James G. Sack (jim)([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > my story: > <snip>I've spared the reader from references to computer models with names/numbers that don't make sense to anyone below the tender young age of 45</snip> > > As I recall, the mainframe had 32K of 60-bit ram (core, or > course). There were 2 6-ft tall tape drives for holding the > fortran compiler,assembler, etc, and for building intermediate > code products, I think. The final output was a card deck spit out > by the nifty card punch. Then you added job control cards and > your data deck at the end and the whole package was fed into a > card reader right at the console.
These days, mainframers call the RAM, "(main) storage". However, despite the fact that no one uses card readers anymore, the system has INTREADERs (internal readers) that take jobs and feed them to the system for execution. Your output is still sent to "printers" which may or may not include a "form", all of this is, of course, simply sent to the output queues and stored in logging files. </snip> > I thought it was quite an honor when they allowed me to run my > own programs as a sanctioned console operator on Saturdays. I had > to open up, start the beast (bootstrapping from toggle-switch > instructions that read and executed a card in the card reader. As > I understood it that card had instructions to read the rest of > the bootstrap code from the remaining cards in the reader. All of > this is really not too far from what we do now, eh? I am surprised that it didn't boot from tape. How many cards were required for that process. Booting is usually referred to as an IPL, now (initial program load). A warm restart of any system, OS or otherwise, is referred to as a "bounce". > My program decks, I could hold in one hand usually, but some guys > had huge programs they carried around in multiple punchcard boxes > (1000 each box?). There are many horror stories of programmers > who neglected to use the (optional) card sequencing field in cols > 81-90(?), and learned their lesson after one experience dropping > their deck. You young'uns need to know that there were card > sorting machines to put things back together. They were pretty > nifty machines, too!, those card sorters. I believe in earlier > days, they may have played a large role in the business machines > industry. I've heard those horror stories around here, too. If the program itself wasn't large, then the tray might've had several jobs in it. There was no such thing as a small accident if you dropped a tray. Interestingly enough, the default editor on MVS still allows you to have the numbers inserted. Now, I don't mean the line numbers like we have in vi. Those are there, but there is an entirely different, optional set of numbers that you can have going down the right side (sitting just outside the viewable area unless you scroll). It took a while before I found out that those were for card numbering. No one knows why it's still in the editor, though. They still do use JCL for inputing jobs and starting tasks, with pretty much identical syntax that was used on the cards. In fact, each line of JCL is still called a "job card" (that might make the last paragraph make a little more sense for some people). > There was a job-control requirement for specifying max CPU time > and printer output, so the cost of runaway programs was somewhat > controlled. There are numerous items you can specify in the JOB statement. They can be very configurable, and site-specific, but I still have to define the default output class so that logs go to the right "printer". > Card jams in the reader and punch provided additional > entertainment. Card Jams... Sounds like an industrial, grunge band. Would they play at a KPLUG meeting? </snip> Wade Curry -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
