1 INFO-VAX	Thu, 13 Apr 2006	Volume 2006 : Issue 205       Contents:5 Re: Error codes from Distributed NetBeans for OpenVMS 5 Re: Error codes from Distributed NetBeans for OpenVMS ? Getting device/directory info for an arbitrary user (F$GETUAI?) C Re: Getting device/directory info for an arbitrary user (F$GETUAI?) C Re: Getting device/directory info for an arbitrary user (F$GETUAI?) C Re: Getting device/directory info for an arbitrary user (F$GETUAI?) ' Re: Internal to External PID conversion ' Re: Internal to External PID conversion ' Re: Internal to External PID conversion E Re: Is OpenVMS certified yet for 64-way Hard partitions (GS1280 M64). E RE: Is OpenVMS certified yet for 64-way Hard partitions (GS1280 M64). E Re: Is OpenVMS certified yet for 64-way Hard partitions (GS1280 M64). E Re: Is OpenVMS certified yet for 64-way Hard partitions (GS1280 M64). E Re: Is OpenVMS certified yet for 64-way Hard partitions (GS1280 M64). E Re: Is OpenVMS certified yet for 64-way Hard partitions (GS1280 M64). @ Last VAX release (WAS: How does a fix become a published patch?)D Re: Last VAX release (WAS: How does a fix become a published patch?)0 set file empty (dfu set <file>/eblock=1/ebyte=0)4 Re: set file empty (dfu set <file>/eblock=1/ebyte=0)4 Re: set file empty (dfu set <file>/eblock=1/ebyte=0)4 Re: set file empty (dfu set <file>/eblock=1/ebyte=0)  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------    Date: 13 Apr 2006 00:54:26 -0700 From: jazzfahrer@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Error codes from Distributed NetBeans for OpenVMSB Message-ID: <1144914866.673676.24600@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>  G Ok. Hmm, what should this error mean? I have this error status from all B remote operation: remote compile, remote build and remote execute.! What have I forget to set? Hints?    ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 12:49:59 GMT ( From: "Meg Watson" <meg.watson@hpxx.com>> Subject: Re: Error codes from Distributed NetBeans for OpenVMS2 Message-ID: <XNr%f.6268$cz5.3571@news.cpqcorp.net>   I'll contact you offline.    Meg   ( <jazzfahrer@gmail.com> wrote in message < news:1144914866.673676.24600@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...I > Ok. Hmm, what should this error mean? I have this error status from all D > remote operation: remote compile, remote build and remote execute.# > What have I forget to set? Hints?  >    ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 09:52:57 GMT L From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing)H Subject: Getting device/directory info for an arbitrary user (F$GETUAI?)6 Message-ID: <00A5422D.D5029ED7@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  N So my actual problem is that I'm reworking my delete-a-user-and-backup-all-hisK -files routine.  The version I -was- using trawled through my big user disk G and did a backup/delete of every file owned by that user, which caught  F whatever he owned whether it was in his directories or not, but makes J _enormous_ save sets because it saves the whole directory structure of theH disk.  I need to keep those savesets around for a year, so when they runM 250mb for 10 mb of actual files, it makes a difference.  And now I have _two_ J big user disks, so if I do the trawl for each disk, I'll end up with _two_1 gigantic savesets, one of the guaranteed useless.   D Usage patterns have changed, in any case, since I wrote this routineF originally, and I think now it would be fine to just backup/delete the user's directory tree.  O What's the recommended way for DCL to get information for a particular user out + of the SYSUAF?  I want his /dev and /dir.     L (It seems a little excessive to do a keyed read of SYSUAF and then F$EXTRACTN the relevant bytes out of the record.  I've got a Datatrieve record definitionI for SYSUAF and I could call Datatrieve and have it FN$SET_LOGICAL for me, 9 but again, this seems inelegant. Also inelegant would be     $ AUTHORIZE LIST 'USER /FULL   and parsing the result.)  O I'd like something that returns a distinct status if the user isn't in the UAF,  while I'm asking.   3 So is there a generally accepted way of doing this?   ) (7.3-2, usually, but could do it on 8.2).    Thanks,    -- Alan    ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 11:13:34 +0000 (UTC)  From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.ukL Subject: Re: Getting device/directory info for an arbitrary user (F$GETUAI?)) Message-ID: <e1lbou$gkl$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>    In article <00A5422D.D5029ED7@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>, winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing) writes:  > O >So my actual problem is that I'm reworking my delete-a-user-and-backup-all-his L >-files routine.  The version I -was- using trawled through my big user diskH >and did a backup/delete of every file owned by that user, which caught G >whatever he owned whether it was in his directories or not, but makes  K >_enormous_ save sets because it saves the whole directory structure of the I >disk.  I need to keep those savesets around for a year, so when they run N >250mb for 10 mb of actual files, it makes a difference.  And now I have _two_K >big user disks, so if I do the trawl for each disk, I'll end up with _two_ 2 >gigantic savesets, one of the guaranteed useless. > E >Usage patterns have changed, in any case, since I wrote this routine G >originally, and I think now it would be fine to just backup/delete the  >user's directory tree.  > P >What's the recommended way for DCL to get information for a particular user out, >of the SYSUAF?  I want his /dev and /dir.   > N There is a public domain utility GETUAI which can get this information and put it into symbols eg  5 Alpha2:getuai dummy1 /device=device_name/dir=user_dir  Alpha2:sh sym device_name    DEVICE_NAME = "USER5:" Alpha2:sh sym user_dir   USER_DIR = "[DUMMY1]"     M >(It seems a little excessive to do a keyed read of SYSUAF and then F$EXTRACT O >the relevant bytes out of the record.  I've got a Datatrieve record definition J >for SYSUAF and I could call Datatrieve and have it FN$SET_LOGICAL for me,: >but again, this seems inelegant. Also inelegant would be  >  >$ AUTHORIZE LIST 'USER /FULL  >  >and parsing the result.)  > P >I'd like something that returns a distinct status if the user isn't in the UAF, >while I'm asking. >   ( Alpha2:getuai dummyx /exists=user_exists Alpha2:sh sym user_exists    USER_EXISTS = "NO"     You can get  GETUAI from  " ftp://ftp.mdx.ac.uk/vms/getuai.zip      
 David Webb Security team leader CCSS Middlesex University      4 >So is there a generally accepted way of doing this? > * >(7.3-2, usually, but could do it on 8.2). >  >Thanks, >  >-- Alan   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 11:30:04 +0000 (UTC)  From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.ukL Subject: Re: Getting device/directory info for an arbitrary user (F$GETUAI?)) Message-ID: <e1lcns$gqo$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>   J In article <e1lbou$gkl$1@news.mdx.ac.uk>, david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk writes: >In article <00A5422D.D5029ED7@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>, winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing) writes: >> >  >You can get  GETUAI from  > # >ftp://ftp.mdx.ac.uk/vms/getuai.zip  >   N Just looked at that zip file. The contents are a little confusing as to how toM build the executable but you should be able to just use the link.com file to  1 link the object files and produce the getuai.exe.             
 David Webb Security team leader CCSS Middlesex University     > 5 >>So is there a generally accepted way of doing this?  >>+ >>(7.3-2, usually, but could do it on 8.2).  >>	 >>Thanks,  >>	 >>-- Alan    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 13:32:02 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> L Subject: Re: Getting device/directory info for an arbitrary user (F$GETUAI?)9 Message-ID: <Ccudnc3HNLsUF6PZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@libcom.com>   , Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing wrote:P > So my actual problem is that I'm reworking my delete-a-user-and-backup-all-hisM > -files routine.  The version I -was- using trawled through my big user disk I > and did a backup/delete of every file owned by that user, which caught  H > whatever he owned whether it was in his directories or not, but makes L > _enormous_ save sets because it saves the whole directory structure of theJ > disk.  I need to keep those savesets around for a year, so when they runO > 250mb for 10 mb of actual files, it makes a difference.  And now I have _two_ L > big user disks, so if I do the trawl for each disk, I'll end up with _two_3 > gigantic savesets, one of the guaranteed useless.  > F > Usage patterns have changed, in any case, since I wrote this routineH > originally, and I think now it would be fine to just backup/delete the > user's directory tree. > Q > What's the recommended way for DCL to get information for a particular user out - > of the SYSUAF?  I want his /dev and /dir.    > N > (It seems a little excessive to do a keyed read of SYSUAF and then F$EXTRACTP > the relevant bytes out of the record.  I've got a Datatrieve record definitionK > for SYSUAF and I could call Datatrieve and have it FN$SET_LOGICAL for me, ; > but again, this seems inelegant. Also inelegant would be   >  > $ AUTHORIZE LIST 'USER /FULL >  > and parsing the result.) > Q > I'd like something that returns a distinct status if the user isn't in the UAF,  > while I'm asking.  > 5 > So is there a generally accepted way of doing this?  > + > (7.3-2, usually, but could do it on 8.2).  > 	 > Thanks,  > 	 > -- Alan   A It seems to me that reading the SYSUAF record to get the data is  H elegant, accurate, and proper.  That's what you would do with any other . data file.  For your purposes, it's just data.   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 13:51:49 GMT , From: Hoff Hoffman <hoff-remove-this@hp.com>0 Subject: Re: Internal to External PID conversion2 Message-ID: <VHs%f.6270$Qf5.2842@news.cpqcorp.net>   Alan Frisbie wrote:   A > If there is another (supported?) way to determine this, I would ? > be very happy.   Poking around in a UCB is not what I think I   > should be doing at this level.      I concur.  F > Other information I would like to have is which workspace the windowD > is in, etc.   When I log in, I want to automatate the setup of allH > my windows as much as possible.   If I'm logging in via SSH or Telnet,+ > I usually want to do something different.   E    So (since the morning's coffee hasn't titrated the serum caffeine  C level up into the effective range as yet) you're using DCL in your  I LOGIN.COM or other such to try to select various operations, and you are  D ending up with a requirement for sniffing the device to determine a H target code paths?  (And, because of what you are doing, you can't look H at the device prefix.)  (Again, do pardon my questions -- it's still in  the single digits local time.)  F    I'd be tempted to acquire this information under an customized LGI E module, and pass it into the new process that way.  This assumes the  $ information is available, of course.  E    Processing ACLs from DCL is a bear, or I'd suggest adding a local  @ device-specific identifier to flag each of the template devices.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 09:17:11 -0700 4 From: Alan Frisbie <Usenet02_REMOVE@Flying-Disk.com>0 Subject: Re: Internal to External PID conversion# Message-ID: <1144945026.1798@smirk>    Hoff Hoffman wrote:  > Alan Frisbie wrote:   D > So (since the morning's coffee hasn't titrated the serum caffeine E > level up into the effective range as yet) you're using DCL in your  K > LOGIN.COM or other such to try to select various operations, and you are  F > ending up with a requirement for sniffing the device to determine a  > target code paths?   Exactly.  5 > And, because of what you are doing, you can't look   > at the device prefix.   = No, I certainly can (and do) look at the device prefix.   The @ problem is that they are all the same, regardless of whether the@ "terminal" device is a DECterm window or an SSH session: FTAnnn.  ? If F$GETDVI would provide the necessary information, that would > be wonderful.   But since it doesn't (as far as I can tell), I2 am reduced to trying to divine it by arcane means.  ; I still don't understand why DECwindows "terminals" and SSH < sessions have to have the same device prefix.   Do you know?   Thanks,  Alan   ------------------------------    Date: 13 Apr 2006 11:28:11 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) 0 Subject: Re: Internal to External PID conversion3 Message-ID: <NLzCgJg$65t9@eisner.encompasserve.org>   Z In article <1144945026.1798@smirk>, Alan Frisbie <Usenet02_REMOVE@Flying-Disk.com> writes:  = > I still don't understand why DECwindows "terminals" and SSH > > sessions have to have the same device prefix.   Do you know?  > I always presumed they both use the Pseudo-terminal interface.   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 11:37:50 GMT 5 From: rdeininger@mindspringdot.com (Robert Deininger) N Subject: Re: Is OpenVMS certified yet for 64-way Hard partitions (GS1280 M64).[ Message-ID: <rdeininger-1304060737460001@dialup-4.233.173.163.dial1.manchester1.level3.net>   E In article <BqKdnZ3-ct55raDZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@libcom.com>, Dave Froble  <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote:     >This gets more amusing. > 7 >Customer:  I won't order until you qualify the system.  > 1 >HP: We won't qualify until you order the system.   O Which (of course, since this is c.o.v.) is a subtle alteration of what I wrote.   D There's a big difference between having an order in hand, and havingH customer(s)  saying they want to order.  HP woudn't need an order on the books to know there was demand.   F Big system orders have long lead times anyway -- configuration detailsG matter, prices must be haggled, spending must be approved, data centers H must be prepared.  These negotiations sometimes result in additional VMSH qualification to support say, a higher count of IO cards that a customerC needs.  These aren't really off-the-shelf items, and neither HP nor  customers treat them that way.  I The current situation seems to be that customers are window shopping, but J DON'T want to buy.  Nobody's configuring systems or wanting to negotiate.  In short, there's no demand.  J VMS wants to keep customers happy, so >32 CPU Marvels would very likely be$ qualified if customers asked for it.  G But something would have to be traded off.  VMS Engineering doesn't get G revenue from hardware sales, but VMS Engineering would bear the cost of H the qualification project.  That's fine, HP would make a profit in other$ divisions, so it's just funny-money.  J But something else would be delayed to support this Marvel project.  MaybeH V8.3, maybe some Integrity new system support, maybe faster FibreChannelI adapters, maybe something else.  Plenty of customers ARE waiting for V8.3 A and new Integrity support, loudly.  VMS management makes priority . decisions like this all the time, no big deal.  & But we're talking about a project that& 1. No customer has actually asked for,0 2. Might not benefit a given application anyway,, 3. Has no direct benefit to VMS Engineering,; 4. Loses money for HP (unless at least one system is sold), B 5. Delays other projects that customer are asking and waiting for.  . So why would anyone approve this project, now?    H >What I think doesn't matter, but I seem to remember that at least some J >of the people who have complained aren't even at the current 32 CPU max, H >but are running only 24 CPUs.  (I am running 2 x M32's (currently both A >24-way))  Seems time for a potential customer to place an order.   H You'd need to be very happy with the way your application scales betweenJ 24 and 32 CPUs before you'd even consider going above 32.  Even on Marvel,I many applications don't do well with 32 CPUs.  Fred mentioned some of the  reasons.  ? Reliability is clearly worse for a M64 than for a pair of M32s. G Reliability is very good for these systems, but it always gets worse as I you increase the component count.  (GS1280 hardware has less-than-perfect A fault isolation.) Reliability matters for a lot of VMS customers.   J Many applications can scale with little effort via VMS clustering, so many; customers who need more horsepower already have a solution.   H There are lots of good, obvious reasons why the market for VMS on M64 isF small compared to M32.  The difficult question is figuring out whetherJ it's small, or zero.  People have looked, and so far the evidence seems to
 say ... zero.   G >While I understand the issue that Robert has raised, I have to wonder  J >whether this is standard for all manufacturers of large systems, or just  >HP's treatment of ALpha.   H Dunno.  Tru64 qualified, and supports, GS1280 M64.  They did NOT qualifyE and support GS1280 M128, and this was back when Alpha was a "growing" H product line.  Lack of demand, or sinister plot?  Or maybe a system that6 clearly couldn't hold its own due to scaling problems.  1 >The concept of "If you build it, they will come"   E "If you build it, they MIGHT come" is certainly closer to the truth.  @ Digital, like any real-world company, had its share of horrible, money-losing products.  < >has a converse of "If you don't build it, they won't come".  I In practice there is a big grey area between the two extremes you listed.    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 10:08:23 -0400 ' From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> N Subject: RE: Is OpenVMS certified yet for 64-way Hard partitions (GS1280 M64).T Message-ID: <FA60F2C4B72A584DBFC6091F6A2B86840125ABC7@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>   > -----Original Message-----J > From: David J. Dachtera [mailto:djesys.nospam@NeOaSrPtAhMlNiOnWk.net]=20 > Sent: April 12, 2006 9:30 PM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com : > Subject: Re: Is OpenVMS certified yet for 64-way Hard=20 > partitions (GS1280 M64). >=20 > Dave Froble wrote: > >=20 > > JF Mezei wrote:  > > > Dave Froble wrote: > > > G > > >>If HP cared about keeping these customers, they'd be pro-actively ? > > >>talking to them and insuring them they'd have whatever=20  > they need.  If< > > >>that's 64 CPU Alphas until Cerner is running on the=20 > itanic, then so be it. > > >  > > > ? > > > Consider Swift. Once Swift had agreed to heed's Palmer=20  > suggestion they A > > > abandon VMS, there was no turning back, and the owner of=20  > VMS wouldn't@ > > > have lifted a finger to try to retain customers it knew=20 > wouldn't be ableB > > > to remain on VMS for long anyways. (and during the Compaq=20
 > era, Compaq > > > > would have known the odds were very slim that a Swift=20 > customer on VMS ? > > > would migrate to a windows based solution which didn't=20  > fully exist at6 > > > that time, and that is all Compaq had to offer). > > > B > > > **IF** Cerner doesn't have intentions of remaining on VMS=20
 > in the long G > > > term and prefers to focus on other platforms such as AIX, then HP H > > > wouldn't have much in terms of incentives to spend money to retain. > > > customers it knows it will lose anyways. > > > > > > > On the other hand, if the VMS engineers know that VMS=20 > works on 64 CPUsH > > > but that they just never got around to documenting it, adding thisA > > > qualified support might be easy, or they may simply tell=20  > Cerner that itB > > > should work and gice Cerner the tools to test it themselves. > >=20@ > > Jumping to conclusions without any reason.  I've not read=20 > one word that H > > says Cerner is abandoning VMS.  Not saying they are, or aren't, just> > > haven't seen anything to indicate they are.  Unless you=20 > have some solid A > > information, speculating on one of your pet theories isn't=20  > very helpful.  >=20G > Well, consider that two of Cerner's largest sites in the Chicago area ? > have been lost by HP as storage customers in favor of EMC.=20  >=20  @ While I would prefer an HP storage solution, a number of OpenVMS Customers use EMC SAN's.  D > Consider that Cerner's three largest sites in the Chicago area areH > contemplating an eventualy move to AIX to obtain 64 CPU support (and a6 > somewhat less uncertain future for their platforms). >=20  D Given the medical environment is extremely conservative and cautiousF (with good reason), making a major change like this would only be doneE if there was serious dissatisfaction or major wall issues. If a major G wall issue was perceived, then the amount of $'s to certify VMS 64cpu's B would be a fraction of what it would take to make a major platformE change - think about staffing changes alone. Also HA and DR means 2 x 4 number of server replacements. Twice x 64cpu server?  A > Consider also that we're on the threshold of V8.3 and Cerner=20  > has yet toF > certify V8.2 (which will be two versions back, allowing for V8.2-1). >=20  H First, the recommended version is V8.2-1 on IA64, so Cust's would not doC 8.2 first and then do 8.2-1. From V7.3-2, they would go straight to  V8.2-1.   B Second - Major app vendors do not certify their app on every majorA release of a vendors OS release. These re-cert's can be extremely G expensive. There has to be good reason and if the current OS version is E perceived to be working well, then they will wait for a good business 3 reason to re-cert their app on a new OS version.=20   H > Consider that the last sale dates for Alpha are just around the corner$ > and Cerner has yet to certify I64. >=20  D I wonder if the availability of Oracle 10G on IA64 had any impact on that?=20  E And before anyone jumps on Oracle, keep in mind that they also had to 2 get the 10G Alpha release out the door as well.=20  E Here is a question for you - has Cerner cert'ed Oracle 10G yet on any D platform? What about RAC? [Perhaps they have, but I am interested to confirm]    A > I know you're an intelligent guy, Dave. I'm sure you can put=20 
 > 2.0 and 2.0 C > together come with something approximating 4.0, even allowing for  > floating-point errors. >=20B > As someone in my office put it, the "marriage" between Cerner=20 > and VMS is > seriously on the rocks.  >=20   David,  H I am not involved, so have no idea of what the Cerner-HP relationship isE right now. I do know that a significant number of both new and GS1280 E upgrades's are continuing to be sold to Cerner sites as I see the win  info.=20  F Keep in mind the generic pro's-n-con's of scale up vs scale out. ThereE are obviously places for both. If the app can not scale out, then the G only solution is scale up, but what about HA and DR requirements now as  well?=20  D You now need 2 64 CPU servers [+ big memory which can cost more thanF CPU's] instead of one. And if the second server can not be effectivelyA used, then that is one large pile of HW sitting around doing very 9 little. Does that impact overall cost? Of course it does.   D As others have stated, the 64CPU cert on OpenVMS Alpha can likely be? done, but it will require some firm business justifications and  commitment from real Customers.    Regards   
 Kerry Main Senior Consultant  HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax: 613-591-4477  kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT)=20  4 OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 09:37:15 -0500 ' From: Dave Harrold <DHarrold@wi.rr.com> N Subject: Re: Is OpenVMS certified yet for 64-way Hard partitions (GS1280 M64).8 Message-ID: <t8os325t37eg3qhqtmro6gd0crqlrj16n7@4ax.com>   Hi Richard,   3 On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 06:53:30 +0800, "Richard Maher" $ <maher_rj@hotspamnotmail.com> wrote:  	 >Hi Dave,  > ' >Thanks for taking the time to explain.  >  >>I >> They support clusters, but they use Oracle for their database and they G >> have problems going to a multiple-active-instance RAC configuration.  > I >So a) push the envelope and build a new supercomputer b) Continue to get * >Oracle and VMS to fix the software. Hmmm? > E >Again, I don't want to waste everyone's time with idle curiosity and I >frivolous speculation (it's not the ITRC after all) but If someone would L >like to discuss the problems with getting multiple-active-instances and RACK >(or Grid) working with VMS then I would be very interested. (I'm sure alot M >of VMS users not using the Cerner applications would be interested as well!)  >   = Sorry if I gave the impression the problem was VMS or Oracle.   : Warning! I am not an Oracle DBA nor do I play on on TV....  B My understanding is that the way Cerner has implemented their dataA design is what causes the issues.  I have talked with various VMS @ sites at DECUS, etc. that are using and have been using multipleD active instances of an Oracle database.  So, to my understanding, itB has more to do with the design of the application and the databaseB design for the application than the capabilities of Oracle or VMS.  F Some one with a better Oracle background (or any Oracle background :-)5 can probably give a more detailed discussion of this.   J >What happened to that disaster tolerant proof-of-concept whitepaper? Only) >one active instance? Where's Kerry Main?  >  >Regards Richard Maher   Hope that helps,   Dave    N ..............................................................................N David Harrold                                 E-Mail: David.Harrold@aurora.orgN Lead Software Systems Engineer                 Phone:           (414) 647-6204N                                                Pager:           (414) 941-4634N Aurora Health Care                               Fax:           (414) 647-4999 3031 W. Montana Street Milwaukee, WI 53215    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 12:59:07 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> N Subject: Re: Is OpenVMS certified yet for 64-way Hard partitions (GS1280 M64).9 Message-ID: <KLydnVloQadNH6PZnZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@libcom.com>    David J. Dachtera wrote: > Dave Froble wrote: >  >>JF Mezei wrote:  >> >>>Dave Froble wrote:  >>>  >>> E >>>>If HP cared about keeping these customers, they'd be pro-actively I >>>>talking to them and insuring them they'd have whatever they need.  If N >>>>that's 64 CPU Alphas until Cerner is running on the itanic, then so be it. >>>  >>> I >>>Consider Swift. Once Swift had agreed to heed's Palmer suggestion they H >>>abandon VMS, there was no turning back, and the owner of VMS wouldn'tK >>>have lifted a finger to try to retain customers it knew wouldn't be able H >>>to remain on VMS for long anyways. (and during the Compaq era, CompaqH >>>would have known the odds were very slim that a Swift customer on VMSH >>>would migrate to a windows based solution which didn't fully exist at3 >>>that time, and that is all Compaq had to offer).  >>> H >>>**IF** Cerner doesn't have intentions of remaining on VMS in the longD >>>term and prefers to focus on other platforms such as AIX, then HPE >>>wouldn't have much in terms of incentives to spend money to retain + >>>customers it knows it will lose anyways.  >>> I >>>On the other hand, if the VMS engineers know that VMS works on 64 CPUs E >>>but that they just never got around to documenting it, adding this J >>>qualified support might be easy, or they may simply tell Cerner that it? >>>should work and gice Cerner the tools to test it themselves.  >>I >>Jumping to conclusions without any reason.  I've not read one word that F >>says Cerner is abandoning VMS.  Not saying they are, or aren't, justI >>haven't seen anything to indicate they are.  Unless you have some solid J >>information, speculating on one of your pet theories isn't very helpful. >  > G > Well, consider that two of Cerner's largest sites in the Chicago area = > have been lost by HP as storage customers in favor of EMC.   > D > Consider that Cerner's three largest sites in the Chicago area areH > contemplating an eventualy move to AIX to obtain 64 CPU support (and a6 > somewhat less uncertain future for their platforms).  D I'd think that an entity could make that switch anytime.  If that's C true, why would any intelligent entity perform what I'd guess is a  ; rather expensive exercise immediately and upon speculation?   I > Consider also that we're on the threshold of V8.3 and Cerner has yet to F > certify V8.2 (which will be two versions back, allowing for V8.2-1).  G Does Cerner have anything to say about their current and future plans?  I I'd think that a vendor would be up front and open with their customers.  G   Has anybody just come out and asked Cerner what their VMS plans are?   If not, why not?  H > Consider that the last sale dates for Alpha are just around the corner$ > and Cerner has yet to certify I64.  E Same questions as above.  What does Cerner say about VMS on the good  + ship itanic?  If nobody has asked, why not?   J > I know you're an intelligent guy, Dave. I'm sure you can put 2.0 and 2.0C > together come with something approximating 4.0, even allowing for  > floating-point errors.  H No, I don't think that that is the proper way to run an enterprise.  If G I was running things at your shop, and I had concerns, I'd be in touch  I with upper management at Cerner and be demanding some guidance.  As your  G vendor, it's their responsibility to let you know where they're going,  I and to keep you from wasting money on speculation.  I'd be asking Cerner   what is the total of 2 + 2.   J > As someone in my office put it, the "marriage" between Cerner and VMS is > seriously on the rocks.    Do they know this?  ! Has anyone just asked the vendor?   G Such things can feed upon themselves.  Customers are heard to say that  D Cerner is abandoning VMS.  Cerner hears such, and thinks that their G customers are abandoning VMS, so they had better place their resources  
 elsewhere.  H Has anyone told Cerner that they'd rather remain on VMS, and asked when 6 the latest version of VMS on itanic will be certified?  2 Maybe you need to ask, so they know what you want.  + Am I the only one who can see this clearly?    --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 13:00:41 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> N Subject: Re: Is OpenVMS certified yet for 64-way Hard partitions (GS1280 M64).9 Message-ID: <KLydnVhoQaexHqPZnZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@libcom.com>    David J. Dachtera wrote: > Dave Froble wrote: >  >>[snip]2 >>The concept of "If you build it, they will come" >>= >>has a converse of "If you don't build it, they won't come".  >  > G > More like, "If you don't build it, your competition wins since that's   > where your customers will go". > H > ...on the other hand, it appears that this is exactly what HP intends;3 > so, obviously, their plan is working as intended.  >   , Have you asked HP for a 64 CPU Alpha system?   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 13:09:56 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> N Subject: Re: Is OpenVMS certified yet for 64-way Hard partitions (GS1280 M64).9 Message-ID: <79qdnWG-mdbHGKPZnZ2dnUVZ_tOdnZ2d@libcom.com>    Robert Deininger wrote: G > In article <BqKdnZ3-ct55raDZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@libcom.com>, Dave Froble  > <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote: >  >  >  >>This gets more amusing.  >>8 >>Customer:  I won't order until you qualify the system. >>2 >>HP: We won't qualify until you order the system. >  > Q > Which (of course, since this is c.o.v.) is a subtle alteration of what I wrote.   
 <big snip>   Hey, I'm with you.  ? If a customer hasn't maxed out their current system(s), and is  E complaining about the supported maximims, thats rationalization, not    valid reasons to switch vendors.  H If you tell a customer that if they order a 64 CPU system, you'll build F it and sell it to them, and they don't order, just complain about the B lack of availability of a 64 CPU system, again, they're not being  reasonable.   C Me, I think there is more to this, that just isn't being mentioned.    --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 06:05:01 -0700 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> I Subject: Last VAX release (WAS: How does a fix become a published patch?) ) Message-ID: <op.s7x6mnmvzgicya@hyrrokkin>   L On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 14:43:20 -0700, Hoff Hoffman <hoff-remove-this@hp.com>   wrote:   > Tom Linden wrote:  > ) >> BTW,  is 7.3 the last release for VAX?  > / >    It is the current release for OpenVMS VAX.   2 Sorry, that was ambiguous, what I meant is 7.3 the? last to be released for the VAX?  Haven't followed this closely 0 but I thought that 8.2 was going to be the last.   ------------------------------    Date: 13 Apr 2006 11:26:32 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) M Subject: Re: Last VAX release (WAS: How does a fix become a published patch?) 3 Message-ID: <pk1uVdH85DaX@eisner.encompasserve.org>   O In article <op.s7x6mnmvzgicya@hyrrokkin>, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> writes: N > On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 14:43:20 -0700, Hoff Hoffman <hoff-remove-this@hp.com>   > wrote: >  >> Tom Linden wrote: >>* >>> BTW,  is 7.3 the last release for VAX? >>0 >>    It is the current release for OpenVMS VAX. > 4 > Sorry, that was ambiguous, what I meant is 7.3 theA > last to be released for the VAX?  Haven't followed this closely 2 > but I thought that 8.2 was going to be the last.  E My understanding is that there is no VAX release currently scheduled.   C But if there are reasons for that to change, the decision regarding D what number to give that new release will likely be made rather late in the game.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 10:23:33 +0100 0 From: Chris Sharman <chris.sharman@sorry.nospam>9 Subject: set file empty (dfu set <file>/eblock=1/ebyte=0) 4 Message-ID: <e1l5am$ath$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk>  D I've a (sequential) file I want to truncate to empty, so that I can  rewrite it from DCL.1 I don't believe vms has a built-in tool to do it.   0 dfu provides a way to set the last block & byte.A However, when ebyte is 0, dfu, for reasons best known to itself,  I consistently adds one to the block number. So if I set (1,0) I get (2,0). B When eblock is 0, dfu sets the block number to the last allocated.  8 /eblock=-1/ebyte=0 actually does the trick! (writes 1,0) How bizarre a feature is that ?    VMS Alpha 7.3-1, DFU 3.1-1.    Chris    ------------------------------    Date: 13 Apr 2006 05:07:07 -0700 From: mckinneyj@saic.com= Subject: Re: set file empty (dfu set <file>/eblock=1/ebyte=0) C Message-ID: <1144930027.416684.299100@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>   E > I've a (sequential) file I want to truncate to empty, so that I can H > rewrite it from DCL. I don't believe vms has a built-in tool to do it.  E I know that you weren't looking for a solution (you've got one), but,  how's this (DCL only)?   $ dir/siz=all x.x    Directory DISK$CIR:[MCKINNEYJ]    X.X;1                      15/18   Total of 1 file, 15/18 blocks. $ set file/attr=ebk:0 x.x  $ set file/trunc x.x $ dir/siz=all x.x    Directory DISK$CIR:[MCKINNEYJ]  $ X.X;1                      0/0         Total of 1 file, 0/0 blocks.$    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 15:47:27 +0100 0 From: Chris Sharman <chris.sharman@sorry.nospam>= Subject: Re: set file empty (dfu set <file>/eblock=1/ebyte=0) 4 Message-ID: <e1lo9v$eja$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk>   mckinneyj@saic.com wrote: F >> I've a (sequential) file I want to truncate to empty, so that I canI >> rewrite it from DCL. I don't believe vms has a built-in tool to do it.  > G > I know that you weren't looking for a solution (you've got one), but,  > how's this (DCL only)? >  > $ set file/attr=ebk:0 x.x   H Yes, I'd completely forgotten that - I checked the set file qualifiers, I but forgot to check the /attribute keywords. ebk & ffb were exactly what     I wanted.    Thanks Chris    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 13:28:39 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> = Subject: Re: set file empty (dfu set <file>/eblock=1/ebyte=0) 9 Message-ID: <J-ednSEUMeMmFKPZnZ2dnUVZ_vidnZ2d@libcom.com>    Chris Sharman wrote: > mckinneyj@saic.com wrote:  > G >>> I've a (sequential) file I want to truncate to empty, so that I can J >>> rewrite it from DCL. I don't believe vms has a built-in tool to do it. >> >>H >> I know that you weren't looking for a solution (you've got one), but, >> how's this (DCL only)?  >> >> $ set file/attr=ebk:0 x.x >  > J > Yes, I'd completely forgotten that - I checked the set file qualifiers, K > but forgot to check the /attribute keywords. ebk & ffb were exactly what   >  I wanted. >  > Thanks > Chris    Strictly curious.   H Why would you want to truncate an existing file and re-write it instead 2 of just deleting the file and creating a new file?  A It cannot be to re-use the existing allocated storage, since the  " truncate must release the storage.   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2006.205 ************************