So... what exactly is "the bar"? There seems to be some disagreement.
And that's natural since, being technology developers, we make up our
nomenclature as we go along, so variations in nuances (nuancai?) can
easily arise...
To some, "the bar" is the 2G line...
At 7/5/2011 11:00 AM, Tom Marchant wrote:
I think that "above the bar" means >2G. It is true that the bar was
once described as having a thickness of 2G as IARV64 would not
create a memory object in that area. I think that is now obsolete.
At 7/5/2011 11:49 AM, John McKown wrote:
z/OS hurls if the PSW instruction address is above the bar. [[[...
That would be any address >=2G, so I guess John holds to the 2G line
view. -dbc]]]
At 7/5/2011 11:51 AM, Cheryl Walker wrote:
Above the bar > 2G.
At 7/5/2011 01:10 PM, Bill Fairchild wrote:
Regardless of other restrictions that IBM may add to the use of
storage above the bar, "the bar" is still the virtual address 2GB.
And to many, "the bar" is the very thick 2G to 4G area...
At 7/5/2011 08:11 AM, Gene Hudders wrote:
Isn't the reason it is called a Bar is because it is 2 GB in size
and not a simple 1 byte from 16 MB to 16+1 MB? [[[... I think that
reasin it's called a "bar" is simply becuase it is a word that is
different from "line" -dbc]]]
At 7/5/2011 09:07 AM, Mark Zelden wrote:
Since the bar is 2G thick (or it used to be before Java started to
use it), maybe it can be called "in the bar".
At 7/5/2011 09:34 AM, Mohammad Khan wrote:
Since bars unlike lines do have some thickness I like to think of
the bar being the range from 2G - 4G but that's just me. [[[... No,
apparently it's not just you. -dbc]]]
At 7/5/2011 11:32 AM, John McKown wrote:
Java uses memory "in the bar"? An IBMer stated that is impossible.
[[[... It used to be impossible -dbc]]]
At 7/5/2011 12:02 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
I vote for "within the bar".
At 7/5/2011 07:43 PM, Gibney, Dave wrote:
I've never had a problem considering it "within the bar". I always
thought of the "bar" as being 2G thick as opposed to the 2 dimensional "line".
At 7/6/2011 06:46 AM, Jan MOEYERSONS wrote:
It's called "the bar". The bar being 2GB thick.
And some have followed their own road altogether... [;)]
At 7/5/2011 01:10 PM, Bill Fairchild wrote:
[...] above the 2G proto-bar
but possibly below the 4G quasi-bar,
or even up to the 32G neo-bar.
[[[... Well actually Bill goes on to state that he believes "the bar"
is the 2G line. But I do like his creativity here. [;)] -dbc]]]
And to still others, "the bar" is the 4G line. That's my own view,
and the view of ...
Oh-oh! Apparently no others? Woh!
Am I really going to have to change my whole world view here?
Or could I stick to my guns and bring all you other misguided souls
around to my self-evidently correct view? [Sorta like the Casey
Anthony jury, right?]
Are there any supporters out there of the >4G view?
Just wondering...
Dave Cole REPLY TO: dbc...@colesoft.com
ColeSoft Marketing WEB PAGE: http://www.colesoft.com
736 Fox Hollow Road VOICE: 540-456-8536
Afton, VA 22920 FAX: 540-456-6658
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
