ? the P690/P670's use 8 way MCM modules which actually consist of ? 4 dual core units. Each pair of CPU's shares L2 cache and all 8  CPU's share a single L3 cache.  ? IBM's single CPU Power4 benchmark results are run with 1 of the A 8 CPU's in the MCM turned on, this gives the remaining CPU 2x the A L2 cache and 8x the L3 cache. Having 128 MB of L3 cache for 1 CPU ? has a pretty significant impact on SPECint and SPECfp because a = reasonable % of the indevidual benchmarks either run entirely 6 in cache or have their resident set entirely in cache.  @ This isn't against the SPEC rules but it makes single CPU Power4: benchmarks largely invalid if you are thinking about using% more than 1 CPU in your final system.      Regards  Andrew Harrison    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:22:53 -0500 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> , Subject: Re: HP World (was HP to drop hpux?)' Message-ID: <3F05A9DD.DC1D5670@fsi.net>    Bill Todd wrote: > 9 > "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> wrote in message % > news:3F037CE5.A0ACFE62@istop.com...  >  > ...  > N > > Again, best example of the VMS marketplace. Digital, Compaq and now HP areN > > refusing to say bad things about VMS' competitors and look at where VMS is > at
 > > today. > L > I suspect that a great many people here couldn't care less whether HP saidL > bad things about VMS's competition:  they'd likely be deliriously happy ifJ > HP would just start saying good things about VMS in some conspicuous and > on-going manner.   A-MEN!   --   David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:37:40 -0500 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> , Subject: Re: HP World (was HP to drop hpux?)' Message-ID: <3F05AD54.9D3953A5@fsi.net>    Keith Parris wrote:  > ] > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> wrote in message news:<3F037CE5.A0ACFE62@istop.com>... M > > Linux could do to HP-=UX and AIX and possibly Solaris what NT did to VMS.  > E > At one point not so long ago, I was thoroughly convinced that Linux B > meant the death of all proprietary UNIXes.  Now I think that was > probably naive.   F ...or at least pre-mature, and perhaps "ALL" was inappropriate. (Dunno= why we find so many "either-or" thoughts like that; dunno why 0 co-existence is far from the common paradigm...)  G If that had been true, then *BSD should have killed off commercial UN*X 2 ages ago. Yet, Sun, Tru64, UNIXware, etc. live on.  H > There is a lot of added value in each of the proprietary UNIX systems,B > and very little incentive for their owners to move that advanced, > technology into Linux and open-source it.   C True, but we're still stuck in that "either-or" paradigm. How 'bout D commercial software on an OpenSource platform? Linux, *BSD, etc. ...  7 ...or is that too much for the market to chew just yet?    > All their competitors would E > benefit from their investment.  Just look at how upset SCO is right E > now about the possibility of any Unix intellectual property or code  > having moved into Linux.  H However, there is some question as to whether SCO actually has the legalA right to to do so. I was reading an article - don't recall where, G probably InfoWorld Daily update - which indicated that SCO does not own C the patents it is presuming to defend, or owns some but not others.   8 > Can you see HP giving TruClusters code away to Linux?   1 How 'bout porting it, but *NOT* "giving it away"?   . Sorry, I forgot: Marketing is not their forte.  
 > (Compaq did F > give away the NonStop Clusters for Unixware code, but I suspect thatB > was probably only because it lost out in internal competition toG > TruClusters.  But that's speculation on my part; I wasn't working for  > Compaq when that happened.)  > G > HP sells ServiceGuard on Linux, but the ServiceGuard code is not open F > source  (just like Oracle runs on Linux but that doesn't make Oracle > open-source.)    Good examples of my point.  > > I now have serious doubts as to whether unfunded, spare-timeD > enthusiasts can take Linux beyond where funded companies with paidD > software engineers (and patent attorneys) can take the proprietary' > UNIXes.  How can Linux ever catch up?   9 How 'bout commercial software on an OpenSource platform?    E My take on the opensource thing is that as well as providing low-cost H entry into a product, it also provides that if the user doesn't like theE product's features, or needs features the vendor does not offer, then - user can hack up his own additional features.   H I firmly believe that a commercial vendor who is sufficiently responsiveA to the consumer can still survive, even in the face of opensource  competition.  = > I suspect Linux will simply continue to provide a low-cost, . > lower-capability entry point for Unix users.  A ...as well as eventually achieving greater acceptance and greater 1 penetration into the commercial computing market.    --   David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------   Date: 4 Jul 2003 01:54:17 -0700 ) From: jbrankin@ntlworld.com (Jim Brankin)  Subject: Re: iSCSI anyone?< Message-ID: <863f19d6.0307040054.536506e@posting.google.com>   "John Gemignani, Jr." <jon-nope@thiswontworkossc.net> wrote in message news:<6lZMa.26115$Jw6.9846123@news1.news.adelphia.net>...J > Is there anyone interested in running software-based iSCSI client and/orJ > server on OpenVMS?  I have some rather advanced work in this area and amL > seeking suggestions and needs on the way to productization.  In fact, when. > ready, I could use a few test sites as well. >  > -John   	 Hi John,    E    I can see that there is a market for a software based solution but D I would have thought it was small. Surely HP must eventually produceC iSCSI products based on one of the host-based adapters. Several are F mentioned in the FAQ at http://technomagesinc.com/iscsi_faq.html. WhenD that happens, they will take the serious users of iSCSI and you will: be left with the folk who are using it on an ah-hoc basis.  D    I think iSCSI is going to be an important technology. It seems toC offer the speed of fibre channel (almost) with the price of network ? attached storage (almost). But I do think the HBA approach will  prevail.   - Jim   M -----------------------------------------------------------------------------   $                         Jim Brankin   0                Brankin at nildram dot co dot uk   ,                    Strictly Personal Opinion    M -----------------------------------------------------------------------------    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 15:50:16 +0100 O From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>  Subject: Re: iSCSI anyone?0 Message-ID: <be4479$lnv$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Jim Brankin wrote: > "John Gemignani, Jr." <jon-nope@thiswontworkossc.net> wrote in message news:<6lZMa.26115$Jw6.9846123@news1.news.adelphia.net>... > J >>Is there anyone interested in running software-based iSCSI client and/orJ >>server on OpenVMS?  I have some rather advanced work in this area and amL >>seeking suggestions and needs on the way to productization.  In fact, when. >>ready, I could use a few test sites as well. >> >>-John  >  >  > Hi John,   > G >    I can see that there is a market for a software based solution but F > I would have thought it was small. Surely HP must eventually produceE > iSCSI products based on one of the host-based adapters. Several are H > mentioned in the FAQ at http://technomagesinc.com/iscsi_faq.html. WhenF > that happens, they will take the serious users of iSCSI and you will< > be left with the folk who are using it on an ah-hoc basis. >   = You really nead a Gigabit card that supports TOE for iSCSI to : be performant otherwise the stack ends up being to much of a performance drag.    regards  Andrew Harrison F >    I think iSCSI is going to be an important technology. It seems toE > offer the speed of fibre channel (almost) with the price of network A > attached storage (almost). But I do think the HBA approach will 
 > prevail. >  > - Jim  > O > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------  > & >                         Jim Brankin  > 2 >                Brankin at nildram dot co dot uk  > . >                    Strictly Personal Opinion >  > O > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 16:37:54 GMT ; From: "John Gemignani, Jr." <jon-nope@thiswontworkossc.net>  Subject: Re: iSCSI anyone?> Message-ID: <C3iNa.27014$Jw6.10211886@news1.news.adelphia.net>  K "Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy" <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> ; wrote in message news:be4479$lnv$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com...  > Jim Brankin wrote:J > > "John Gemignani, Jr." <jon-nope@thiswontworkossc.net> wrote in message9 news:<6lZMa.26115$Jw6.9846123@news1.news.adelphia.net>...  > > L > >>Is there anyone interested in running software-based iSCSI client and/orL > >>server on OpenVMS?  I have some rather advanced work in this area and amI > >>seeking suggestions and needs on the way to productization.  In fact,  when0 > >>ready, I could use a few test sites as well. > >>	 > >>-John  > >  > >  > > Hi John, > > I > >    I can see that there is a market for a software based solution but H > > I would have thought it was small. Surely HP must eventually produceG > > iSCSI products based on one of the host-based adapters. Several are J > > mentioned in the FAQ at http://technomagesinc.com/iscsi_faq.html. WhenH > > that happens, they will take the serious users of iSCSI and you will> > > be left with the folk who are using it on an ah-hoc basis. > >  >        Couple of points: L         The protocol is still emerging, and purchasing a card soon may yield
 headaches.I         For redundency you may have to purchase additional cards (akin to  redundant NICs) I         if a problem should arise.  I also don't believe that those cards  will be cheap, but if G         you have the dough for a lot of storage, you'll have it for the  adapters.  But then, if F         you have the dough for your big servers, what about your other systems?  K         You are also assuming that the iSCSI targets are not going to be on  any of your L         servers.  For those with VAXes yet, you are assuming that someone is	 making an          adapter for them.   K         You forget that most of Windows is used on an ad-hoc basis.  VMS is  just oneH         version of the product.  I am confident that my phone will ring.  ? > You really nead a Gigabit card that supports TOE for iSCSI to < > be performant otherwise the stack ends up being to much of > a performance drag.   %     Is this measured, or theoretical?   @         I assume that's theoretical.  Here are the measurements:  G         With an AS255 4/300 reading a disk (COPY) from an XP1000 with a  6/667, I was able toH         transfer about 1.2MBYTES/second.  Using the same 6/667 writing a disk on an ES40 6/1000G         (BACKUP/IMAGE/INIT) I get 2.3 MBYTES/second.  In both cases the  systems certainly DOG         NOT run out of CPU time.  The EV6's spend only a few percentage  points on the interrupt stack L         (the ES40 is about 2-3%, which REALLY astonished me).  The AS255 has 10Mbit through aH         10/100 switch to the XP1000 with 100Mbit.  The XP's 100MBit goes through switches and-         eventually through fiber to the ES40.   J         On an AS1200 with 2x5/533's, using localhost (client and server on the same machine), IH         am transferring 6.2 MBytes/second at about 62% CPU utilitzation. The same local copy D         gives 6.8MBytes/second.  Keep in mind that with the loopback interface there is more dataE         copying going on, and the host has both the client and server  overhead on it.   J         These tests allow unsolicited data to be transferred up to 64K-512 bytes per PDU, and with L         a single connection.  Multiple connections will be added if enabled.  J         The above is only caching on the client side (XQP and XFC/VCC).  I am working on addingC         caching to the server right now to get a feel for how write  performance would differ.   C         By the way, does MSCP require a gigabit card with TOE to be  performant?  I think you'll get &         a lot of feedback on that one.   -Thank you both for your input.    >    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 06:02:53 GMT 3 From: wallacethinmintr@eircom.net (Russell Wallace) I Subject: Re: More than VMS is required, but VMS is a great starting point 0 Message-ID: <3f051846.892963013@news.eircom.net>  F On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 16:33:57 GMT, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote:  F >A California law that takes effect July 1 will force companies insideF >and outside the state to do what they historically have been loath to9 >do: disclose embarrassing information-security breaches.   D I'm no lawyer, so perhaps I'm missing something obvious, but how can? the California legislature exert force on companies that aren't  located in California?   --   "Sore wa himitsu desu."  To reply by email, remove  the small snack from address. ! http://www.esatclear.ie/~rwallace    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 17:32:01 +1000 1 From: Paddy O'Brien <paddy.o'brien@tg.nsw.gov.au> I Subject: Re: More than VMS is required, but VMS is a great starting point * Message-ID: <3F052D71.70009@tg.nsw.gov.au>   Russell Wallace wrote:H > On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 16:33:57 GMT, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote: >  > G >>A California law that takes effect July 1 will force companies inside G >>and outside the state to do what they historically have been loath to : >>do: disclose embarrassing information-security breaches. >  > F > I'm no lawyer, so perhaps I'm missing something obvious, but how canA > the California legislature exert force on companies that aren't  > located in California? > D Well, neither am I.  But I would take a guess that it's because the   companies are trading within CA.   Regards, Paddy      G ***********************************************************************   C "This electronic message and any attachments may contain privileged > and confidential information intended only for the use of the B addressees named above.  If you are not the intended recipient of C this email, please delete the message and any attachment and advise B the sender.  You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, 7 distribution, reproduction of this email is prohibited.   A If you have received the email in error, please notify TransGrid 0A immediately.  Any views expressed in this email are those of the r= individual sender except where the sender expressly and with eC authority states them to be the views of TransGrid.  TransGrid uses.> virus scanning software but excludes any liability for viruses contained in any attachment.  < Please note the email address for TransGrid personnel is now$ firstname.lastname@transgrid.com.au"  G ***********************************************************************e   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 13:29:50 GMT # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> I Subject: Re: More than VMS is required, but VMS is a great starting pointrH Message-ID: <ijfNa.54167$a51.31853@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  @ "Russell Wallace" <wallacethinmintr@eircom.net> wrote in message* news:3f051846.892963013@news.eircom.net...A > On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 16:33:57 GMT, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>n wrote: >iA > >A California law that takes effect July 1 will force companiesF insideE > >and outside the state to do what they historically have been loatha to; > >do: disclose embarrassing information-security breaches.p >MF > I'm no lawyer, so perhaps I'm missing something obvious, but how canA > the California legislature exert force on companies that aren'te > located in California?    > ...threats, coercion, seizures, convictions in courts that are; followed by attempts to have the judgments imposed in othernD jurisdictions.... in other words, the usual range of options open to governments....i    F But whether its California or some other state, or another nation such@ as Holland or Australia, the fact remains that VMS-based systems: provide a great starting point.....and a great Advertising9 premise.....there's that nasty advertising word again....C   Hello HP???i   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 12:12:50 -0500i1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>nI Subject: Re: More than VMS is required, but VMS is a great starting pointr' Message-ID: <3F05B592.DF4CD831@fsi.net>p   John Smith wrote:u > B > "Russell Wallace" <wallacethinmintr@eircom.net> wrote in message, > news:3f051846.892963013@news.eircom.net...C > > On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 16:33:57 GMT, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>u > wrote: > >vC > > >A California law that takes effect July 1 will force companiesH > insideG > > >and outside the state to do what they historically have been loathM > to= > > >do: disclose embarrassing information-security breaches.e > >nH > > I'm no lawyer, so perhaps I'm missing something obvious, but how canC > > the California legislature exert force on companies that aren'ti > > located in California? > @ > ...threats, coercion, seizures, convictions in courts that are= > followed by attempts to have the judgments imposed in other F > jurisdictions.... in other words, the usual range of options open to > governments....c > H > But whether its California or some other state, or another nation suchB > as Holland or Australia, the fact remains that VMS-based systems< > provide a great starting point.....and a great Advertising; > premise.....there's that nasty advertising word again....- > 
 > Hello HP???-  H Please leave a message after the tone - we'll ignore you later, at *OUR* convenience, not yours.m   -- t David J. Dachterax dba DJE Systemss http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/1   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 06:38:16 GMTn3 From: wallacethinmintr@eircom.net (Russell Wallace)s' Subject: Re: New OpenVMS-to-Itanium FAQ,0 Message-ID: <3f0520bf.895132384@news.eircom.net>  @ On Wed, 2 Jul 2003 08:33:36 -0700, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> wrote:   >How about ON conditions   What are those?a  ! >and lexical scoping for startersc   C++ has lexical scoping.   -- e "Sore wa himitsu desu."S To reply by email, removep the small snack from address.u! http://www.esatclear.ie/~rwallacee   ------------------------------   Date: 4 Jul 2003 06:27:07 -0500 - From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)n' Subject: Re: New OpenVMS-to-Itanium FAQ 3 Message-ID: <PTQMSYMxaAVy@eisner.encompasserve.org>l  f In article <3f0520bf.895132384@news.eircom.net>, wallacethinmintr@eircom.net (Russell Wallace) writes:B > On Wed, 2 Jul 2003 08:33:36 -0700, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> > wrote: >  >>How about ON conditions  >  > What are those?,  D Presumably they are fully understood by whoever asserted the ease of translating PL/I to C.   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 12:59:26 GMTt3 From: wallacethinmintr@eircom.net (Russell Wallace)o' Subject: Re: New OpenVMS-to-Itanium FAQl0 Message-ID: <3f057988.917864570@news.eircom.net>  E On 4 Jul 2003 06:27:07 -0500, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen). wrote:  g >In article <3f0520bf.895132384@news.eircom.net>, wallacethinmintr@eircom.net (Russell Wallace) writes:.C >> On Wed, 2 Jul 2003 08:33:36 -0700, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>2	 >> wrote:8 >> 0 >>>How about ON conditions >> i >> What are those? >eE >Presumably they are fully understood by whoever asserted the ease ofo >translating PL/I to C.t  C Presumably so, but they aren't fully understood by me, which is whynD I'm asking :) (My purpose here isn't to assert or refute the ease ofB translating PL/1 to C - I don't care what people choose to do withE their PL/1 code - it's curiosity about the features of what's said toAD have been in its day the world's premier general purpose programming
 language.)   --   "Sore wa himitsu desu."S To reply by email, remover the small snack from address.k! http://www.esatclear.ie/~rwallace    ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 07:34:12 -0700# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>e' Subject: RE: New OpenVMS-to-Itanium FAQ39 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIOEHNHIAA.tom@kednos.com>e   >-----Original Message----- ; >From: Russell Wallace [mailto:wallacethinmintr@eircom.net]e$ >Sent: Friday, July 04, 2003 5:59 AM >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com( >Subject: Re: New OpenVMS-to-Itanium FAQ >n >uF >On 4 Jul 2003 06:27:07 -0500, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) >wrote:u >r2 >>In article <3f0520bf.895132384@news.eircom.net>,6 >wallacethinmintr@eircom.net (Russell Wallace) writes:D >>> On Wed, 2 Jul 2003 08:33:36 -0700, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>
 >>> wrote: >>>h >>>>How about ON conditionse >>>  >>> What are those?g >>F >>Presumably they are fully understood by whoever asserted the ease of >>translating PL/I to C. >oD >Presumably so, but they aren't fully understood by me, which is whyE >I'm asking :) (My purpose here isn't to assert or refute the ease ofdC >translating PL/1 to C - I don't care what people choose to do with F >their PL/1 code - it's curiosity about the features of what's said toE >have been in its day the world's premier general purpose programmingI >language.)n  G ON conditions provide for the ability to write self correcting programsaF by provide specific error handlers for signals otherwise caught by the systemI or for programmeer generated signals.  These error handlers may reside ine any B scope and once a signal is caught stack frames are popped until an appropriatepH handler is found, and after processing control returns to the point from whichCI it all started.  If no handlers found then system defaults.  Read more in  Chap 8I of the reference manual which you may freely download from www.kednos.comr  L Other features which will cause problems are strong typing with well-definedK conversion rules.  Fixed Decimal and Float Decimal (No, you can't use Float  binary),L picture data types, char string handling, powerful builtin functions, record
 I/O, ISAM,...7  A People have been trying for more than 20 years to write PL/I to Cn translatorshG and no one has succeded except us.  C++ may be able to do it if you are  willingWB to create new class libraries, but then what you have circuitously accomplished$ is to have built a PL/I interpreter.  J Finally, whatever code you end up with, assuming for sake of argument that youTH were actually successful in this endeavour, would not be useful to human beingsL and any changes to the underlying code would have to be done in PL/I anyway!  K How are you going to debug the code?  If you don't have the skills to learnf PL/IC and need to have the code in C or C++ then the only way to go is tod
 reenginer thee0 code starting with a fresh set of specifications     >e >--  >"Sore wa himitsu desu." >To reply by email, remove >the small snack from address." >http://www.esatclear.ie/~rwallace >  >---' >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.w; >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).uA >Version: 6.0.489 / Virus Database: 288 - Release Date: 6/10/2003  >t --- & Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.489 / Virus Database: 288 - Release Date: 6/10/2003   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 10:35:18 +0200c9 From: Jan-Erik =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=F6derholm?= <aaa@aaa.com>l/ Subject: Re: OpenVMS FAQ and FAQ Website Errataa' Message-ID: <3F053C46.C4F66A04@aaa.com>t  D If you with "DEC doc style", meen anything written using DECdocument< and the "manual" docstyle, then yes. I'm using that setup to( write all kinds of manuals and guides...= Got a "hobbyist price" from Touch on a complet DECdoc distro.p  	 Jan-Erik.o   Carl Perkins wrote:e > B > Hey, a DEC documentation style FAQ! (Or should it be called "VMSC > documentation style"? Is there anything else that uses this stylet > anymore?)) > 	 > Spiffy.o > 
 > --- Carl   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 10:41:51 +0100a* From: Nic Clews <sendspamhere@[127.0.0.1]>/ Subject: Re: OpenVMS FAQ and FAQ Website Errata ' Message-ID: <be3iaf$o3f$1@lore.csc.com>r   Carl Perkins wrote:0 >  > B > Hey, a DEC documentation style FAQ! (Or should it be called "VMSC > documentation style"? Is there anything else that uses this style  > anymore?)s  A Documentation delivered with our in-house toolset also uses this.o  F I also know one of our clients that develop a software package for VMS use it.o   --  ? Regards, Nic Clews a.k.a. Mr. CP Charges, CSC Computer Sciencesh nclews at csc dot com    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 12:35:11 +0200i$ From: Michael Unger <unger@decus.de>/ Subject: Re: OpenVMS FAQ and FAQ Website Errata 4 Message-ID: <be3lcd$s0r6$1@ID-152801.news.dfncis.de>  ) On 03-Jul-2003 19:27, Hoff Hoffman wrote:o  M >   Text, Postscript, Bookreader, HTML, and related formats and the aggregatemK >   FAQ zip archive for the June 2003 edition of the OpenVMS FAQ should all  >   be available at the: >  > [...]4  8 What's the purpose of the "vmsfaq.zip" file _inside_ the= "vmsfaq200307.zip" file? It just contains the PostScript filewC "vmsfaq.ps" which itself is already included in "vmsfaq200307.zip".e   Michaelc   -- h  @ Please do *not* send "Security Patch Notifications" or "SecurityA Updates"; this system isn't running a Micro$oft operating system. = And don't annoy me <mailto:postmaster@[127.0.0.1]> please ;-)i   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 12:03:50 -0500a1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>mY Subject: Re: OpenVMS Pearl - OpenVMS V8.0, first release on Itanium, ships today!!! todaya' Message-ID: <3F05B376.EA69D322@fsi.net>t   Keith Parris wrote:  > b > "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message news:<3F00F7F9.3B43DF13@fsi.net>...5 > > Any chance this might be available for hobbyists?_ > >_# > > Low-cost (less than $50US) CDs?o > E > Not quite at the price level you requested, but close: How about anlC > Early Adopter Kit on CD for US$75?  (Stay tuned for a part number- > soon.)  E WOW!!! Major breakthrough! Sure hope they don't (read: are not forcedu8 to) retreat back into their non-affordable comfort zone!  F Hey, I'd even consider living without cross-compilers and such just toD get a look at the new stuff. Of course, I'd have to shell out for an IA64 box to run it on...   -- @ David J. DachteraC dba DJE Systemse http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 10:17:26 +0100gO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>eY Subject: Re: OpenVMS, and Itanium2 and Itanium2 6M (was: Re: HP Webcast this morning on No0 Message-ID: <be3gn7$ff2$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Rick Jones wrote:d& > Hoff Hoffman <hoff@hp.nospam> wrote: > ? >>  Various of the HP zx2000 and zx6000 series workstations use F >>  McKinley or Madison, as do various of the rx-series servers -- theD >>  rx2600 and rx5670 and the Integrity Superdome series are largelyD >>  (entirely?) now using the new Madison-based Itanium2 processors. >  > E > That is correct. "Madison" - what marketing folks will/have to calldD > "Itanium2 6M" and what not - is the first IPF CPU to be shipped in > Superdome systems. >   > However when Superdomes were announced they were introduced as= being Itanium ready and at the time everyone expected that to$
 be Merced.  ; HP then found that Merced was slower than the current HP-PAtA processor and said they were canning Merced for Domes and waiting%
 for Mckinley.   < Mckinley came along and there were no sightings of Mckinleys in Domes that you could buy.  A The biggest laugh of all if you don't work for HP is the HP N4000e< announced as being IA-64 ready but discontinued before IA-64
 was ready.   Regards  Andrew Harrison    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:06:24 +0100r* From: Nic Clews <sendspamhere@[127.0.0.1]>Y Subject: Re: OpenVMS, and Itanium2 and Itanium2 6M (was: Re: HP Webcast thismorning on Nes' Message-ID: <be3joh$o79$1@lore.csc.com>t  ( Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy wrote: >    > @ > However when Superdomes were announced they were introduced as? > being Itanium ready and at the time everyone expected that to  > be Merced. > = > HP then found that Merced was slower than the current HP-PA C > processor and said they were canning Merced for Domes and waitingr > for Mckinley.l > > > Mckinley came along and there were no sightings of Mckinleys > in Domes that you could buy. > C > The biggest laugh of all if you don't work for HP is the HP N4000r> > announced as being IA-64 ready but discontinued before IA-64 > was ready.  H But the point is, you can just pull out the old chip and slot in the new one.  5 You *do not* have to replace the motherboard, IO, ...e  & Compare that with going EV68 to EV7...  H You can even replace the single CPU 'carrier' with a twin CPU carrier (4 in the space of 2).S  H This is an architecture, it is not about a chip for today, or yesterday.@ It scores in two major areas for us as a "cpu service" provider,F floorspace CPU density, and investment protection in regards to future= upgrades. Sadly Alpha's never been really great in this area.e   -- c? Regards, Nic Clews a.k.a. Mr. CP Charges, CSC Computer Sciences  nclews at csc dot como   ------------------------------   Date: 4 Jul 2003 02:56:36 -0700a2 From: lex.beekman@staatsloterij.com (shawn taylor)$ Subject: powerterm and the euro sign= Message-ID: <9977b2f4.0307040156.2c8bb568@posting.google.com>m  C Is there anybody out there who can explain me how i can produce thet euro-sign in PowerTerm 525 ?.y Thanks.s   ------------------------------   Date: 4 Jul 2003 04:48:46 -0700r, From: shevchenko@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de (Sheva)- Subject: Q on TS10 emulator: only TEXT BASED? = Message-ID: <adeef81b.0307040348.7a52f998@posting.google.com>h  H > The TS10 vax emulator uses a virtual Ethernet solution (TUN/TAP) that J > allows the host box to hold network conversations with the emulated VAX   % In the description for TS10 they say: ! Environment: Console (Text Based)l  ? Does that mean that I cannot use X-WINDOWS applications on thatlC emulated VAX, but only those programs which give the text output to  the console?  A Or had someone managed to use TS10-emulated VAX with DECWINDOWS ?M   Thanks!y     > - E > though, without tcpip routing, does not allow connections to other   > machines on the LAN. > H > TS10 disk images are compatable with SIMH, so you can use you current J > emulated vax installation - though you may have to register a different  >  > VAX/VMS licence PAK. >  >  > 8 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > J > On 04/07/03, 01:25:22, "Stanley F. Quayle" <stan@stanq.com> wrote regard > ing G > Re: Q: SIMH/VAX on Linux: XWindows on the same host without network?:  >  > ( > > On 3 Jul 2003 at 15:46, Sheva wrote:I > > > My PC at work has a network card, and I can connect to this HOST PC1J > > > running SIMH/VAX FROM ANOTHER COMPUTER (!) running Windows (:(() and >  h< > > > export graphical displays via TCP/IP to that computer.J > > > BUT somehow I am not able to export Graphics to the same Linux-PC on >     > > > which SIMH/VAX is running. >  'F > > You're using only network interface, and having SIMH share it with > > Windows, right?i >   H > > The interface can't hear the message it's sending, so there can't be/ > > any communication between SIMH and Windows.  >  pE > > Get a second network card, and set up SIMH to use that one.  Thati > > should get it. >  > J > > > And also will the same work under Linux, having no network card at a >  llrF > > > (like my PC at home)? How one can do this? Or one really needs a; > > > physical network card, even if there is no network???M >   G > > You're probably in the same boat here.  When I run CHARON-VAX on my6H > > laptop, and aren't really connected to a network, I use a cross-overH > > cable between the two network interfaces so I can telnet from one to > > another. >  iH > > You might be able to configure SIMH to use the "lo" loopback device. > > Good luck... >  >  >  > > --Stan Quayle  > > Quayle Consulting Inc. >  a > > ----------G > > Stanley F. Quayle, P.E. N8SQ  +1 614-868-1363  Fax: +1 614 868-1671 5 > > 8572 North Spring Ct. NW, Pickerington, OH  43147iA > > Preferred address:  stan@stanq.com       http://www.stanq.com    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:57:05 GMT4L From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr")1 Subject: Re: Q on TS10 emulator: only TEXT BASED?o6 Message-ID: <00A22571.2D73E7B9@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  l In article <adeef81b.0307040348.7a52f998@posting.google.com>, shevchenko@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de (Sheva) writes:I >> The TS10 vax emulator uses a virtual Ethernet solution (TUN/TAP) that  K >> allows the host box to hold network conversations with the emulated VAX 0 >E& >In the description for TS10 they say:" >Environment: Console (Text Based) >e@ >Does that mean that I cannot use X-WINDOWS applications on thatD >emulated VAX, but only those programs which give the text output to
 >the console?t >gB >Or had someone managed to use TS10-emulated VAX with DECWINDOWS ?  J I haven't used TS10 at all, but I'm aware that you can make a VAX or AlphaE that doesn't have a graphics card at all run DECwindows software withgG displays somewhere else.  If the emulated VAX thinks it has an EthernetpF card, it should be able to pop open DECterms anywhere else you want to allow it to.   -- Alan  -- -O ===============================================================================d0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUM  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056 M  Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park CA   94025gO ===============================================================================d   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:50:52 -0500 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>  Subject: Re: Running VMS off CD ' Message-ID: <3F05B06C.D803C569@fsi.net>    "Doc.Cypher" wrote:t > [snip]I > On a slightly related note, does anyone know of a package (available touM > Hobbyists) which gives similar functionality to the *ix package "tripwire"?   > Rather depends on what "tripwire" is and what it does. Care to
 elucidate?   -- e David J. Dachteraw dba DJE Systems. http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/t   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:56:13 -0500n1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>  Subject: Re: Running VMS off CD ' Message-ID: <3F05B1AD.422E9FBE@fsi.net>f  
 Island wrote:  > , > You could always use a zip drive/jaz drive > & > You can write lock those can't you ? >  > They are pretty quick too !s >  > DT  E Jaz drives are notorious undependable, usually a "heat death" relatedi problem.  H Zip drives acquired a bad rep. when the Zip-100s developed the "click of death" syndrome.  < I believe both suffer from the fact that the write-lock is aB "soft-lock"; that is, a characteristic set on the cartridge, not aB hardware feature. The software to set the write-lock and/or "I'm a> really a hard drive" feature I believe is generally limited to WhineBloze.u  D You could go with the Castlewood ORB drive (2.2GB (1.98GBF ODS-2) orG 5.xGB (ODS GBF unknown), also; but, it suffers from the same or similari write-lock limitations.o   -- e David J. Dachterae dba DJE Systemsh http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/e   ------------------------------   Date: 4 Jul 2003 09:46:29 +0100eK From: pmoreau@ath.cena.fr (Patrick MOREAU, CENA Athis, Tel: 01.69.57.68.40)o( Subject: Re: Sign of the demise of Alpha! Message-ID: <tZuN4$dedKbv@sinead>   0 In article <vg9b7kch2874cf@news.supernews.com>, . "David Turner" <dbturner@islandco.com> writes:, > Got an email from a large company (*.bull) > % > Selling 250 x Alpha DS20 systems!!!t > 3 > Does this, perhaps, show the confidence of Compaqe > customers ???H  N Hum, its good news, I'll probably soon replace my old 2100 4/275 by a DS20 ...   Patrick  --O ===============================================================================pN pmoreau@ath.cena.fr  (CENA)      ______      ___   _          (Patrick MOREAU)4 moreau_p@decus.fr (DECUS)       / /   /     / /|  /|J CENA/Athis-Mons FRANCE         / /___/     / / | / |   __   __   __   __  N BP 205                        / /         / /  |/  |  |  | |__| |__  |__| |  |N 94542 ORLY AEROGARE CEDEX    / /   ::    / /       |  |__| | \  |__  |  | |__|N http://www.ath.cena.fr/~pmoreau/            http://www.multimania.com/pmoreau/O ===============================================================================o   ------------------------------  * Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 10:56:13 +0000 (UTC)+ From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk (David Webb)A( Subject: Re: Sign of the demise of Alpha+ Message-ID: <be3mgd$fv0$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>-  V In article <3F04E93A.B24BD79B@istop.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> writes: >Robert Deininger wrote:8 >> >I assume the fella is replacing them with P4 systems >>  M >> Or maybe DS25 or ES47 systems.  DS20 is well into middle age by now.  It's64 >> not surprising that a company would be upgrading. >tH >If the person were upgrading a fleet of 250 DS20s, wouldn't such a dealO >include negotiation with HP/Compaq to retake those units ? (at which point the I >transaction for 250 old DS20s would be between HP/Compaq and Island, not,5 >between the <former> customers and Island, correct ?  >JN >Would upgrading 250 units normally get enough of HP's attention to warrant HPO >giving a deal to retake the older units ? Or would the customer be expected tod >get rid of the units himself ?e  J As they say this depends. There are sometimes really silly reasons why youL can't do a trade in. For instance in the Education market Compaq changed theN rules so that you could either get a trade in or an education discount but notM both. The Educational discount on a new system is often better than the trade K in Compaq would give you so thats what people would go for. They would thentJ attempt to sell the old systems to whoever would give them the best price.    
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:11:10 -0400o2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)( Subject: Re: Sign of the demise of AlphaL Message-ID: <rdeininger-0407031111100001@user-105n8km.dialup.mindspring.com>  > In article <vg9p0kh8obfcc0@news.supernews.com>, "David Turner" <dbturner@islandco.com> wrote:  
 >Not my points >n2 >Then point is, they had no interest in trading up$ >Wanted "rid" of their Alpha systems  J Their loss, your gain.  You probably got the systems for a good price, andD can arrange for their re-deployment with a fair profit for yourself.   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 12:07:32 -0400, From: "David Turner" <dbturner@islandco.com>( Subject: Re: Sign of the demise of Alpha/ Message-ID: <vgb9r53u0i3kc1@news.supernews.com>d   Point is we didn't buy them.L 250 Systems here, plus 430 DS10L's were getting in the end of July/BeginningI August - for a small company like us, it's a big expense, and a hell of au risk !  ? Unless anyone wants to buy say 250 DS20's for $2200 a pop ??!?!   + Call me if anyone out there wants that many  We won't buy them on spec.   DT   ------------------------------   Date: 4 Jul 2003 09:17:11 -0700t- From: contracer11@uol.com.br (Shiva MahaDeva)S/ Subject: StorageWorks RAID Software for OpenVMS = Message-ID: <ddf392ea.0307040817.5b7e2450@posting.google.com>a   Where can I get this software ? & StorageWorks RAID Software for OpenVMS Thanks in advance...   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 09:19:01 -0700# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> 3 Subject: RE: StorageWorks RAID Software for OpenVMS 9 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIGEIBHIAA.tom@kednos.com>t  = Type, StorageWorks RAID Software for OpenVMS, into google and  you will be pointed to a site.   >-----Original Message------5 >From: Shiva MahaDeva [mailto:contracer11@uol.com.br]n$ >Sent: Friday, July 04, 2003 9:17 AM >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com0 >Subject: StorageWorks RAID Software for OpenVMS >  >   >Where can I get this software ?' >StorageWorks RAID Software for OpenVMS- >Thanks in advance...- >- >---' >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. ; >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). A >Version: 6.0.489 / Virus Database: 288 - Release Date: 6/10/2003@ >s ---s& Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.489 / Virus Database: 288 - Release Date: 6/10/2003   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2003 00:42:13 +1000: From: "David McKenzie" <david.mckenzie@paradigm-shift.biz>S Subject: Re: Tri-architecture cluster demonstrated at DECUS Ottawa Technical UpdatecC Message-ID: <3f0592ef$0$59950$c30e37c6@lon-reader.news.telstra.net>k  F It seems to me that this may be the time to address the whole issue ofL supported and unsupported. Without wishing to get to "legal" this has alwaysC been a "nice" concept, in the English sense rather than a real one.t  J When there was a "Digital" and it was really competing for market share itK was more than content to stretch for market share. Nowadays it appears thatdA people are obsessed by "contract" in the formal sense rather thantI innovation. This is a debate that leads to lawyers splitting hairs rather - than technicians dealing with practicalities.o  K Why isn't it possible to get back to a system where all players are honest, L and there is that which is supported, i.e. no option but for HP to provide aJ solution, and that which is reasonable, "should work, negligence accepted,J but stupidity ignored", and " your on your own mate, it might work, but it might not".s  J There was a time where, and I mean this as a legal term, the intent to actH reasonablely, and accept reasonable risk was a commercial reality rather6 than a legal excuse to suck the hell out of inovation.  ' Anyway, maybe this is too off the topic      David Mckenzie      B "David Beatty" <David.Beatty@qwertysasasdfgh.com> wrote in message, news:qo8AP2WLKLUgDuM3PuLSdEwRjGz6@4ax.com... > ? >     Hmmm ... I wonder if that means HP will decide to support 6 > VAX and Itanium in the same cluster, since it was my5 > understanding that they had not planned to do that.e >o > David R. Beattyn >hD > On 30 Jun 2003 11:19:38 -0700, keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith > Parris) wrote: > I > >A VMS cluster with VAX, Alpha, and Itanium systems was demonstrated atc% > >the DECUS Ottawa Technical Update.e > >c5 > >View of Cluster from system ID 58693  node: CTHX03t > >23-JUN-2003 21:18:32 C > >+----------------------------------------------------+---------+/C > >|                       SYSTEMS                      | MEMBERS |hC > >+--------+--------------------------------+----------+---------+/C > >|  NODE  |             HW_TYPE            | SOFTWARE |  STATUS | C > >+--------+--------------------------------+----------+---------+eC > >| CTHX03 | AlphaServer ES40               | VMS V7.3 | MEMBER  |3C > >| CTHOPS | VAXstation 4000-60             | VMS V7.3 | MEMBER  | C > >| I64CDN | HP rx2600                      | VMS X9TM | MEMBER  | C > >+--------+--------------------------------+----------+---------+  >    ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 09:03:17 -0700# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>sY Subject: RE: Tri-architecture cluster demonstrated at DECUS Ottawa Technical Update Update9 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIGEIAHIAA.tom@kednos.com>n  A Is it possible for a VMS image to be a member of two separate ands% distinct clusters?  A cluster bridge?o   >-----Original Message-----l2 >From: Nic Clews [mailto:sendspamhere@[127.0.0.1]]$ >Sent: Friday, July 04, 2003 8:45 AM >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.ComC >Subject: Re: Tri-architecture cluster demonstrated at DECUS Ottawaa >Technical Update Update Update  >/ >) >David McKenzie wrote: >>I >> It seems to me that this may be the time to address the whole issue ofr? >> supported and unsupported. Without wishing to get to "legal"i >this has alwaysF >> been a "nice" concept, in the English sense rather than a real one. >>= >> When there was a "Digital" and it was really competing for- >market share itA >> was more than content to stretch for market share. Nowadays itr
 >appears thatlD >> people are obsessed by "contract" in the formal sense rather thanL >> innovation. This is a debate that leads to lawyers splitting hairs rather0 >> than technicians dealing with practicalities. >>B >> Why isn't it possible to get back to a system where all players >are honest,B >> and there is that which is supported, i.e. no option but for HP
 >to provide alC >> solution, and that which is reasonable, "should work, negligence 
 >accepted,@ >> but stupidity ignored", and " your on your own mate, it might
 >work, but it  >> might not". >>? >> There was a time where, and I mean this as a legal term, ther >intent to actK >> reasonablely, and accept reasonable risk was a commercial reality rather 9 >> than a legal excuse to suck the hell out of inovation.: >>* >> Anyway, maybe this is too off the topic >.H >No not really. I left in all what you said because it is correct and inF >context. At the recent update, Andy Goldstein who came over to the UKI >did talk specifically about clustering with VAX and he said, but gave nocF >public hint to, cluster wide features that could only ever be seen onH >Alpha and Itanium, and the participation of a VAX would prevent the useH >of the features to the non-VAX members. It's more technical than legal.I >While it may be "innovative" to have a tri-architecture cluster, it willb4 >also stifle it, due to the limitations of the same. >oF >The support is a legal issue that is backed up with amount of effort.I >With a given amount of effort, it could be spent perfecting the port andhH >the alignment of Alpha and Itanium, or spent including (supporting) theI >VAX architecture, and limiting the former. I know what I'd vote for, andn; >I don't need a legal contract, it is down to practicality.n >  >--f@ >Regards, Nic Clews a.k.a. Mr. CP Charges, CSC Computer Sciences >nclews at csc dot com >e >---' >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.e; >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). A >Version: 6.0.489 / Virus Database: 288 - Release Date: 6/10/2003r >b --- & Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.489 / Virus Database: 288 - Release Date: 6/10/2003   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 16:45:08 +0100 * From: Nic Clews <sendspamhere@[127.0.0.1]>Y Subject: Re: Tri-architecture cluster demonstrated at DECUS Ottawa Technical Update Updatn' Message-ID: <be47ji$14j$1@lore.csc.com>n   David McKenzie wrote:t > H > It seems to me that this may be the time to address the whole issue ofN > supported and unsupported. Without wishing to get to "legal" this has alwaysE > been a "nice" concept, in the English sense rather than a real one.  > L > When there was a "Digital" and it was really competing for market share itM > was more than content to stretch for market share. Nowadays it appears thathC > people are obsessed by "contract" in the formal sense rather thanrK > innovation. This is a debate that leads to lawyers splitting hairs rathern/ > than technicians dealing with practicalities.c > M > Why isn't it possible to get back to a system where all players are honest,sN > and there is that which is supported, i.e. no option but for HP to provide aL > solution, and that which is reasonable, "should work, negligence accepted,L > but stupidity ignored", and " your on your own mate, it might work, but it
 > might not".C > L > There was a time where, and I mean this as a legal term, the intent to actJ > reasonablely, and accept reasonable risk was a commercial reality rather8 > than a legal excuse to suck the hell out of inovation. > ) > Anyway, maybe this is too off the topic   G No not really. I left in all what you said because it is correct and in E context. At the recent update, Andy Goldstein who came over to the UKaH did talk specifically about clustering with VAX and he said, but gave noE public hint to, cluster wide features that could only ever be seen on G Alpha and Itanium, and the participation of a VAX would prevent the usetG of the features to the non-VAX members. It's more technical than legal.oH While it may be "innovative" to have a tri-architecture cluster, it will3 also stifle it, due to the limitations of the same.t  E The support is a legal issue that is backed up with amount of effort.2H With a given amount of effort, it could be spent perfecting the port andG the alignment of Alpha and Itanium, or spent including (supporting) theiH VAX architecture, and limiting the former. I know what I'd vote for, and: I don't need a legal contract, it is down to practicality.   -- h? Regards, Nic Clews a.k.a. Mr. CP Charges, CSC Computer Sciencesb nclews at csc dot com    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 12:10:38 -0500e1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>rY Subject: Re: Tri-architecture cluster demonstrated at DECUS Ottawa Technical Update Updat ' Message-ID: <3F05B50E.6EEDAF4C@fsi.net>s   Nic Clews wrote: >  > David McKenzie wrote:t > >cJ > > It seems to me that this may be the time to address the whole issue ofP > > supported and unsupported. Without wishing to get to "legal" this has alwaysG > > been a "nice" concept, in the English sense rather than a real one.  > >nN > > When there was a "Digital" and it was really competing for market share itO > > was more than content to stretch for market share. Nowadays it appears thattE > > people are obsessed by "contract" in the formal sense rather thaniM > > innovation. This is a debate that leads to lawyers splitting hairs rather-1 > > than technicians dealing with practicalities.: > > O > > Why isn't it possible to get back to a system where all players are honest,VP > > and there is that which is supported, i.e. no option but for HP to provide aN > > solution, and that which is reasonable, "should work, negligence accepted,N > > but stupidity ignored", and " your on your own mate, it might work, but it > > might not".  > >eN > > There was a time where, and I mean this as a legal term, the intent to actL > > reasonablely, and accept reasonable risk was a commercial reality rather: > > than a legal excuse to suck the hell out of inovation. > >L+ > > Anyway, maybe this is too off the topic- > I > No not really. I left in all what you said because it is correct and ineG > context. At the recent update, Andy Goldstein who came over to the UKlJ > did talk specifically about clustering with VAX and he said, but gave noG > public hint to, cluster wide features that could only ever be seen oneI > Alpha and Itanium, and the participation of a VAX would prevent the use I > of the features to the non-VAX members. It's more technical than legal.uJ > While it may be "innovative" to have a tri-architecture cluster, it will5 > also stifle it, due to the limitations of the same.3  H If one's "vendor evaporated decades ago" VAX application can participateH in a tri-architecture cluster, IMO, only the most creative fiction could describe that as "stifling".  G > The support is a legal issue that is backed up with amount of effort.6J > With a given amount of effort, it could be spent perfecting the port andI > the alignment of Alpha and Itanium, or spent including (supporting) theoJ > VAX architecture, and limiting the former. I know what I'd vote for, and< > I don't need a legal contract, it is down to practicality.  F Practicality, in some cases, tends to be dictated by circumstance, notH by a vendor's willingness (or reluctance) to "go the extra miles" to getE the job done. Some folks whose production VAXes will live on in thoseiG roles for many years to come will consider practicality from a somewhat & different paradigm compared to others.   -- r David J. Dachteran dba DJE Systemsk http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/:   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:46:37 -0500-1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>HO Subject: Re: VAX support (was: Re: OpenVMS Technical Seminar Highlights (some))l& Message-ID: <3F05AF6D.8CCD8B1@fsi.net>   Larry Kilgallen wrote: > y > In article <01KXTINLFCLEAPKEWT@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>, Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com> writes:aK > >> There are many other packages that didn't get rescued and are still onw > >> VAX only. > >a > > Do you have a list?u >  > For languages: > 
 > VAX Scan > Dibol0 > LISP > OPS5 > RPGd > G > > Perhaps HP should port this list to Itanium in order to attract the>H > > customers which are still on VAX only because of software lacking on
 > > ALPHA. > 5 > Third party packages are probably a larger problem.   F I used to know of a local outfit who still did their DIBOL development, on VAX, then would VEST the images to Alpha.  D What is needed is a direct VAX -> I64 migration tool. It could be asD simple a .EXE -> Macro/32 translator that can understand a VAX imageF without user intervention. (HINT! HINT! That banging sound you hear is opportunity knocking!)   --   David J. Dachteral dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------   Date: 4 Jul 2003 00:31:29 -0700e2 From: c.bauer@mc-lindinger.de (Christian J. Bauer)A Subject: Re: VAX Vup Listing not available on HP - where is it ??e< Message-ID: <17b17842.0307032331.9eaeaa3@posting.google.com>  4 brandon@dalsemi.com (John Brandon) wrote in message   O > Why not use the TPS (Trans Per Sec) that is available for both VAX and Alpha?wA > http://h18002.www1.hp.com/alphaserver/performance/perf_tps.html   ) Unfortunately, no TPS for VAXStations :-(F  	 Christiana   ------------------------------   Date: 4 Jul 2003 01:33:24 -0700p+ From: paul_hallam@hotmail.com (Paul Hallam)nA Subject: Re: VAX Vup Listing not available on HP - where is it ??t< Message-ID: <5ed44bd3.0307040033.d4cd01b@posting.google.com>  6 Many many thanks for your quick and helpful responses.   Paul Hallamc   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 17:47:13 +1000d1 From: Paddy O'Brien <paddy.o'brien@tg.nsw.gov.au>wA Subject: Re: VAX Vup Listing not available on HP - where is it ??o, Message-ID: <3F053101.6030801@tg.nsw.gov.au>   Paul Hallam wrote:8 > Many many thanks for your quick and helpful responses. > 
 > Paul Hallame   Paul,a  I As a BTW, I've got a file CALCULATE_VUPS.COM which gave me very accurate tI answers on a variety of VAX machines that I once had.  And seems to give gI a good "VUPS" for our Alpha machines where we have measured CPU times in   our applications.e  F I suspect I got it from here (c.o.v or info-vax) and cut the headings F and footings, so I have lost the attribution since the author did not 5 identify himself within the .COM part of the message.   F If the author is still around (and if it is from here that I got it), H hopefully he can post it to you and hopefully "admit" to authorship.  I & would like to maintain an attribution.   Regards, Paddy      G ***********************************************************************-  C "This electronic message and any attachments may contain privileged-> and confidential information intended only for the use of the B addressees named above.  If you are not the intended recipient of C this email, please delete the message and any attachment and adviseDB the sender.  You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, 7 distribution, reproduction of this email is prohibited.b  A If you have received the email in error, please notify TransGrid  A immediately.  Any views expressed in this email are those of the  = individual sender except where the sender expressly and with hC authority states them to be the views of TransGrid.  TransGrid uses-> virus scanning software but excludes any liability for viruses contained in any attachment.  < Please note the email address for TransGrid personnel is now$ firstname.lastname@transgrid.com.au"  G ***********************************************************************n   ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 12:42:41 +0200 (MET)a9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>tA Subject: Re: VAX Vup Listing not available on HP - where is it ??o; Message-ID: <01KXV0FW92HUAPKEWT@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>V  J > As a BTW, I've got a file CALCULATE_VUPS.COM which gave me very accurateJ > answers on a variety of VAX machines that I once had.  And seems to giveJ > a good "VUPS" for our Alpha machines where we have measured CPU times in > our applications.  > G > I suspect I got it from here (c.o.v or info-vax) and cut the headings G > and footings, so I have lost the attribution since the author did notk8 > identify himself within the .COM part of the message.  > G > If the author is still around (and if it is from here that I got it), I > hopefully he can post it to you and hopefully "admit" to authorship.  I") > would like to maintain an attribution. ?  G There was something like that posted here.  I was quite impressed when  H it gave 7.6 for a VAXstation 3100 M76.  :-)  IIRC, Steve Lionel pointed < out that this is NOT the actual code used to calculate VUPs.  9 I saved the whole post, commenting out the non-code bits:'  4    http://www.astro.multivax.de:8000/phillip/vup.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 10:59:24 -0400 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>A Subject: Re: VAX Vup Listing not available on HP - where is it ?? ) Message-ID: <3F05964B.537A6D9E@istop.com>    "Christian J. Bauer" wrote: C > > http://h18002.www1.hp.com/alphaserver/performance/perf_tps.htmlt > + > Unfortunately, no TPS for VAXStations :-(t  G That is because on vax, it is measured in seconds per transactions, not-$ transactions per seconds :-) :-) :-)   ------------------------------   Date: 4 Jul 2003 08:18:12 -0000 4 From: Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]>F Subject: Re: VMS makes "General News" section of HP's "Customer Times"5 Message-ID: <20030704081812.7652.qmail@nym.alias.net>o  @ On Thu, 03 Jul 2003, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> wrote: >Robert Deininger wrote:P >> >Still too early to draw any conclusions. Right now, my impression is that HPP >> >hasn't really changed policies, but have instead taken short term actions to  >> >shut up all the complainers. >> M0 >> If that is HP's goal, I predict it will fail. >- >-M >If HP keeps up the visibility of VMS we has seen this week without customersHL >constantly puting pressure on HP, then the dissenters will become much more >quiet.S  ; You could at least post some sort of thanks for the effort.g  1 Ever heard the phrase, "Keep up the good work." ?o     Doc. -- sK OpenVMS.         Eight out of ten hackers prefer *other* operating systems.x   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 10:44:22 +0200r From: Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl>F Subject: Re: VMS makes "General News" section of HP's "Customer Times"2 Message-ID: <be3f84$jl5$1@news3.tilbu1.nb.home.nl>   Doc.Cypher wrote:  > A little bird sent me this...o > F > http://www.hp.com/products1/evolution/customertimes/pdfs/general.pdf > I > NOTE THAT THE OPTIONS INCLUDE MOVING **TO** VMS FROM OTHER PLATFORMS...n >  > O Yes, that is interesting. However I'm paranoid enough to suspect this has more vN to do with promoting the Itanium. The offered move is to OpenVMS I64, all the 0 moves are from 'anything' to PA Risc or Itanium.  L The odd thing is that PA-Risc should also be superseded by Itanium, yet the 3 PA-Risc is still on offer as a platform to move to!   A Alpha systems are only mentioned as a platform to move from .....s  Q If HP would not mention VMS I64, they could only offer a move from 'anything' to d< HP UX on PA-Risc or Itanium (in their present mind setting).   ------------------------------   Date: 4 Jul 2003 06:25:01 -0500s- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) F Subject: Re: VMS makes "General News" section of HP's "Customer Times"3 Message-ID: <tpukDNebv7m$@eisner.encompasserve.org>   l In article <20030704081812.7652.qmail@nym.alias.net>, Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> writes:B > On Thu, 03 Jul 2003, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> wrote: >>Robert Deininger wrote:MQ >>> >Still too early to draw any conclusions. Right now, my impression is that HPrQ >>> >hasn't really changed policies, but have instead taken short term actions toe! >>> >shut up all the complainers.D  ( Somehow, I doubt that Robert wrote that.   ------------------------------   Date: 4 Jul 2003 12:12:41 -0000s4 From: Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]>F Subject: Re: VMS makes "General News" section of HP's "Customer Times"6 Message-ID: <20030704121241.15430.qmail@nym.alias.net>  = On 4 Jul 2003, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) wrote: A >In article <20030704081812.7652.qmail@nym.alias.net>, Doc.Cyphere, ><Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> writes:C >> On Thu, 03 Jul 2003, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> wrote:n >>>Robert Deininger wrote:J >>>> >Still too early to draw any conclusions. Right now, my impression is
 >>>> >that HPuG >>>> >hasn't really changed policies, but have instead taken short term- >>>> >actions to" >>>> >shut up all the complainers. >r) >Somehow, I doubt that Robert wrote that.-  + No, he didn't, as the quotation lines show.:  & JF, please keep attributions accurate.  C Willfully manipulating them is a sign of under-the-bridge syndrome.D     Doc. -- 7K OpenVMS.         Eight out of ten hackers prefer *other* operating systems.p   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 13:25:10 GMT # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>aF Subject: Re: VMS makes "General News" section of HP's "Customer Times"H Message-ID: <WefNa.54095$a51.10451@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  + "Dirk Munk" <munk@home.nl> wrote in message , news:be3f84$jl5$1@news3.tilbu1.nb.home.nl... > Doc.Cypher wrote:a! > > A little bird sent me this...e > >  > >rD http://www.hp.com/products1/evolution/customertimes/pdfs/general.pdf > >n> > > NOTE THAT THE OPTIONS INCLUDE MOVING **TO** VMS FROM OTHER PLATFORMS... > >i > >nB > Yes, that is interesting. However I'm paranoid enough to suspect
 this has morehB > to do with promoting the Itanium. The offered move is to OpenVMS I64, all the2 > moves are from 'anything' to PA Risc or Itanium. >dE > The odd thing is that PA-Risc should also be superseded by Itanium,0 yet theg5 > PA-Risc is still on offer as a platform to move to!  > C > Alpha systems are only mentioned as a platform to move from .....n > D > If HP would not mention VMS I64, they could only offer a move from
 'anything' to<> > HP UX on PA-Risc or Itanium (in their present mind setting).    E Yes, there is more than a bit of inconsistency in those platform move  from/move to cpu choices.r  B So here's where Doc and others thump me....two small rights in theE space of a week does not indicate a trend...a statistician would callnC them outliers and discard them from the results. That HP has in theh9 past week made several positive mentions (or perhaps moreeE accurately...neutral mentions, it being the sorts of things to expectxC from any  normal company about its products), should be viewed withg cautious optimism.  @ A more accurate indication of HP's VMS intentions is a sustainedC advertising campaign in trade mags and other publications extolling D the virtues of VMS, which have yet to make an appearance anywhere --C unlike like the ad featuring Non-Stop that appeared in the 100-pagegE general business magazine insert of my local paper last weekend (fulloE page color glossy ad) ...real money spend on Tandem brand advertisingt< in a general interest business publication aimed at business? execs....which all the naysayers swear isn't done for operating F systems or large-scale systems in general.  I'm happy to scan and post6 the ad someplace if you want to see it for yourselves.  B Nonetheless, that HP execs have somehow gone to grammar school and> learned to pronounce and say "VMS" before an audience is to beB congratulated - for that they get a "C+" in my grading system. AllC they need to do is repeat it as often as they currently say "Linux"Q, and "Windows" and then they will get an "A".   ------------------------------   Date: 4 Jul 2003 14:25:46 -0000 4 From: Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]>F Subject: Re: VMS makes "General News" section of HP's "Customer Times"6 Message-ID: <20030704142546.32553.qmail@nym.alias.net>  9 On Fri, 04 Jul 2003, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote:u  C >So here's where Doc and others thump me....two small rights in theFF >space of a week does not indicate a trend...a statistician would callD >them outliers and discard them from the results. That HP has in the: >past week made several positive mentions (or perhaps moreF >accurately...neutral mentions, it being the sorts of things to expectD >from any  normal company about its products), should be viewed with >cautious optimism.   , That is absolutely nothing to thump you for.  N JF on the other hand has gone from, "bash 'em for ignoring VMS", to what looksM like, "ignore 'em and hope they go back to a situation where I can bash 'em".N  # Like you I'm cautiously optimistic.u  1 Significantly moreso than I was a few weeks back.e     Doc. -- pK OpenVMS.         Eight out of ten hackers prefer *other* operating systems.t   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:05:06 -0400o* From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>F Subject: Re: VMS makes "General News" section of HP's "Customer Times") Message-ID: <3F0597A1.FC272604@istop.com>    "Doc.Cypher" wrote:L= > You could at least post some sort of thanks for the effort.L > 3 > Ever heard the phrase, "Keep up the good work." ?-  H No. It isn't a question of thanking HP for mentioning VMS. It is HP thatE shoudl thank us for pointing out how much damage they were causing by-% consistently avoiding mention of VMS.0  L Also, for this to be a permanent change, it must "come from the heart" at HPN and not simply be some reaction to some bitching by a few "loyal" VMS fans. IfL we, the loyal bitchers were to thank HP, it woudl send the signal to HP thatP their job was done and that they can return to business as usual (ignoring VMS).  G Carly would simply have to publicly acknowledge that under the previoustK owners, VMS was neglected and a great potential never realised, but that HPpM would now undertake to maximise VMS' potential. With such a public statement,y: I would acknowledge a significant immediate change at HP.   M Failing such a statement, HP must show over a long period that it has changedtK its behaviour with regards to VMS.  Remember that just a few weeks ago, VMSfK wasn't mentioned once in that strategic presentation that was 2 hours long.o   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:14:09 -0400 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>F Subject: Re: VMS makes "General News" section of HP's "Customer Times") Message-ID: <3F0599BF.81FC9B37@istop.com>c   "Doc.Cypher" wrote: + > >Somehow, I doubt that Robert wrote that.e > - > No, he didn't, as the quotation lines show.i > ( > JF, please keep attributions accurate.  K Please. I wrote that text, and of you look at the text, my name is directlyaK above it with others quoting me when they replied.  The problem is that the J complainer has me killfiled and never sees my original posts and only seesJ stuff others have posted.  It is HIS problem, not mine if HE gets confused with attributions.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:17:22 -0400M* From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>F Subject: Re: VMS makes "General News" section of HP's "Customer Times") Message-ID: <3F059A80.EFF460AE@istop.com>,   "Doc.Cypher" wrote:.P > JF on the other hand has gone from, "bash 'em for ignoring VMS", to what looksO > like, "ignore 'em and hope they go back to a situation where I can bash 'em".n  N Wrong. All I have said is that I reserve judgement to see whether HP has trulyN changed their mind about VMS and continues this by itself, or whether this was/ just a single event to shut up the complainers.s   ------------------------------   Date: 4 Jul 2003 14:09:01 GMTr3 From: gartmann@immunbio.mpg.de (Christoph Gartmann)= Subject: VMS-Upgrade from disk?=0 Message-ID: <be41pt$lv9$1@n.ruf.uni-freiburg.de>   Hello,  N is it possible to make an image copy of the OpenVMS 7.3-1 CD and do the system) upgrade from there? The same for VAX-VMS?|   Regards,    Christoph Gartmann    --  E  Max-Planck-Institut fuer      Phone   : +49-761-5108-464   Fax: -452R  ImmunbiologieA  Postfach 1169                 Internet: gartmann@immunbio.mpg.dea  D-79011  Freiburg, Germany 9                http://www.immunbio.mpg.de/home/menue.html=   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:08:27 -0400-2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)# Subject: Re: VMS-Upgrade from disk?aL Message-ID: <rdeininger-0407031108270001@user-105n8km.dialup.mindspring.com>  P In article <be41pt$lv9$1@n.ruf.uni-freiburg.de>, gartmann@immunbio.mpg.de wrote:   >Hello,m >@O >is it possible to make an image copy of the OpenVMS 7.3-1 CD and do the system * >upgrade from there? The same for VAX-VMS?  F It certainly works for Alpha.  I do it all the time.  After making theG BACKUP/IMAGE of the CD onto a disk, I add my own directories containingdE layered product kits and various ECO.  Then I can carry the disk fromtJ system to system and have everything I need in one place.  And the disk is  much faster than most CD drives.  B I haven't tried it on a VAX, but I suspect it will work similarly.   ------------------------------  + Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 17:21:03 +0200 (MET) 9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>o Subject: VMS-Upgrade from disk? ; Message-ID: <01KXVA7D2MDAAM7Y4A@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>   I > is it possible to make an image copy of the OpenVMS 7.3-1 CD and do thes3 > system upgrade from there? The same for VAX-VMS? e   Yes.  H I have heard of people installing from a copy of an ALPHA CD (for speed D reasons).  Both are Files-11 CDs and an image copy is an image copy.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:22:09 -0400e* From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com># Subject: Re: VMS-Upgrade from disk? ( Message-ID: <3F059B9F.179A79F@istop.com>   Christoph Gartmann wrote:-P > is it possible to make an image copy of the OpenVMS 7.3-1 CD and do the system+ > upgrade from there? The same for VAX-VMS?j  J For VAX, yes. Just copy the savesets to a disk that can be mounted by VMS.W When asked where the medium will be mounted, you answer something like DKA300:[0000000]D  M For Alpha, I would assume (and hope) this is also possible due to the need tosK remotely upgrade machines etc, where you want to copy the installation kits ' over the network to the target machine.t   ------------------------------   Date: 4 Jul 2003 01:00:29 -0500 + From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)-+ Subject: XFC, IO Size and Backup - Take Two 3 Message-ID: <4JrWZ6GY$Y46@eisner.encompasserve.org>c  : 	I've killed off the other version in Google.  I realized < 	when I couldn't reproduce the results, something was wrong. 	My analysis was wrong.   " 	Much will remain the same, below.  oK          This first group of data below is XFC stats on the target (output)nM          file when backing up a 4800006 block file disk-to-disk via a simple            backup command:  n5          $ backup *.* new_disk:[new_directory]*.*/log.   +  Total QIOs to this file:             75004 +  Read IOs to this file:                   0@+  Read Hits:                               0e,  Hit Rate:                            0.00 %+  Read Aheads:                             0c+  Read Throughs:                           0r6  Read Arounds:                            0 (/NOCACHE)?  Read Arounds:                            0 (Function modifier):5  Read Arounds:                            0 (IO Size):  :+  Write IOs to this file:              75004s+  Write Throughs:                          0n6  Write Arounds:                       75004 (/NOCACHE)?  Write Arounds:                       75004 (Function modifier)n5  Write Arounds:                           0 (IO Size)e  @/  Average Overall I/O response time to this fileM-   in milliseconds:                     1.6177W,  Average Disk I/O response time to this file-   in milliseconds:                     1.6177S2  Accuracy of I/O resp time:                   78 %   L          Things of note, 75004 IOs, which works out to 32K IO size - defaultO          size as expected.  All IO is write IO and therefore bypasses XFC.  IO  <          response time is low as disks have writeback cache.  cJ          This next set of stats is taking the original input file, backingI          it up via ABC to a TSM server (3rd party TSM client for OpenVMS)-   +  Total QIOs to this file:              9766 +  Read IOs to this file:                9766f+  Read Hits:                               0 ,  Hit Rate:                            0.00 %+  Read Aheads:                             0r+  Read Throughs:                           0a6  Read Arounds:                         9766 (/NOCACHE)?  Read Arounds:                            0 (Function modifier)a5  Read Arounds:                         9766 (IO Size)a  r+  Write IOs to this file:                  0a+  Write Throughs:                          0r6  Write Arounds:                           0 (/NOCACHE)?  Write Arounds:                           0 (Function modifier)t5  Write Arounds:                           0 (IO Size)a  t/  Average Overall I/O response time to this filen-   in milliseconds:                    18.2225h,  Average Disk I/O response time to this file-   in milliseconds:                    18.2225 2  Accuracy of I/O resp time:                   71 %  e  9 	The XFC IO size is 512 blocks.  XFC must be raising thatl9 	to a 512 block IO with sequential reads.  What I believer< 	may be happening is the ABC/TSM client is throwing a number? 	of IOs, these IOs are 50 blocks as revealed in another summarye 	file:   filename.dat  I Files scanned:                     1    Buffered I/O count:            29hI Files sent:                        1    Direct I/O count:            4024aI Files deactivated:                 0    Page faults:                  124 I Catalog data sent:           0.11 Kb    Elapsed CPU time:   0 00:00:01.09.I Catalog data rcvd:           0.11 Kb    Data rate:          13561.05 Kb/seI Data transferred:        99994.50 Kb    Data xfer time:     0 00:00:07.37oI Total:                   99994.72 Kb    Elapsed time:       0 00:00:07.53i  C 	Those 4024 IOs divided into 199900+ block file equals 50 block IO.r  > 	Looking at what XFC did for that same file during ABC backup:  0 Statistics Valid From:    3-JUL-2003 01:00:32.05  * Total QIOs to this file:             16864* Read IOs to this file:                 945* Read Hits:                              63+ Hit Rate:                            0.37 % * Read Aheads:                             0* Read Throughs:                         9455 Read Arounds:                            0 (/NOCACHE) > Read Arounds:                            0 (Function modifier)4 Read Arounds:                            0 (IO Size)  * Write IOs to this file:              15919* Write Throughs:                      159195 Write Arounds:                           0 (/NOCACHE) > Write Arounds:                           0 (Function modifier)4 Write Arounds:                           0 (IO Size)  . Average Overall I/O response time to this file,  in milliseconds:                     1.95670 Average Cache Hit I/O response time to this file,  in milliseconds:                     0.0522+ Average Disk I/O response time to this fileI,  in milliseconds:                     1.96381 Accuracy of I/O resp time:                   64 %t  * CFB FAL stalls:                         15* CFB Operation stalls:                    0* FAL Blocking ASTs:                       5* Quiesce Depose:                          5* Quiesce depose Stalls:                   0  1 (I/O size statistics not collected for this file)p  > 	There were 545 Read Throughs prior to the backup.  945 after.7 	391 occured during the backup, therefore the IO size =rB 	199988 / 391 = 512.  Notice above that there were no read aheads.? 	The file in the example is opened for writes.  XFC won't read rB 	ahead if the file is opened for updating.  That is what threw me. 	But it makes a lot of sense.   > 	This file below backed up by TSM is closed - no file streams:  a+  Total QIOs to this file:             84380d+  Read IOs to this file:                9376n+  Read Hits:                               0t,  Hit Rate:                            0.00 %+  Read Aheads:                          2216W+  Read Throughs:                        9376w6  Read Arounds:                            0 (/NOCACHE)?  Read Arounds:                            0 (Function modifier)l5  Read Arounds:                            0 (IO Size)i  c+  Write IOs to this file:              75004d+  Write Throughs:                          0t6  Write Arounds:                       75004 (/NOCACHE)?  Write Arounds:                       75004 (Function modifier)l5  Write Arounds:                           0 (IO Size)r  e/  Average Overall I/O response time to this filef-   in milliseconds:                     4.1719o,  Average Disk I/O response time to this file-   in milliseconds:                     4.1719c2  Accuracy of I/O resp time:                   78 %  v$          Note the read aheads above.  t+          Checking a file backed up like so:c  p0          $ backup large_file.dat nla0:t.bck/save  eA          and looking at XFC stats,  nary a read.  Backup bypasseswE          XFC on reads.  Makes sense - wouldn't want XFC to get in theeF          way of backup as backup is double-buffering , pumping tons ofE          IO to disk.  One more layer of cache would be a hindrance totF          BACKUP but not to a 3rd party product that isn't doing double>          buffering.  It is unnecssary to cache IOs that large.2 	Instead of read through, read around.  so Raising= 	VCC_MAX_IO_SIZE is unnecessary.   It is probably detrimentalrD 	as XFC has to flush those IOs from cache and manage them otherwise,> 	they take away from cache to be availble for other functions.    < 	Finally, to help track down what was/is really going on, I C 	decided to copy a closed file.  I assumed I would get read aheads.e? 	I also assumed I would see smaller IO going through XFC.  That : 	is what happened.  this is a 4.8 million block file being 	copied:  * Total QIOs to this file:             84378* Read IOs to this file:               84378* Read Hits:                           22886+ Hit Rate:                           27.12 %-* Read Aheads:                         42190* Read Throughs:                       843785 Read Arounds:                            0 (/NOCACHE) > Read Arounds:                            0 (Function modifier)4 Read Arounds:                            0 (IO Size)  * Write IOs to this file:                  0* Write Throughs:                          05 Write Arounds:                           0 (/NOCACHE)"> Write Arounds:                           0 (Function modifier)4 Write Arounds:                           0 (IO Size)  . Average Overall I/O response time to this file,  in milliseconds:                     5.27250 Average Cache Hit I/O response time to this file,  in milliseconds:                     0.2603+ Average Disk I/O response time to this filea,  in milliseconds:                     7.13791 Accuracy of I/O resp time:                   96 %c  * CFB FAL stalls:                          1* CFB Operation stalls:                    0* FAL Blocking ASTs:                       0* Quiesce Depose:                          0* Quiesce depose Stalls:                   0  1 (I/O size statistics not collected for this file)   ; 	That works out to 64 blocks per IO in/from/to/through XFC.   $ 	Yet, the copy is doing 32 block IO:      File is 4800006 blocksn     Accounting information: O   Buffered I/O count:                139      Peak working set size:       2848sO   Direct I/O count:               150344      Peak virtual size:         171168 O   Page faults:                       328      Mounted volumes:                0.O   Charged CPU time:        0 00:00:27.70      Elapsed time:       0 00:04:55.55a  E 	150344 IO into 4800006 blocks is 32 blocks per IO.  Since copy isn'tlE 	real heavy IO intensive, XFC is able to keep up/ahead by posting 64 ,E 	block IOs , with a number of them read aheads.  We know the file is  < 	closed or a copy would choke - hence we expect Read Aheads.   	Summary:  XFC is smart.   				Roba   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2003.366 ************************