1 INFO-VAX	Fri, 30 Jun 2006	Volume 2006 : Issue 361       Contents:> Re: Education Ministry rethinks payroll plans (Oracle and VMS)> RE: Education Ministry rethinks payroll plans (Oracle and VMS) Re: Floating point questions+ Re: Gates says vista "most secure os ever"?  Re: How to set LOCKIDTBL? ' Re: OT: Intel quad core X64 benchmarked ' Re: OT: Intel quad core X64 benchmarked G Re: zipping large files (was Re: Info-ZIP's Zip V2.32 is now available)   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------    Date: 30 Jun 2006 03:14:17 -0700 From: dooleys@snowy.net.auG Subject: Re: Education Ministry rethinks payroll plans (Oracle and VMS) C Message-ID: <1151662457.276000.193400@y41g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>   ) Good to see that you are committed Kerry! 6 That is what dec/compaq/hp has always needed in sales.4 We have put out a number of tenders for applications9 in the last few years (including payroll/HR), none of the  responses have included vms.& Maybe it would be different in Canada?3 Organisations that run "off-the_shelf" software, do 5 effectively outsource the regression testing of their 4 systems to the software supplier, they trust that in8 the event of a problem their business will be supported. Phil   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 10:12:59 -0400 ' From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> G Subject: RE: Education Ministry rethinks payroll plans (Oracle and VMS) T Message-ID: <FA60F2C4B72A584DBFC6091F6A2B868401664ED1@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>   > -----Original Message-----7 > From: Karsten Nyblad [mailto:nospam@nospam.nospam]=20  > Sent: June 29, 2006 10:04 PM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com ; > Subject: Re: Education Ministry rethinks payroll plans=20  > (Oracle and VMS) >=20 > Main, Kerry wrote:H > > I guess it is a matter of opinion as imho, due to the sensitive data@ > > they hold, HR systems have high security and depending on=20
 > the time of ? > > the month, high availability requirements. If a Cust can=20  > get over the OS : > > religion, putting these types of applications on OS=20 > platforms that have H > > 5-20 *security* patches per month does not seem logical or have much > > business sense to me.  >=20I > Who would be stupid enough to put the payroll system directly on the=20 E > Internet?  Yes, you might have information needed for the system=20 A > available and perhaps even modifiable from the Internet, but=20  > the payroll=20B > system should not be accessible from the Internet, and larger=20 > companies=20J > should have a firewall between it and normal employees and their PCs.=20@ > Smaller companies might be better of out sourcing payroll. =20 > At least in=20- > Denmark that is usually cheaper and better.  >=20  @ Missing the point .. Once the attacker gets through the externalB defences (many of which are now Windows/Linux based - see previousH comments on monthly security patches and difficulty in keeping current -H which btw, the bad guys have no problem doing), attacking the know otherH systems internally using the many known issues becomes the prime targets of interest.=20   A Remember - breaking in past the external defences is not the main G objective for the bad guys .. Its getting at the internal systems which  is the main prize.   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, 29 Jun 2006 22:43:43 -0700 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> % Subject: Re: Floating point questions ) Message-ID: <op.tbx1651mzgicya@hyrrokkin>   H On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 13:36:37 -0700, Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>  =   wrote:   > Tom Linden wrote: ; >> On Wed, 28 Jun 2006 21:17:36 -0700, Steven M. Schweda  =    >> <sms@antinode.org> wrote: >>C >>>    So, does this count as the annual comp.os.vms floating-point " >>> mystification thread for 2006?F >>  A good candidate.  Decimal and binary don't mix well.  If you needC >> to use Decimal, then use a language that supports it as a native 
 >> data type.  > I > Well, you're the compiler guy, and I'm just the dumb polock from back =  in  =   & > the hills, but, isn't it all binary?  I In a word, No, well sort of.  On machines like Alpha which do not have  =    nativeI decimal istructions, it is done in runtime.  The excess-3 algorithm was =   =  G devised by soemone at Univac in the early 50's, which allows for BCD  =    arithmetic on a binary machine. > I > I'm thinking it's probably interesting how you get stuff to work in an=  y  =   > base other than 2. >    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 14:47:07 +0200 / From: Paul Sture <paul.sture.nospam@hispeed.ch> 4 Subject: Re: Gates says vista "most secure os ever"?: Message-ID: <bae3c$44a51d4b$50db5015$9757@news.hispeed.ch>   bob@instantwhip.com wrote:/ > http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=14905  >   D Following the link from that page entitled "Microsoft: Please Don't 
 Disable UAC":     L http://www.betanews.com/article/Microsoft_Please_Dont_Disable_UAC/1151441160  G "User Account Control, or UAC, is a fundamental security change coming  D in Windows Vista and one of the most important additions to protect E users from threats, Microsoft says. But the company is struggling to  . find a balance between security and usability.   ...   E In turn, new Vista users are left with a bad first impression of the  I operating system and experts simply disable the feature altogether using  F "msconfig." At the Windows Vista Beta 2 lab in May, almost the entire J room said the first thing they do after installing Vista is turn off UAC."  
 Oh dear...   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 06:13:36 GMT   From: John Santos <john@egh.com>" Subject: Re: How to set LOCKIDTBL?) Message-ID: <ki3pg.7756$il.6204@trnddc03>    Hoff Hoffman wrote:  > AEF wrote: > G >> I noticed that AUTOGEN always increases LOCKIDTBL on my v6.1 systems . >> and always decreases it on my v6.2 systems: >  > ...  > A >> These are MicroVAX 3100's (models 80, 90, 95) if that matters.  >  >  > J > Databases and a few applications can require great huge piles of locks. H >  Various other operations and applications and environments don't.  A H > MicroVAX 3100 running some applications will churn along with minimal G > locking activity, while a clustered MicroVAX 3100 running Oracle Rdb  H > will require rather more locks; it's the application load and not the J > system model that tends to be key here.  (Yes, once again Hoff displays % > his hammerlock on the obvious.  :-)  >   E Another potential consumer of lots of locks (by the standards of this D system; it's a piker compared to a database) is BACKUP.  If you haveC tuned with lots of FILLM quota, it can potentially open hundreds of D files when it hits a large directory with many small files, and each will require at least one lock.      --   John Santos  Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Jun 2006 01:55:40 -0700 From: icerq4a@spray.se0 Subject: Re: OT: Intel quad core X64 benchmarkedC Message-ID: <1151657740.787196.129750@d56g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>    Tom Linden skrev:   ? > On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:47:38 -0700, <icerq4a@spray.se> wrote:  > > G > > Xeon does not have a clear lead. HP's xz1 scale good to 4 cores and : > > SGIs system scales linear from 1 to hundreds of cores. > >  > SGI is dropping Itanium.  ) No, they are not. Why do you need to lie?   G They are starting to re-sell Intel designed 1-2 CPU Woodcrest boxes for E clustering solutions to be able to compete in the low cost x86 market G with HP and IBM etc. They are not dropping any Itanium boxes because of  that.    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:18:55 -0700 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> 0 Subject: Re: OT: Intel quad core X64 benchmarked) Message-ID: <op.tbyvltk4zgicya@hyrrokkin>   = On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 01:55:40 -0700, <icerq4a@spray.se> wrote:    > Tom Linden skrev:  > @ >> On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:47:38 -0700, <icerq4a@spray.se> wrote: >> >I >> > Xeon does not have a clear lead. HP's xz1 scale good to 4 cores and=   ; >> > SGIs system scales linear from 1 to hundreds of cores.  >> > >> SGI is dropping Itanium.  > + > No, they are not. Why do you need to lie?   I Lie is a very strong term.  I am just reporting what I was told.  Unlike=   I Garth Brooks, I have friends in high places.  Now that was several weeks=    =    ago  so things may have changed.  > I > They are starting to re-sell Intel designed 1-2 CPU Woodcrest boxes fo=  r G > clustering solutions to be able to compete in the low cost x86 market I > with HP and IBM etc. They are not dropping any Itanium boxes because o=  f  > that.  >    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:13:25 -0700 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> P Subject: Re: zipping large files (was Re: Info-ZIP's Zip V2.32 is now available)) Message-ID: <op.tbyvcntdzgicya@hyrrokkin>   I On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 11:28:41 -0700, Hoff Hoffman <hoff-remove-this@hp.co=  m>  =    wrote:   > Tom Linden wrote:  > I >> Do you have it for Alpha as well?  If so, could you post it somewhere=    =   
 >> please? > F >    gzip 1.3.3 and likely 1.3.5-1 (if not later) will be generally  =  I > available on the Freeware V8.0 distribution.  (Tom now has a copy of a=  n  =  I > OpenVMS Alpha gzip port to look at; he probably didn't realize it, but=    =   5 > he just volunteered to test a gzip port for me. :-)  > % >> How is it an improvement on 1.2.4?  > I >    Other than the large-file support that I centrally needed as part o=  f  =  I > compressing the OpenVMS I64 DVD kits, I didn't particularly investigat=  e  =  6 > the details of the changes made to gzip after 1.2.4. >  >  > H Testing it now, and will report back later.  It would be nice if gzip  =  	 respected . version incrementation instead of overwriting.  : HAFNER> dir $1$DGA2:[000000]common.sav*/size=3Dunit=3Dbyte Directory $1$DGA2:[000000] COMMON.SAV;1         20.49GB COMMON.SAV-GZ;1       5.03GB   FREJA> gzip COMMON.SAVE gzip: $1$DGA2:[000000]COMMON.SAV-gz already exists; do you wish to  =    overwrite (y or n)? y   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2006.361 ************************