INFO-VAX Mon, 05 Nov 2007 Volume 2007 : Issue 605 Contents: RE: .NET Mono for VMS Re: .NET Mono for VMS Re: .NET Mono for VMS Re: Guidance with OpenVMS IA64 8.3 with Java 1.5 Problems Re: Guidance with OpenVMS IA64 8.3 with Java 1.5 Problems RE: Happy Anniversary VMS - 30 years young Re: hope there's VMS here Re: lexical for terminal attributes? Re: lexical for terminal attributes? Re: Name that VAX/VMS version based on banner Re: Pathworks vs NFS RE: Rare job posting ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 21:08:07 +0000 From: "Main, Kerry" Subject: RE: .NET Mono for VMS Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Arne Vajh=F8j [mailto:arne@vajhoej.dk] > Sent: November 3, 2007 10:47 PM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: Re: .NET Mono for VMS > > Main, Kerry wrote: > > Technically, you are partially right i.e. clustering requires > multiple > > levels of support i.e. HW, OS, DB and Applications in order for a > complete > > overall clustering solution. > > But not the compiler or language runtime. > > Arne ?? I must be misunderstanding something - can you expand on this? Thanks, Kerry Main Senior Consultant HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660 Fax: 613-591-4477 kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT) OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 18:55:48 -0500 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= Subject: Re: .NET Mono for VMS Message-ID: <472e5bfe$0$90271$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Main, Kerry wrote: > From: Arne Vajhøj [mailto:arne@vajhoej.dk] >> Main, Kerry wrote: >>> Technically, you are partially right i.e. clustering requires multiple >>> levels of support i.e. HW, OS, DB and Applications in order for a complete >>> overall clustering solution. >> But not the compiler or language runtime. > ?? > > I must be misunderstanding something - can you expand on this? We were discussing a new language (C#) and a new runtime (.NET/Mono) for VMS. You asked whether it should support VMS clustering. I have been trying to explain that neither compiler or language runtime are particular relevant for clustering. Arne ------------------------------ Date: 4 Nov 2007 18:30:07 -0600 From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Subject: Re: .NET Mono for VMS Message-ID: In article <472e5bfe$0$90271$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= writes: > Main, Kerry wrote: >> From: Arne Vajhøj [mailto:arne@vajhoej.dk] >>> Main, Kerry wrote: >>>> Technically, you are partially right i.e. clustering requires multiple >>>> levels of support i.e. HW, OS, DB and Applications in order for a complete >>>> overall clustering solution. >>> But not the compiler or language runtime. >> ?? >> >> I must be misunderstanding something - can you expand on this? > > We were discussing a new language (C#) and a new runtime (.NET/Mono) > for VMS. > > You asked whether it should support VMS clustering. > > I have been trying to explain that neither compiler > or language runtime are particular relevant for > clustering. Perhaps not for C# or .NET, but an implementation of the Ada distributed systems annex might have interactions. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 21:28:59 -0500 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= Subject: Re: Guidance with OpenVMS IA64 8.3 with Java 1.5 Problems Message-ID: <472e7fe7$0$90266$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Richard B. Gilbert wrote: > Arne Vajhøj wrote: >> Richard B. Gilbert wrote: >>> Maybe HIS PC has that much RAM. Mine has 1GB which seems to be >>> sufficient. >> >> If you were to buy a new today - how much RAM would that system have ? > > If I were to buy a new PC today, I would call a friend who is a PC > wizard and ask him. That is probably what most people do. :-) > With W/XP 512 MB is enough and 1 GB is generous. I've never run Vista > and, God willing, never will! Eventually you will need to go Vista or switch to a non Windows OS. Arne ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 21:44:50 -0500 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" Subject: Re: Guidance with OpenVMS IA64 8.3 with Java 1.5 Problems Message-ID: <472E83A2.9090408@comcast.net> Arne Vajhøj wrote: > Richard B. Gilbert wrote: > >> Arne Vajhøj wrote: >> >>> Richard B. Gilbert wrote: >>> >>>> Maybe HIS PC has that much RAM. Mine has 1GB which seems to be >>>> sufficient. >>> >>> >>> If you were to buy a new today - how much RAM would that system have ? >> >> >> If I were to buy a new PC today, I would call a friend who is a PC >> wizard and ask him. > > > That is probably what most people do. > > :-) > >> With W/XP 512 MB is enough and 1 GB is generous. I've never run Vista >> and, God willing, never will! > > > Eventually you will need to go Vista or switch to a non Windows OS. > > Arne > Well, I already run Red Hat Linux, Solaris 8, 9, & 10, VMS/Alpha v7.1-2 in addition to W/XP. With any luck either Vista or I will die before I HAVE to use it. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 23:43:05 +0000 From: "Main, Kerry" Subject: RE: Happy Anniversary VMS - 30 years young Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: JF Mezei [mailto:jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca] > Sent: November 1, 2007 11:09 PM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: Re: Happy Anniversary VMS - 30 years young > > Ron Johnson wrote: > > All of the current versions of the "big" Server software (Windows, > > Exchange & SQL Server) are all released for ia64. And ia64 is a VC > > builds target, so in-house development obviously goes on. > > Unless Microsoft has reversed its previous decision, its support of > IA64 > is still very limited with only a few "server" packages available, and > nothing like Office or others popular software. And if I remember > correctly, Ia64 versions were to come later than for the industry high > volume stuff. > Ummm, since when did Office become a server application? How many people install Office on Xeon based x86 servers? Did I miss something? > And frankly, do you serously believe that someone with pure business > goals would choose to run windows on some IA64 box ? > As Keith stated, the answer is yes. > I can understand shops who have marketing associations with either > intel > or microsoft who would deploy some windows on ia64. I can understand > some very high profile high performance shop getting some deal where > the > subsidies for having windows on IA64 would be greater than running > linux > on 8086 for instance. But do people really want windows on IA64 on > their own free will ? As Keith stated, the answer is yes. Regards Kerry Main Senior Consultant HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660 Fax: 613-591-4477 kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT) OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 03:36:50 -0000 From: "David P. Murphy" Subject: Re: hope there's VMS here Message-ID: <1194233810.872416.92620@o38g2000hse.googlegroups.com> Damn, I never figured you as a yes-man, Brian . . . ok dpm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 01:40:58 -0000 From: Thomas Dickey Subject: Re: lexical for terminal attributes? Message-ID: <13ist5arm191r84@corp.supernews.com> Arne Vajhøj wrote: > Thomas Dickey wrote: >> Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>> PS: That code require a damn good terminal emulator to work ! >> >> ...particularly since it is using a feature which is not documented: >> >> \E["v > It is documented. > Try Google for DECRQDE. sure (recall that I suggested that it was for a vt300+, since it was not for a vt100 or vt220). google shows it for a vt520. Just to point out that your example should have had the caveat that it was able to ask _some_ terminal for the width - not that it has anything to do with how good the emulator is. -- Thomas E. Dickey http://invisible-island.net ftp://invisible-island.net ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 21:23:56 -0500 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= Subject: Re: lexical for terminal attributes? Message-ID: <472e7eb6$0$90266$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Thomas Dickey wrote: > Arne Vajhøj wrote: >> Thomas Dickey wrote: >>> Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>>> PS: That code require a damn good terminal emulator to work ! >>> ...particularly since it is using a feature which is not documented: >>> >>> \E["v > >> It is documented. > >> Try Google for DECRQDE. > > sure (recall that I suggested that it was for a vt300+, since it was > not for a vt100 or vt220). google shows it for a vt520. > > Just to point out that your example should have had the caveat that > it was able to ask _some_ terminal for the width - not that it has > anything to do with how good the emulator is. It is in VT400 series as well. I find it much more likely that people have a terminal emulator that are missing obscure features than one that only supports VT300 series. Arne ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 20:37:45 -0800 From: AEF Subject: Re: Name that VAX/VMS version based on banner Message-ID: <1194237465.067594.95050@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com> On Nov 4, 12:40 pm, "R.A.Omond" wrote: > AEF wrote: > > While rummaging in my storage area I found a VAX/VMS printout of the > > prime numbers between 1 and a million and a second printout for those > > between 1000000 and 2000000. Here is what the top banner says: > > > VAX/VMS PTEXT 23-SEP-1981 17:56 LPA0: 23-SEP-1981 > > 17:56 _DRA0:[PRIME]PTEXT.DAT;1 VAX/VMS > > > This is followed by the username in 7-character-tall letters, then the > > filename and type in 14-character-tall letters over two lines > > > PTEXT. > > DAT;1 > > > followed by the username in 7-character-tall letters followed by the > > same as the top banner. > > > Frankly, I have no idea what the answer is. > > > Anyone have any ideas what version of VAX/VMS these printouts are > > from? > > I'd say it would have been about the VMS 2.3 to VMS 2.5 timeframe. > The lineprinter output format stayed pretty much the same for a long > time after that. Thanks! Someone gave these printouts to me in the 1982-1983 time frame. I didn't use a VAX myself until 1985. I think we had V3.x then. AEF ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 22:58:44 -0500 From: VMSQuest Reborn Subject: Re: Pathworks vs NFS Message-ID: Bob Koehler wrote: > In article <-5udnWzGLsLB-rzanZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@giganews.com>, VMSQuest Reborn writes: >> We have been using Pathworks for several years now, serving about 1 TB >> of data to about 15,000 users. >> >> Some people here at my workplace are proposing a "Pathworks replacement" >> that entails a NetApps solution which, according to some NetApps folk, >> implies NFS for serving the VMS-based files. >> >> To me, comparing Pathworks to NFS is barely comparing fruit to fruit, >> let alone apples to apples. > > I used PCNFS to connect PC's to Solaris systems. NFS has been known > to have secutiry problems, many of which have been addressed, but > NFS is still very UNIX-centric. > > You will have problems accessing VMS files from PCs and PC files from > VMS since NFS doesn't understand anything but UNIX byte stream files. > We had similar, but smaller, problems between Solaris' UNIX > conventions and PCs. (PCs use simlilar byte stream files with > different text line conventions). Pathworks knows about this and > uses RMS extensions added primarily to support Windows to help deal > with it. But you'll have little problem accessing VMS files from VMS > and PC files from PCs. > > Windows has its own ideas of how to lock files from multiple access. > NFS does not enforce such things on its own, but an application can > ask it to. You need to verify that NetApps will enforce Windows' > file locks (I suspect it does). > > And of course, choose your NFS server vendor for VMS wisely. > Bob, apparently yours is the definitive response, since no one else has anything to add. But it was quite helpful to me, on several levels, so "many thanks" to you. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 21:08:08 +0000 From: "Main, Kerry" Subject: RE: Rare job posting Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Arne Vajh=F8j [mailto:arne@vajhoej.dk] > Sent: November 3, 2007 10:34 PM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: Re: Rare job posting > > Main, Kerry wrote: > > Ask any outsourcing company for a quote on them managing 10 > standalone servers vs > > 10 VM's running on one server. The quote they provide for the VM's > will be approx 80-90% > > of the 10 physical servers. They know where all the real work is. > > Sure. > > With the applications that are the same. > > Arne Bus App's are only one small part of the equation. Backups, security log monitoring, perf/capacity planning, user mgmt, licens= ing, data archiving-restores, OS upgrade planning, etc are just a few of the are= as that outsourcing companies have to do on a OS specific basis. Hence, the more OS instances, the greater the work. That is why they all ty= pically provide quotes on a OS specific basis - regardless of the physical number o= f servers. And of course, if you have an OS platform that has many security patches re= leased each and every month, then the workload is that much higher as you then nee= d to additional bus app testing and re-certification + roll-out planning + sched= uling App reboot or downtimes with the business units. Regards Kerry Main Senior Consultant HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660 Fax: 613-591-4477 kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT) OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works. ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2007.605 ************************