0 INFO-VAX	Wed, 11 Feb 2004	Volume 2004 : Issue 82      Contents:+ Re: chicken and egg: shadowing and licenses  Re: DQDRIVER on a 500au  Re: DTSESSION annomalie  Re: Feb Condist...2 Galactic Idle Loop (Was: Why was VAX abandonned ?)6 Re: Galactic Idle Loop (Was: Why was VAX abandonned ?)6 HP Press Release: New Itanium Servers, OpenVMS content HTTP server for OpenVMS??? RE: HTTP server for OpenVMS??? Re: HTTP server for OpenVMS???: Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!: Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!: Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!: RE: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!: Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !! OpenVMS Feelings Re: OpenVMS FeelingsP Re: OpenVMS thrashes slowaris and aix in cluster tco/virus study ... again! ... C Re: Oracle ships 10g database, cuts price  <-- Oracle RDB too ????? H Re: OT: Another American arrested in Brazil after making obscene gesture OT: PSION, another Digital Re: Other CVS on VMS problems  Re: Other CVS on VMS problems = page- and swap-files, autogen, modparams.dat, file-naming etc  Re: Pinging Brian  Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars  Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars # Re: Searching for DECps information # RE: Searching for DECps information  Re: Why was VAX abandonned ?  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 22:56:59 +0000 (UTC) P From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply)4 Subject: Re: chicken and egg: shadowing and licenses$ Message-ID: <c0bnjr$osd$3@online.de>  C In article <nsof201h8va80t2pa9kk7b131bh4l6rv2n@4ax.com>, John Laird % <nospam@laird-towers.org.uk> writes:    J > Perhaps I should have said I didn't see a particularly strong need for aM > cluster-wide database early on in the startup sequence.  I very much prefer H > having cluster nodes able to get themselves started, and cope with theG > possible absence of shared files without coming to a complete stop.     * I agree.  The question is: what do I need?  E Since the LICENSE START command is apparently done AFTER I mount the  B disk, I'm puzzled as to how I could mount it at all!  I DID see a H warning about volume shadowing not being enabled, but since the cluster 3 eventually came up OK, it somehow must have worked.   D The command is MOUNT/CLUSTER/NOASSIST.  Each node will execute this  command when it comes up.   M > Philip wants his database on a shadowed disk, hence he needs VOLSHAD, hence  > his chicken-and-egg question.   G Right.  I definitely want important files like that on a shadowed disk!    ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 22:46:19 -0600 (CST)  From: sms@antinode.org  Subject: Re: DQDRIVER on a 500au) Message-ID: <04021022461900@antinode.org>   # From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)    > [...] M >   The central issue discussed in the OpenVMS FAQ involves Cypress and Intel J >   SIO CD-ROM (ATAPI) bootstraps, and the latter are not supported.  OnlyJ >   with Intel SIO is the (unsupported) ENABLE-IDE.COM needed, and that toI >   bring ATA and ATAPI devices online via the Intel SIO; once the system  >   has been bootstrapped.    H    Ok.  I'll admit that my Digital Personal WorkStation [500a] is not onH the supported list, but it doesn't seem to do as well as the unsupportedF stuff is supposed to do.  I don't care about booting, only access to a- cheap (IDE) CR-R/RW drive after VMS comes up.   I    The (slightly modified) ENABLE-IDE program thinks it's the wrong type:    ALP2 $ run ENABLE-IDE2  CPU_TYPE = 5, SYS_TYPE = 30. 8 ? This system does not support an internal IDE interface  8 %SYSTEM-E-UNSUPPORTED, unsupported operation or function  H    It's looking for (cpu_type == 2) && (sys_type == 13), so 5 and 30 are$ clearly not what this program wants.      On the other hand:   - ALP2 $ write sys$output f$getsyi( "HW_MODEL")  1556  E So LOAD_DQ_INTEL_SIO.COM decides SYSTEM = "MX5", and proceeds to do a 1 SYSMAN IO CONNECT which yields an offline device:   & IO CONNECT DQA0 /DRIVER=SYS$DQDRIVER -                 /ADAPTER=4 -                 /NODE=6 -                  /CSR=%X1F0 -                 /VECTOR=56     ALP2 $ show device /full dqa0   I Disk ALP2$DQA0:, device type Generic SCSI disk, is offline, file-oriented F     device, shareable, available to cluster, error logging is enabled.    G    Repeating this for DQA1, DQB0, and DQB1 yields four offline devices, ( regardless of what's actually connected.  E    Console "show config" output is shown below.  At this point, I get G confused, as the "pqb0.0.1.4.0 PCI EIDE" (or pqa0.0.0.4.0, depending on @ lunar phase) appears in the "PCI bus" section, while the /NODE=6E /CSR=%X1F0 and /VECTOR=56 (56 = 7* 14) stuff seems to agree with this  item in the ISA section:B         6       EIDE            Embedded        Yes     1f0     14  H    If anyone can explain how to make this work, or why it never can, I'd be pleased to hear it.  E    Pointers to documentation on the console commands (like "memtest") . would also be gratefully received, by the way.  H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  4    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-98183    382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode-org     Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547   H ------------------------------------------------------------------------   >>>show config   Firmware) SRM Console:	V7.2-1		Mar  6 2000 14:47:02  ARC Console:	5.70 > PALcode:	OpenVMS PALcode V1.20-16, Tru64 UNIX PALcode V1.22-18 SROM Version:   v5.90   	 Processor 6 DECchip (tm) 21164A-2	Pass   500 MHz  96 KBytes SCache 2 MB BCache  PYXIS ASIC Pass 257    MEMORY   Memory Size = 1152Mb   Bank      Size/Sets   Base Addr  ------    ----------  ---------     0        512Mb      00000000     1        512Mb      20000000     2        128Mb      40000000    BCache Size = 2Mb    Tested Memory =  1152Mbytes    PCI Bus D      Bus 00  Slot 03: Digital Semiconductor 21143 Network ControllerJ                                    ewa0.0.0.3.0          00-00-F8-75-99-EB        Bus 00  Slot 04: PCI IDE A                                    pqb0.0.1.4.0          PCI EIDE N                                    dqa0.0.0.4.0           TOSHIBA CD-ROM XM-65  %      Bus 00  Slot 07: Intel SIO 82378   5      Bus 00  Slot 20: DECchip 21052 PCI to PCI Bridge /        Bus 01  Slot 08: ISP1040 Scsi Controller F                                    pka0.7.0.1008.0       SCSI Bus ID 7L                                    dka0.0.0.1008.0        SEAGATE ST118202LCN                                    dka400.4.0.1008.0      NEC CD-ROM DRIVE:466  +        Bus 01  Slot 10: ELSA GLoria Synergy    ISA 5 Slot	Device	Name		Type	     Enabled  BaseAddr	IRQ	DMA  0  	0	MOUSE		Embedded	Yes	60	12 	1	KBD		Embedded	Yes	60	1  	2	COM1		Embedded	Yes	3f8	4  	3	COM2		Embedded	Yes	2f8	3  	4	LPT1		Embedded	Yes	3bc	7  	5	FLOPPY		Embedded	Yes	3f0	6	2  	6	EIDE		Embedded	Yes	1f0	14
 							3f6	15 
 							170
 							376 	7	ES1888		Embedded	Yes	220	5	1    >>>show deviceD dka0.0.0.1008.0            DKA0             SEAGATE ST118202LC  0005D dka400.4.0.1008.0          DKA400         NEC CD-ROM DRIVE:466  1.26D dqa0.0.0.4.0               DQA0        TOSHIBA CD-ROM XM-6502B  1013> dva0.0.0.0.1               DVA0                               > ewa0.0.0.3.0               EWA0              00-00-F8-75-99-EBD pka0.7.0.1008.0            PKA0                  SCSI Bus ID 7  5.57> pqa0.0.0.4.0               PQA0                       PCI EIDE> pqb0.0.1.4.0               PQB0                       PCI EIDE   ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:03:05 +0000 (UTC) P From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply)  Subject: Re: DTSESSION annomalie$ Message-ID: <c0bnv9$osd$4@online.de>  B In article <MCELKPMOKPMNDNKJNIONIEINCKAA.win@fom.fgan.de>, "Rudolf# Wingert" <win@fom.fgan.de> writes:    O > a few day ago I did check all user disk and did see, that one was full. A few P > minutes after a purge, the disk was full again. The SHOW SYSTEM command showedN > me, that DTSESSION did have an unvieable count of I/O. Then I looked for theM > open files and did see, that the open DTSESSION.LOG did have allocated over P > 45Million blocks of diskspace. The inuse count was zero. Every time I did freeK > some diskspace DTSESSION did catch it for this logfile. Does anybody know N > something about this problem. We do have OpenVMS 7.3-1 with DECwindows Motif' > 1.2-5 and a lot of patches installed.   F I have known about this problem for years; you should be able to find E posts of mine (and responses to them) on this topic.  Apparently, it  H only shows up if DECwindows is running for a long time.  I haven't seen 6 it in a while; I was hoping it had been solved by now.  I If you look in the log, you will see that it is repeating the same error   message over and over.   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Feb 2004 11:05:08 -0800- From: soccer13player@yahoo.com (Nom de Plume)  Subject: Re: Feb Condist... = Message-ID: <f401eb7f.0402101105.7fcbab8d@posting.google.com>   h "Stanley F. Quayle" <squayle@insight.rr.com> wrote in message news:<4027998A.4504.22428454@localhost>...) > On 9 Feb 2004 at 11:29, Hal Kuff wrote: ? > > Has anyone seen the Feb Condist for OpenVMS... (7.3-2 kits)  >  > Yep.  Mine came last week. >  > --Stan Quayle  > Quayle Consulting Inc. >  > ----------E > Stanley F. Quayle, P.E. N8SQ  +1 614-868-1363  Fax: +1 614 868-1671 3 > 8572 North Spring Ct. NW, Pickerington, OH  43147 ? > Preferred address:  stan@stanq.com       http://www.stanq.com   C I got my HP Certified Professional Con. Dist. too, but I thought it D was the Q4CY2003 release.  I will have to go home and double check. D It was back to the full release, not the partials I had been getting the last couple times.   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 14:47:08 -0600 / From: Chris Scheers <chris@applied-synergy.com> ; Subject: Galactic Idle Loop (Was: Why was VAX abandonned ?) 3 Message-ID: <4029434C.CAE9FE50@applied-synergy.com>    glen herrmannsfeldt wrote: >  > Daryl Jones wrote: >  > (snip) > J > > I don't know everything about IBM systems. You can stop a CPU on a VAXH > > or Alpha from the console by issuing a control-p, which will produceD > > the three chevrons >>>. The system will be stop. You can issue aG > > "continue" and the system will continue were it stop at. There is a 7 > > time limit and how much time you have I don't know.  > 6 > IBM S/360 and successors have a PSW bit called WAIT. > 8 > When set, no instructions are executed, hopefully with: > interrupts enabled.   There is no NULL job or NULL task. > = > The is especially useful when running on a virtual machine, > > as VM doesn't have to use up 100% of its time running a NULL > task loop.    H In my hoplessly naive way, I've thought it would be usefull for the idleE loop to switch to the next Galaxy instance.  With this and a periodic E timer which forced transitions, you could time slice Galaxys and have + multiple instances running on a single CPU.   B Of course, device interrupts then become "interesting".  (It wouldG probably be necessary to add an abstraction layer which directed device $ interrupts to the correct instance.)  F Still, it would be usefull to be able to run more instances than there? are available CPUs.  Particularly for code development/testing.   G ----------------------------------------------------------------------- $ Chris Scheers, Applied Synergy, Inc.  C Voice: 817-237-3360            Internet: chris@applied-synergy.com     Fax: 817-237-3074    ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 22:13:17 +0000 (UTC) , From: lewis@mazda.mitre.org (Keith A. Lewis)? Subject: Re: Galactic Idle Loop (Was: Why was VAX abandonned ?) . Message-ID: <c0bl1t$5vl$1@newslocal.mitre.org>   hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com (Charlie Hammond) writes in article <j1cWb.109$cy5.77@news.cpqcorp.net> dated Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:27:43 GMT:I >Some time ago a former colleague observed the strong coorelation between H >CPU idle time and performance.  He postulated that performance could be: >improoved by increasing the priority of the null process.   Haha!   G >Fortunately (at least in some opinions) the null process was elminated 9 >(as part of SMP work, IIRC) before this could be tested.   A The NULL process still exists on VMS(as of V7.3-1), just hidden.  6 Normally the PID of NULL is one less than SWAPPER's.     $ sho sys/own=systemM OpenVMS V7.3-1  on node SIENNA  10-FEB-2004 22:11:24.53  Uptime  110 07:40:55 M   Pid    Process Name    State  Pri      I/O       CPU       Page flts  Pages M 00000401 SWAPPER         HIB     16        0   0 00:00:00.31         0      0 M 00000404 LANACP          HIB     13       61   0 00:00:00.02        94    116 M 00000406 IPCACP          HIB     10       10   0 00:00:00.00        32     42 M 00000409 OPCOM           HIB      6     8538   0 00:00:00.70      1081     43  [snip] $ sho proc/id=400   G 10-FEB-2004 22:11:54.69   User: SYSTEM           Process ID:   00000400 E                           Node: SIENNA           Process name: "NULL"   	 Terminal:  User Identifier:    [0,0]  Base priority:      0 ! Default file spec:  Not available  Number of Kthreads: 1   0 --Keith Lewis              klewis {at} mitre.org> The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 14:17:18 -0500 ' From: "Main, Kerry" <kerry.main@hp.com> ? Subject: HP Press Release: New Itanium Servers, OpenVMS content R Message-ID: <FD827B33AB0D9C4E92EACEEFEE2BA2FB278929@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>   All,  > You might be interested in the following HP press release from
 yesterday:  9 http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press/2004/040209b.html   J HP Strengthens Industry-standard Offerings with New Servers and Storage=20  I New products enable customers to reduce costs while simplifying change=20  PALO ALTO, Calif., Feb. 9, 2004   F While this release deals with a number of product announcements, there# is a paragraph specific to OpenVMS:   D "HP also announced the availability of the evaluation release of theB Open VMS version 8.1 operating system for HP Integrity servers forB software vendors and early adopters. This version will incorporateH native compilers and tools as well as expanded functionality. OpenVMS isD expected to be generally available for HP Integrity server customersH later this year and adds to the current multi-operating system offeringsF on Integrity, including HP-UX, Linux and Windows Server 2003. To date,G approximately 600 applications from more than 280 ISVs are committed to . being ported to OpenVMS for Integrity servers.   Regards,  
 Kerry Main Senior Consultant  HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax: 613-591-4477  Email: kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom . (remove the DOT's and AT for email address)=20   ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:40:24 +0000 (UTC) 4 From: Pat Dandenault <pdandenault@ssd5.nrl.navy.mil># Subject: HTTP server for OpenVMS??? @ Message-ID: <Xns948B955853876pdandenaultssd5nrlna@132.250.1.121>  A Can anyone recommend a small/secure/free HTTP server for OpenVMS?   J It doesn't have to have many bells and whistles.. in fact, we simply want F to append a log file to index.html so we can check the status of some  processing from our desks.   Thanks,  Pat  pdandenault@ssd5.nrl.navy.mil    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:35:32 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> ' Subject: RE: HTTP server for OpenVMS??? 9 Message-ID: <NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIAENBCMAA.tom@kednos.com>    http://wasd.vsm.com.au/      -----Original Message-----=   From: Pat Dandenault [mailto:pdandenault@ssd5.nrl.navy.mil] +   Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 11:40 AM    To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com %   Subject: HTTP server for OpenVMS???     C   Can anyone recommend a small/secure/free HTTP server for OpenVMS?   K   It doesn't have to have many bells and whistles.. in fact, we simply want G   to append a log file to index.html so we can check the status of some    processing from our desks.  	   Thanks,    Pat    pdandenault@ssd5.nrl.navy.mil      --- (   Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.<   Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).B   Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 1/22/2004   --- & Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 1/22/2004   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:15:26 +0100 9 From: Jan-Erik =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=F6derholm?= <aaa@aaa.com> ' Subject: Re: HTTP server for OpenVMS??? ' Message-ID: <402957FE.64F12DB1@aaa.com>    Pat Dandenault wrote:  > C > Can anyone recommend a small/secure/free HTTP server for OpenVMS?   7 http://kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu/www/doc/serverinfo.html    ------------------------------    Date: 10 Feb 2004 11:35:12 -08001 From: keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris) C Subject: Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !! = Message-ID: <cf15391e.0402101135.55ae28d4@posting.google.com>   X Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl> wrote in message news:<bvbham$ald$1@news1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl>...Q > What many of us have been predicting for the last couple of years now is going  3 > to be a reality. Intel will have 64bit x86 cpu's.   B A lot of folks are making a very big assumption here: that Intel's1 64-bit extensions would be compatible with AMD's.   A While this would be great for AMD, how would it be for Intel?  It D would put Intel into "me-too" territory and catch-up mode, when they= prefer to be thought of as industry leaders.  I think Intel's F engineering pride and their sense that they have great marketing power? would most likely push them to do a "better" set of extensions,  incompatible with AMD's.  = We'll know more once the Intel Developer's Forum is underway.    ------------------------------   Date: 10 Feb 2004 19:56:47 GMT, From: bill@gw5.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)C Subject: Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !! : Message-ID: <c0bd1u$155478$1@ID-135708.news.uni-berlin.de>  = In article <cf15391e.0402101135.55ae28d4@posting.google.com>, 4 	keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris) writes:Z > Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl> wrote in message news:<bvbham$ald$1@news1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl>...R >> What many of us have been predicting for the last couple of years now is going 4 >> to be a reality. Intel will have 64bit x86 cpu's. > D > A lot of folks are making a very big assumption here: that Intel's3 > 64-bit extensions would be compatible with AMD's.    Need I remind you:  @ >> In article <cf15391e.0310021020.33a68494@posting.google.com>,7 >>  keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris) writes: _ >> > David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote in message news:<3F7C1EBE.10004@tsoft-inc.com>... / >> >> http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11781  >> >> 8 >> >> Why Intel's Prescott will use AMD64 extensions ...W >> >> So, why is this again? Simple, MS. Microsoft will not support a different 64 bit  U >> >> platform, and frankly I don't blame it, it costs a lot of money to do that. MS  V >> >> gave Intel the choice, support AMD's instruction set, or do without Windows. MS % >> >> won that battle pretty handily.  >> >  J >> > Why this doesn't make sense to me is that Microsoft has already had aK >> > 64-bit version of Windows for Itanium available for quite a while, and 4 >> > only recently added a 64-bit version for AMD.   >>  H >> True, and now they are basicly saying, "This is it, no more differentH >> 64bit versions".  Remember, INTEL was rumored to have had plans for aH >> 32/64 hybrid even after they supposedly killed Yamhill.  This basicly >> tells INTEL, "Don't bother."  >>  K >> >                                                So the work for Itanium J >> > appears to have been done first, and the additional work for AMD doneF >> > more recently.  It sounds like the writer here missed the earlier) >> > Itanium release of Windows entirely.  >>  , >> No, it's just that there will be no more. >>     > C > While this would be great for AMD, how would it be for Intel?  It F > would put Intel into "me-too" territory and catch-up mode, when they? > prefer to be thought of as industry leaders.  I think Intel's H > engineering pride and their sense that they have great marketing powerA > would most likely push them to do a "better" set of extensions,  > incompatible with AMD's. > ? > We'll know more once the Intel Developer's Forum is underway.   D And without support from Microsoft, where wll this new and different
 x86-64 be?   bill   --  J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 00:09:04 +0100  From: Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl>C Subject: Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !! 2 Message-ID: <c0bp65$7te$1@news3.tilbu1.nb.home.nl>  	 Hi Keith,   P I agree with you that in normal circumstances Intel could have such a attitude. Q However not now. Over the past years Intel has shown a scornful attitude towards  O   AMD's 64 bit x86 cpu's. Now however they are forced to jump on the bandwagon  N and  produce a similar cpu. The market will not tolerate a different approach P that is not compatible with the AMD cpu's. Not even the mighty Intel can afford P to do that. It is known that Intel's present 64 bit x86 cpu is not (completely) N compatible with the AMD design, however from what I gather from the web, they " will have such a cpu halfway 2005.  Q In my opinion this is good news for the industry. It means that AMD has become a  J leader, and not just a cheaper alternative for Intel. This will raise the Q prestige of AMD, and that is good and well deserved. Now we will have two highly  ' regarded producers of 64 bit x86 cpu's.   M On the other hand this is very bad news for HP. There is no doubt that Intel  N planned the Itanium as a general 64 bit replacement for the x86 architecture. M The last couple of years they realised that this was not going to happed, so  Q they claimed that 32 bits was sufficient for the desktop. A very poor excuse for  + the failure of the Itanium in this respect.   O The reality now is that the 64 bit x86 architecture will be the foundation for  L all desktop systems, as well as for the low-end and mid-range servers. This M still will be the case even if you are right with your assumption that Intel  * will produce a non-AMD compatible x86 cpu.  O HP's main competitors on the high-end market (SUN & IBM) have their own CPU's.  G Only HP is totaly depending on Intel for their supply of CPU's. A very  P uncomfortable position. I don't see any reason for Intel to put a lot of energy N in the Itanium if only HP will buy this chip. Sure, other companies also have " Itanium systems, but for how long?  H Am I happy about this situation? No, certainly not. We as VMS users are N passengers in the HP car. Many of use have been trying to convince the driver O (HP management) that he has entered a cul-de-sac, and now that it seems we are  N rapidly approaching the end of this street, we are all very aware of the very ( negative consequences of this situation.             Keith Parris wrote: Z > Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl> wrote in message news:<bvbham$ald$1@news1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl>... > Q >>What many of us have been predicting for the last couple of years now is going  3 >>to be a reality. Intel will have 64bit x86 cpu's.  >  > D > A lot of folks are making a very big assumption here: that Intel's3 > 64-bit extensions would be compatible with AMD's.  > C > While this would be great for AMD, how would it be for Intel?  It F > would put Intel into "me-too" territory and catch-up mode, when they? > prefer to be thought of as industry leaders.  I think Intel's H > engineering pride and their sense that they have great marketing powerA > would most likely push them to do a "better" set of extensions,  > incompatible with AMD's. > ? > We'll know more once the Intel Developer's Forum is underway.    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 16:13:03 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> C Subject: RE: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !! 9 Message-ID: <NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECIMENGCMAA.tom@kednos.com>      -----Original Message-----'   From: Dirk Munk [mailto:munk@home.nl] *   Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 3:09 PM   To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com E   Subject: Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!        Hi Keith,   @   I agree with you that in normal circumstances Intel could have   such a attitude.A   However not now. Over the past years Intel has shown a scornful    attitude towardsB     AMD's 64 bit x86 cpu's. Now however they are forced to jump on   the bandwagon <   and  produce a similar cpu. The market will not tolerate a   different approach@   that is not compatible with the AMD cpu's. Not even the mighty   Intel can afford@   to do that. It is known that Intel's present 64 bit x86 cpu is   not (completely)A   compatible with the AMD design, however from what I gather from    the web, they $   will have such a cpu halfway 2005.  ? Whether they choose to be compatible with AMD or not depends on % (1) market share AMD has at the time, @ (2) cost to shove AMD out of the way (with an incompatible chip)> (3) and how successfuly they could bully their major partners,@ such as Dell, Hp and so on to drop or minimize dependence on AMD  C I think there is merit to your analysis.  I wonder if GEM generates 3 X86 code?  Our Tru64 backend does with some effort.   A   In my opinion this is good news for the industry. It means that    AMD has become aK   leader, and not just a cheaper alternative for Intel. This will raise the B   prestige of AMD, and that is good and well deserved. Now we will   have two highly )   regarded producers of 64 bit x86 cpu's.   C   On the other hand this is very bad news for HP. There is no doubt    that IntelA   planned the Itanium as a general 64 bit replacement for the x86    architecture. C   The last couple of years they realised that this was not going to    happed, soB   they claimed that 32 bits was sufficient for the desktop. A very   poor excuse for -   the failure of the Itanium in this respect.   A   The reality now is that the 64 bit x86 architecture will be the    foundation for?   all desktop systems, as well as for the low-end and mid-range    servers. This C   still will be the case even if you are right with your assumption    that Intel,   will produce a non-AMD compatible x86 cpu.  ?   HP's main competitors on the high-end market (SUN & IBM) have    their own CPU's.H   Only HP is totaly depending on Intel for their supply of CPU's. A veryC   uncomfortable position. I don't see any reason for Intel to put a    lot of energy ;   in the Itanium if only HP will buy this chip. Sure, other    companies also have $   Itanium systems, but for how long?  I   Am I happy about this situation? No, certainly not. We as VMS users are ;   passengers in the HP car. Many of use have been trying to    convince the driver C   (HP management) that he has entered a cul-de-sac, and now that it    seems we areC   rapidly approaching the end of this street, we are all very aware 
   of the very *   negative consequences of this situation.               Keith Parris wrote: -   > Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl> wrote in message 0   news:<bvbham$ald$1@news1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl>...   > ?   >>What many of us have been predicting for the last couple of    years now is going5   >>to be a reality. Intel will have 64bit x86 cpu's.    >    > F   > A lot of folks are making a very big assumption here: that Intel's5   > 64-bit extensions would be compatible with AMD's.    > E   > While this would be great for AMD, how would it be for Intel?  It H   > would put Intel into "me-too" territory and catch-up mode, when theyA   > prefer to be thought of as industry leaders.  I think Intel's J   > engineering pride and their sense that they have great marketing powerC   > would most likely push them to do a "better" set of extensions,    > incompatible with AMD's.   > A   > We'll know more once the Intel Developer's Forum is underway.      --- (   Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.<   Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).B   Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 1/22/2004   --- & Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 1/22/2004   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Feb 2004 23:59:28 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) C Subject: Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !! 3 Message-ID: <Wiwy+k9IdgOy@eisner.encompasserve.org>   V In article <4029B0F9.26F21AB7@istop.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> writes: > Keith Parris wrote: D >> While this would be great for AMD, how would it be for Intel?  ItG >> would put Intel into "me-too" territory and catch-up mode, when they @ >> prefer to be thought of as industry leaders.  I think Intel'sI >> engineering pride and their sense that they have great marketing power B >> would most likely push them to do a "better" set of extensions, >> incompatible with AMD's.  > M > No. My guess would be for Intel to add extensions to AMD's 64 bit solution. M > This way, they can run standard off the shelf windows that was designed for N > AMD, but can also get niche market stuff such as HPUX, VMS and NSK to run onB > the Intel version whereas the AMD version will lack those hooks. > L > Of course, the minute Intel announces that the 8086 will have lockstep, itP > will be a very loud and clear messages that IA64 is going down the drain sinceO > if Tandem/NSK goes 8086, so will HPUX and VMS. So when Intel announces its 64 ; > bit 8086, I suspect we won't get the full story just yet.   A 	I think you seriously under-estimate the engineering effort here  	in several dimensions.   E 	No one is going to foot AMD's bills.  It doesn't make sense for them 5 	to.  That and AMD is seriously resource constrained. $ 	Hence Win64 for x86-64 plods along.  ) http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=14062 ) http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=14049   M Here's the basic problem. Were you aware that Intel actually writes a heap of L drivers for Windows? And that when Windows XP was being launched, both IntelL and Microsoft helped out some hardware vendors by assisting them with driver writing?  O Unfortunately, Windows for AMD64 is not a high priority for Microsoft. By which M we mean that it's not going to go out of its way to help out AMD, without the 4 chip company paying a heap of money for the effort.   & 	Money and resources AMD doesn't have.  9 	It will Intel's deep pockets that will get Win64 off the G 	ground on x86-64.  Will you be shocked if Win64 for x86-64 is still a   	beta 6 months from now?  C 	Secondly, Fister says Itanium = Xeon in cost in a few years.  What A 	if that translates into 32 * $5000 as the CPU costs for a 32-way @ 	box?  Do you think UltraSparc and Power will be able to competeB 	in that price space?  Absolutely not.  You're going to see a real@ 	shift here in the server space and it is NOT going to be pretty4 	at all.  Intel has billions and is making billions:  O The third quarter of 2003 was a positive one for Intel. The company made almost < US $8 billion in revenue, and almost $2 billion in profits.   @ 	I will bet that if they can make the x86 ISA pig fly, they willB 	make Itanium fly AND will throw the proper hundred million dollarG 	chunks in the correct directions to ensure it is successful.  HP must  E 	be excited to see high-end server costs come down to the Xeon level  B 	(they make bucks on VMS services and NSK services).  IBM and Sun  	aren't nearly as excited.   				Rob    ------------------------------    Date: 10 Feb 2004 16:05:21 -0800. From: fabiopenvms@yahoo.com.br (Fabio Cardoso) Subject: OpenVMS Feelings = Message-ID: <f30679fb.0402101605.77657053@posting.google.com>   	 Hi People   8 How do you feel in your companies working with OpenVMS ?  = Abandoned, alone, no integrated, nobody cares about your job, = no body listens you, your are forgotten in the meetings, your0@ system works but its not important for the IT staff -  just for0 the end-users, feeling at the end-of-career, ...  ! Just to know if I am not alone ! s   Regardst   FC   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 03:56:41 GMTw& From: Lee Mah <lytmah@telusplanet.net> Subject: Re: OpenVMS Feelingsn, Message-ID: <ZJhWb.30076$QX4.11654@clgrps13>  I We have a good atmosphere in our company, a government organization whichnG provides health care for almost one million people.  VMS has been here l for overI 20 years, which is why most of our clients still refer to the VMScluster t
 as the "VAX",aG even though all the cluster nodes are Alpha's.  I don't feel abandoned  	 or alone.4F There are 3 full-time VMS administrators, along with a DBA who spends  part of H his time doing RMS file maintenance.  We also have about 20 VMS analystsA maintaining and developing applications.  Our VMScluster handles r mission-critical applications for the company.u     Fabio Cardoso wrote:  
 >Hi People >V9 >How do you feel in your companies working with OpenVMS ?n >w> >Abandoned, alone, no integrated, nobody cares about your job,> >no body listens you, your are forgotten in the meetings, yourA >system works but its not important for the IT staff -  just form1 >the end-users, feeling at the end-of-career, ...- >-" >Just to know if I am not alone !  >- >Regards >- >FCa >  u >1   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 10:23:48 +0000iO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>nY Subject: Re: OpenVMS thrashes slowaris and aix in cluster tco/virus study ... again! ... 40 Message-ID: <c0abfl$qpj$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Bob Ceculski wrote: < > the results are in ... and OpenVMS clusters trash slowaris@ > and aix by huge margins ... tco is the best in all categories,A > and also OpenVMS has the least downtime, especially to viruses.l? > It once again proves Andrew wrong ... throw out cert since hes> > says they aren't reliable, bring in an independent tco study? > and it proves that VMS is unhackable ... of course this studyn@ > wasn't done by sun but by their customers responses, so it has. > to be wrong because what do they know ... :) >  > ; > http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=04/02/09/4975302c    , Bob, this is rather like your CERT trolling.  : The TechFoolish report you refer to was released some time6 ago, its is complete tosh, it has been comprehensively7 trashed at least twice but still you see fit to drag it  up again for another airing.     Regards  Andrew Harrisonm   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Feb 2004 17:17:41 -08001 From: susan_skonetski@hotmail.com (Sue Skonetski)CL Subject: Re: Oracle ships 10g database, cuts price  <-- Oracle RDB too ?????= Message-ID: <857e9e41.0402101717.7ebdfc19@posting.google.com>m   Folks,  C Just letting you know that I checked with Oracle and this on VMS asr well starting with 10g  
 Warm Regards,o Suep  r fabiopenvms@yahoo.com.br (Fabio Cardoso) wrote in message news:<f30679fb.0402040128.4659871@posting.google.com>... > Clickn > ; > http://news.com.com/2100-7344_3-5152672.html?tag=nefd_top  >  > A > Oracle announced the availability of its Oracle 10g database onaC > Tuesday and cut prices, in an effort to gain more customers amonge > midsize businesses.u > G > As previously reported by CNET News.com, Oracle released the Unix and H > Linux versions of its Oracle 10g database and dropped the price of itsG > entry-level database to about $5,000 per processor, matching the costAF > of Microsoft's SQL Server 2000 database. A Windows version of OracleE > 10g is slated for completion in a "few weeks," according to companyi
 > executives.  > (...)  >  > 	 > Regardsp >  > FC   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Feb 2004 19:03:29 -0800. From: spamsink2001@yahoo.com (Alan E. Feldman)Q Subject: Re: OT: Another American arrested in Brazil after making obscene gestureM= Message-ID: <b096a4ee.0402101903.433417c1@posting.google.com>f  ~ "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net> wrote in message news:<40293688.21073A17@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net>... > "Alan E. Feldman" wrote: > >  > > "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net> wrote in message news:<40258B38.FE4310C8@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net>... > > > Fabio Cardoso wrote: > > > >eG > > > > What is happening with the americans ? I allways had admirationy! > > > > for the American minds...d > > > G > > > Say, "freedom of expression". Some Americans just assume, perhapslN > > > incorrectly, that their homeland rights extend to the rest of the world. > > J > > Freedom of speech, not expression. Freedom of speech protects opinion, > > not vulgarity. > F > The supreme court has repeatedly disagreed with your interpretation.  D OK. Well, I doubt the founding fathers had cursing on national TV inF mind when drafting the First Amendement. And I think the Supreme CourtF would disagree with your capitalization thereof! Look at what happenedE to Putin's opposition. He was "disappeared". Prevention of stuff like C that (but not necessarily limited to that) is the motivation of the-F First Amendment. I don't think vulgarity counts much compared to that!  ; > > If you can't figure out a way to "express" your opinionP; > > without vulgarity, then you've got far bigger problems.- > H > Be that as it may, the courts have repeatedly disagreed with those whoF > have sought to suppress vulgarity. Obscenity is the "bug-a-boo", not > vulgarity.   OK.U  H > > Remember, not all forms of speech are protected. You are not allowed? > > to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater when there is no fire.P > B > Well, under freedom of speech, yes it is allowed. However, otherH > regulations may impose restrictions even where constitutional freedoms > have been upheld.   7 Whatever, but I don't believe such speech is protected.z   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 05:46:21 -0500 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com># Subject: OT: PSION, another Digital ) Message-ID: <4028B64C.F68F3D53@istop.com>   < Sadly, I see so many similarities between PSION and Digital.  I PSION, which pioneered/opened/developped the PDA market is essentially no. longer.   C It had established itself with its "VAX", the SIBO-EPOC hardware/OS K combination which generated both PDAs (Series 3) and industrial devices. It8M was a leader, with those little guys having pre-emptive multitasking on a 286 L with 1 or 2 meg of ram, interprocess communications, a networking stack veryK simular in functionality to DECNET (including abilitely to remotely start a M task). And this was in the early 1990s when competing PDA were "devices" suchlC as CASIO agendas that you couldn't program or load additinal apps).m  M Then, seeing the threath from Microsoft, it decided to go all out and rewriteMI its EPOC from scratch, targeting ARM, and allowing more GUIish interface,eN dropping C and using the then trendy C++, making very proprietary file system.  M Shortly after releasing its first EPOC-32 model, The Series 5, PSION spun offDF the OS group to form a consortium called Symbian, and got mobile phoneL companies to pitch in. The Series 5 was released before the software was allI finished (rushed to market, probably to demo EPOC-32 to potential Symbian  shareholders) This was in 1998.   L This coincided with Microsoft entering the market with Windows-CE, which, at the time, was dismal.   H However, from this point onwards, PSION lagged and introduced only 2 newG products in the years that followed, the PSION 5mx which was really the-N "completed" Series 5 with the originally promised functions (such as Java) andJ many bug fixes. It also released a slightly larger model the netbook (also1 knowns as series 7) which had identical software.b  J Meanwhile, as Microsoft and Compaq unleashed an updated Windows-CE (calledM Pocket PC) in a "Palm" form factor,  PSION  confirmed it was pulling out fromcI consumer PDA parket. PSION had meanwhiled purchased a small canadian firmuL called Teklogix which also made industrial devices that were microsoft based (mostly MS-dos).  H In recent weeks, PSION has sold its remaining software division that hadL written applications for Symbian (such as email push to the phone software),E and this week, announced it was selling its stake in Symbian. In thatDH announcement, it mentioned it would be working to eliminate the multipleM platforms supported by Teklogix to a single standard one (Windows CE) To this L end, Teklogix had already converted the industrial version of the Netbook to" run Windows-CE instead of EPOC-32.  M Interestingly, since EPOC stopped developping new EPOC-32 based devices yearsiJ ago, the OS has progressed significantly in a direction set by the handsetM manufacturers and the originally extremely proprietary nature of the OS, fileiG system and applications has become more opened. (TCPIP stack, symlc for-N instance). If PSION were to create a PDA based on a current version of SymbianM OS and marketed it, it could revive the PDA market big time, especially if it5B can integrate MP3 and digital cameras (which Symbian OS supports).    L So PSION has gone from being a leader in the PDA market, a competitor fearedK by Microsoft to becoming just another Windows-CE vendor, loyal to Microsoftn" and without any distinctive asset.  M The owner, Mr Potter, fearing Microsoft's onlaught,  instead of selling PSION-K to someone who wanted to make it succeed, decided to cannabalise it and use N the money to buy Teklogix, a company already loyal to Microsoft. Reminds me ofZ Palmer's actions with Digital/VMS. Oh and yes, PSION also had a problem with marketing....  I PSION is yet another exmaple of a company that had an establihed, leadingeN product line, and allowed itself to wither away even thought it had a superior= product, simply because the competitors HAD BETTER MARKETING.e    K Seems that everytime I choose a product because it is technically superior,mI the owner disagrees with me and works hard to get rid of that product. ItD) happened with Digital/VMS and with PSION.    ------------------------------    Date: 10 Feb 2004 13:32:53 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)o& Subject: Re: Other CVS on VMS problems3 Message-ID: <U7K95Huh6dyl@eisner.encompasserve.org>   b In article <200402100842.19991.kpederson@ewu.edu>, Kaleb Pederson <kpederson@mail.ewu.edu> writes:  * > $ cvs -d:ext:otherhost:/home/cvs co test@ > cvs [checkout aborted]: cannot exec: no such file or directory  =    I'm not sure you can use -d with ssh.  I've only tried -p.i   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:47:59 -0800n- From: Kaleb Pederson <kpederson@mail.ewu.edu>l& Subject: Re: Other CVS on VMS problems2 Message-ID: <200402101347.59517.kpederson@ewu.edu>  J '-d' should definitely work as it specifies the directory (in this case a M remote module) that should be pulled.  The documentation (in the info pages) t on '-p' say the following:    `-p'oE      Pipe the files retrieved from the repository to standard output,aG      rather than writing them in the current directory.  Available withe*      the `checkout' and `update' commands.   If I were to issue the command:h  1 cvs -d :ext:otherhost:/path/to/cvsroot co -p testn  J Then it would all be displayed on the console instead of being written to 9 file.  What command would you use to hit a remote system?s  7 I tried the following as well, but get the same result:-  # $ define CVS_RSH "ssh_exe:ssh2.exe"A+ $ define CVSROOT ":ext:otherhost:/home/cvs"  $ cvs co -p testB cvs [checkout aborted]: cannot fdopen 3 for write: bad file number  J Bob, what version of CVS are you running?  I'm currently running the only ' version that I was able to find online?:  L Anyone have any ideas what file descriptor three has to do with any of this?   Thanks.a   Kalebr  8 On Tuesday 10 February 2004 11:32 am, Bob Koehler wrote:D > In article <200402100842.19991.kpederson@ewu.edu>, Kaleb Pederson   <kpederson@mail.ewu.edu> writes:, > > $ cvs -d:ext:otherhost:/home/cvs co testB > > cvs [checkout aborted]: cannot exec: no such file or directory >c? >    I'm not sure you can use -d with ssh.  I've only tried -p.c   ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:42:23 +0000 (UTC)lP From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply)F Subject: page- and swap-files, autogen, modparams.dat, file-naming etc$ Message-ID: <c0bq8v$8q2$1@online.de>  F The System Manager's Manual says to refer to the primary page and swapC files as PAGEFILE1 in modparams.dat.  I thus assumed that the first F non-primary file would answer to "2" etc, so I used that in modparams.H dat.  Didn't work---so I explicitly gave it a name.  Didn't work.  So I : explicitly gave a name to the primary files.  Didn't work.  E Here's what things look like now.  Can someone explain the confusion?4  O ===============================================================================   @               System Memory Resources on 11-FEB-2004 00:22:48.17  L Swap File Usage (8KB pages):                   Index        Free        Size+   DISK$ALPHASYS_3:[SYS0.SYSEXE]SWAPFILE.SYSrL                                                    1        2480        3120)   DISK$SWAPPAGE_3:[GLADIA]SWAPFILE2.SYS;1iL                                                    2        6248        6248  L   Total size of all swap files:                                         9368  L Paging File Usage (8KB pages):                 Index        Free        Size)   DISK$SWAPPAGE_3:[GLADIA]PAGEFILE2.SYS;1nL                                                  253       17643       19928+   DISK$ALPHASYS_3:[SYS0.SYSEXE]PAGEFILE.SYSnL                                                  254        1588        3816  L   Total size of all paging files:                                      23744L   Total committed paging file usage:                                    8243  O ===============================================================================a  > PAGEFILE1_NAME="SYS$SYSTEM:PAGEFILE.SYS" ! why do I need this? MIN_PAGEFILE1_SIZE=200000 6 PAGEFILE2_NAME="DISK$SWAPPAGE_3:[GLADIA]PAGEFILE2.SYS" PAGEFILE2_SIZE=400000SF SWAPFILE1_NAME="SYS$SYSTEM:SWAPFILE.SYS" ! maybe not needed; see above MIN_SWAPFILE1_SIZE=500006 SWAPFILE2_NAME="DISK$SWAPPAGE_3:[GLADIA]SWAPFILE2.SYS" SWAPFILE2_SIZE=100000n  O ===============================================================================c  4 AUTOGEN Parameter Calculation Report on node: GLADIA;   This information was generated at 10-FEB-2004 00:06:33.30nK   AUTOGEN was run from SAVPARAMS to SETPARAMS - default execution specifiede     Processing Parameter Data filesn -------------------------------   3 Including parameters from: SYS$SYSTEM:MODPARAMS.DAT   9 The following problems were detected within MODPARAMS.DAT 1    These problems should be reviewed immediately.n  9 ** WARNING ** - Duplicate value for PAGEFILE1_NAME found. G 	This overrides preceding requirements for this parameter in PARAMS.DATnJ 	Please review the parameter setting and if possible use MIN, MAX, or ADD.  9 ** WARNING ** - Duplicate value for PAGEFILE2_NAME found. G 	This overrides preceding requirements for this parameter in PARAMS.DATnJ 	Please review the parameter setting and if possible use MIN, MAX, or ADD.  9 ** WARNING ** - Duplicate value for SWAPFILE2_NAME found. G 	This overrides preceding requirements for this parameter in PARAMS.DAT.J 	Please review the parameter setting and if possible use MIN, MAX, or ADD.       Page file calculations:e  Q         PAGEFILE1_SIZE information (for DISK$SWAPPAGE_3:[GLADIA]PAGEFILE2.SYS;1):C 	Feedback information.- 	   Old value was 318900, New value is 200000a* 	   Maximum observed usage (blocks): 38224B 	Override Information - parameter calculation has been overridden.= 	   The calculated value was 57300.  The new value is 200000.v9 	   PAGEFILE1_SIZE is not allowed to be less than 200000.r9 	   PAGEFILE1_SIZE will be modified to hold 200000 blocksv  A         PAGEFILE2_SIZE information (for SYS$SYSTEM:PAGEFILE.SYS):o 	Feedback information., 	   Old value was 61100, New value is 400000* 	   Maximum observed usage (blocks): 38608B 	Override Information - parameter calculation has been overridden.= 	   The calculated value was 57900.  The new value is 400000.iB 	   PAGEFILE2_SIZE has been set to the hard-coded value of 400000.9 	   PAGEFILE2_SIZE will be modified to hold 400000 blocks   I ** Note **  A new, smaller PAGE file cannot be created on DISK$SWAPPAGE_3/< this would leave insufficient space.  The existing file will unchanged at this time.e  F 	** Note **  Free space on DISK$SWAPPAGE_3 is insufficient to create a- 		PAGE file of 200000 blocks.   The file willf! 		continue to hold 318911 blocks.F  O ===============================================================================s  H While true that there is insufficient space to create a smaller file, itD shouldn't even be trying to.  On DISK$SWAPPAGE_3 I want to have the F secondary page and swap files with FIXED SIZES.  I originally created I them with the desired sizes, but due to this confusion they accidentally sH got downsized.  I want to call these files (in modparams.dat) PAGEFILE2 H and SWAPFILE1, with the ones in SYS$SYSTEM referred to by PAGEFILE1 and 1 SWAPFILE1 (as the manual says).  What's going on?l  C Also, what is the relationship between the sizes specified in SHOW 6. MEMORY/FILES and the actual size of the files:   Directory SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSEXE]   PAGEFILE.SYS;6         61100 SWAPFILE.SYS;3         50000  " Directory DISK$SWAPPAGE_3:[GLADIA]   PAGEFILE2.SYS;1       318911 SWAPFILE2.SYS;1       100000  I Also: the above was produced with two separate DIR commands.  What about r this:h  P $ dir/siz sys$system:pagefil*,swapfil*,disk$swappage_3:[gladia]pagefil*,swapfil*   Directory SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSEXE]   PAGEFILE.SYS;6         61100 SWAPFILE.SYS;3         50000    Total of 2 files, 111100 blocks.  " Directory DISK$SWAPPAGE_3:[GLADIA]   PAGEFILE2.SYS;1       318911 PAGEFILE2.SYS;1       318911 SWAPFILE2.SYS;1       100000 SWAPFILE2.SYS;1       100000    Total of 4 files, 837822 blocks.  5 Grand total of 2 directories, 6 files, 948922 blocks.w  E I can understand doubled names in search lists etc, but they are now lH showing up in DISK$SWAPPAGE_3:[GLADIA] which is just a normal directory!  H Final point: AUTOGEN writes AGEN$PARAMS.REPORT OK, but the following to  SYS$OUTPUT:   .                 remain unchanged at this time.F %DCL-W-IVVERB, unrecognized command verb - check validity and spelling
  \SYS$OUTPUT\ I %AUTOGEN-I-ERROR, TESTFILES phase was aborted due to an unexpected error.e %SYSTEM-F-ABORT, abort  B Looks like there is a DCL error when TESTFILES is invoked.  No, I  haven't edited it:  & $ dir sys$update:autogen.com/dat=(c,m)   Directory SYS$COMMON:[SYSUPD]   E AUTOGEN.COM;1        18-JUL-2002 17:47:08.76  18-JUL-2002 17:47:24.66.   Total of 1 file.  N ==============================================================================  = To summarise: I want to have secondary page and swap files oniG DISK$SWAPPAGE_3 and want to refer to them as PAGEFILE2 and SWAPFILE2 intF MODPARAMS.DAT (and thus have given them consistent file names) and, IF> NECESSARY, to the primary files in SYS$SYSTEM as PAGEFILE1 and< SWAPFILE1, as the manual recommends.  What am I doing wrong?   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 22:23:11 GMTh" From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG Subject: Re: Pinging Brian0 Message-ID: <00A2D383.0757A715@SendSpamHere.ORG>  Y In article <IicWb.111$lN5.108@news.cpqcorp.net>, John Reagan <john.reagan@hp.com> writes:iJ >Brian, you sent me a macro question, but didn't setup your system to let C >me reply to your email.  Let me in and I can answer your question.    Sorry John... try again.   --B http://www.legacy-2000.com  for the *best* OpenVMS system securityC                             solutions that others only claim to be.e -- tK VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COMh             5   "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?" i   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Feb 2004 11:03:27 -08001 From: keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris) " Subject: Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars= Message-ID: <cf15391e.0402101103.6ab939aa@posting.google.com>r   Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew No.Harrison No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<bvb1b6$mnq$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>... ) > x86-64 is a full 64bit architecture, ito: > currently has a physical address space of 40 bits enough< > to address 1 TB or RAM. Itanium has a 50 bit address space< > which if you are using the "only" 40 bits argument against9 > Opteron as a way of claiming that it isn't a 64 bit CPUe' > also means that Itanium isn't either.v  , Virtual address space, Andrew, not physical.   According to AMD's website atiR http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_8826_8805,00.html+ Opteron has a 48-bit virtual address space.    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 10:29:54 +0000RO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>t" Subject: Re: Rumours of (CPU) Wars0 Message-ID: <c0abr3$qrp$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Rob Young wrote: > In article <c07n2i$nlb$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes: >  >>Rob Young wrote: >> >>>In article <bvvr7r$5ac$3@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> writes:h >>>  >>>. >>>>Rob Young wrote: >>>> >>>>L >>>>>We're sorry, but we are unable to process your request to configure theT >>>>>identified product. The link to the product you selected is temporarily broken.Q >>>>>This product should be accessible shortly. If time is of the essence, we askn= >>>>>that you call us at and talk to a sales representative. a >>>>>rS >>>>>Please use your browser's "back" button to return to the previous page and, ife* >>>>>appropriate, make another selection.  >>>>>d >>>>>e >>>>> >>>>Just do the config Rob and stop BSing, including support a? >>>>PowerEdge 6550 with 4 x 2.8 GHz CPU's and 8 GB of RAM costsn >>>>$30120.e >>>> >>>o >>> ( >>>	Sure it does.  For that industry :^) >>>e	 >>>			Robt >>>h >>< >>Well since that Industry accounts for the bulk of all Dell8 >>purchases your attempts to justify your pricing claims: >>using an EDU/Govt price for the box was only what people >>have come to expect from you.  >> >  > A > 	But it is where we purchase from, so it is a legitimate lookupn > 	on my part. >    Yehhh right.   >  > : >>I predicted in another thread that you would butt out of6 >>this one, this is the time to do so though you would8 >>have been advised to have done it earlier. :-) :-) :-) >  > < > 	Nah.  You've got a lot of words and points, but sometimes > 	they miss the mark. >   > As you know that is also a false claim on your part. After all? why has the sum total of your claims in this thread ended being ? reduced to whether or not its legitimate for you to compare theh@ higher EDU/Govt price of a Dell box with the lower general price of an Opteron box.  = It wasn't as if your frantic spin actually proved your point.    Regards  Andrew Harrisone   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Feb 2004 11:52:35 -08001 From: keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris)v, Subject: Re: Searching for DECps information= Message-ID: <cf15391e.0402101152.28ae7b3e@posting.google.com>w  p grayduck_not_goose@yahoo.com (Davies) wrote in message news:<8561a3dd.0401291539.1e9a04df@posting.google.com>...4 > Where can I get a copy of or information on DECps?  B Computer Associates now owns, supports, and maintains the product,C which is now named "Unicenter Performance Management for OpenVMS".  4 See http://www3.ca.com/Solutions/Product.asp?ID=1174  E While the Advisor's rulebase has not been updated over the years as IeF would have liked, this is still the first performance tool I reach for2 when and if it's available on a customer's system.  ; You can get a trial license and kit from CA and try it out.   F Business practices in general seem to have gotten better at CA lately.F  But for folks who have taken a solemn vow against buying from CA, seeC http://perfcap.com/  I think their graphs have reached a level thate> exceeds that of DECps, and they've added Hot-Files capability,< although they still lack an AI-based Advisor or PC Sampling.   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:55:19 -0800O# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>n, Subject: RE: Searching for DECps information9 Message-ID: <NDEMLKKEBOIFBMJLCECICENCCMAA.tom@kednos.com>j   You could also have a look at,  L http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:YrlpLRXQfdEJ:212.190.77.82/cockpitmgr/Bro8 chure2003.pdf+vms+cockpit+manager&hl=en&start=3&ie=UTF-8     -----Original Message-----:   From: Keith Parris [mailto:keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com]+   Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 11:53 AMf   To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Coma.   Subject: Re: Searching for DECps information    8   grayduck_not_goose@yahoo.com (Davies) wrote in message;   news:<8561a3dd.0401291539.1e9a04df@posting.google.com>...o6   > Where can I get a copy of or information on DECps?  D   Computer Associates now owns, supports, and maintains the product,D   which is now named "Unicenter Performance Management for OpenVMS".6   See http://www3.ca.com/Solutions/Product.asp?ID=1174  G   While the Advisor's rulebase has not been updated over the years as ItH   would have liked, this is still the first performance tool I reach for4   when and if it's available on a customer's system.  =   You can get a trial license and kit from CA and try it out.h  H   Business practices in general seem to have gotten better at CA lately.H    But for folks who have taken a solemn vow against buying from CA, seeE   http://perfcap.com/  I think their graphs have reached a level thatn@   exceeds that of DECps, and they've added Hot-Files capability,>   although they still lack an AI-based Advisor or PC Sampling.     ---e(   Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.<   Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).B   Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 1/22/2004   ---6& Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).@ Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 1/22/2004   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:41:48 GMTt& From: jlsue <jefflsxxxz@sbcglobal.net>% Subject: Re: Why was VAX abandonned ?e8 Message-ID: <nsnh205cubpt44eitfrp8ikmikbkddi63h@4ax.com>  H On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 10:50:27 +0100, Paul Sture <nospam@sture.homeip.net> wrote:   >John Santos wrote:g   >>  I >> Some terminals send a BREAK when they are turned off.  Many VAXes halt.H >> on break.  It probably wasn't the act of logging out that crashed theB >> system, but the BREAK from turning off the terminal, which they. >> probably did immediately after logging out. >> ' >eG >I came across some third party terminals which sent break on power up.nF >For some inexplicable reason the console terminals weren't on the UPS >though everything else was. >   A At one place I worked, we used VAXstation Model 90 systems, fullyr4 configured with memory, as interactive user systems.  < We also used VCS (console system), connected via DECservers.  G Unfortunately, some DECservers send a <break> when powered on or reset,h which caused the M90s to halt.   --- jls 0 The preceding message was personal opinion only.6 I do not speak in any authorized capacity for anyone,  and certainly not my employer.- (get rid of the xxxz in my address to e-mail).   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2004.082 ************************