Re: Mainframe articles
On Tue, 12 May 2009 01:51:26 -0400, Scott T. Harder scottyt.har...@gmail.com wrote: Maybe it was a 3080 when I first logged on to TSO??? Sorry... a bit foggy. I would guess a 3081 Bruno Sugliani zxnetconsult(at)free(dot)fr http://zxnetconsult.free.fr -- 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
308x Processors - was Mainframe articles
3083 was Uni, 3081 was Dyadic (2 -way Non-Partitionable), 3084 was Partitionable 4-way. Base and X models with almost unrememberable model letters. Interestingly, later on you could get a 1+1 2-way and a 2+1 3-way. The benefits of these were larger caches (as you got 2 of them). I'm not sure who bought these, though. Martin Martin Packer Performance Consultant IBM United Kingdom Ltd +44-20-8832-5167 +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter ID: MartinPacker They're figuring out that collaboration isn't a productivity hit, it makes them smarter. Sam Palmisano on BlogCentral, 26 November 2008 Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- 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
Re: Mainframe articles
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main as well. scottyt.har...@gmail.com (Scott T. Harder) writes: Very cool. Funny, though... I remember first logging onto TSO on what I thought was a 3082 (although I didn't know what even DASD was at the time). Then, when I finally got my hands on a mainframe in MCO, it was a 3084. This slideshow shows a 3083, which I don't have any recollection of. Looks like a 3084, from what I can remember, though. 308x were going to be multiprocessor only ... 3081 was two-processor machine, 3084 was pair of 3081s ganged together for four-processor machines. traditional 370 cache machines slowed the processing cycle down by 10% to allow for cross-cache chatter in a two-processor configuration (and four-processor was even slower) ... that is addition to the actual cache processing overhead of handling cross-cache signals (two-way met that there was signals from one other cache, four-way resulted in signals from three other caches). TPF/ACP was an important market segment at the time ... but didn't have SMP (tightly-coupled, shared memory, multiprocessor) support. 3083 was 3081 with some of the hardware removed for a single processor and the single machine running nearly 15% faster (cross-cache chatter slowdown disabled). Prior to 3083, TPF/ACP operation on 3081 was under vm/370 (handling multiprocessor hardware) providing multiple (single processor) virtual machines for TPF/ACP operator (TPF/ACP did have loosely-coupled, cluster support ... so the multiple TPF/ACP virtual machines could be coordinated ... as opposed to say, production vis-a-vis test). Although there were some TPF/ACP 3081 operations where the 2nd processor would sit mostly idle. 3083 was primarily introduced to address TPF/ACP market. web reference: http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/mainframe/mainframe_PP3081.html prior to 308x, a 370 multiprocessor had fully replicated hardware ... and a two processor system could be split and run as two independent single processors. for the 3081, the term dyadic was introduced to differentiate that while it had two execution processors ... all the hardware was not fully duplicated and so a 3081 couldn't be split and operated as two independent uniprocessors (although a 4-processor 3084 could be split into two 3081s). 3082 waas the service processor. One of the issues was that field engineering required a boot-strap diagnostic process ... which started with scoping failed components and going up from there. TCMs in 308x were not scope'able ... so things started with a service processor that was simpler technology and was scope'able ... then a working service processor had all sorts of diagnostices instrumentation into the TCMs. There were lots of issues with developing a roll-your-own operating system and diagnostic applications for the service processor in the 308x ... so for the 3090 ... it was decided to go with a standard (low-end, scope' able) 370 for the service process. The 3090 effort started out with 4331 running a customized version of vm370 release six and all the service screens implemented in cms ios3720. by the time, the 3090 shipped, the service processor had been upgraded to a pair of 4361s (effectively replicated units in lieu of having to scope the service processor for diagnostic process). misc. past posts mentioning 3083: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#103 IBM 9020 computers used by FAA (was Re: EPO stories (was: HELP IT'S HOT!)) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#65 oddly portable machines http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#9 4341 was Is a VAX a mainframe? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#69 TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001b.html#37 John Mashey's greatest hits http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001c.html#13 LINUS for S/390 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001j.html#17 I hate Compaq http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#9 IBM Doesn't Make Small MP's Anymore http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002i.html#83 HONE http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002m.html#67 Tweaking old computers? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002o.html#28 TPF http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#58 AMP vs SMP http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#30 One Processor is bad? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003p.html#45 Saturation Design Point http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004.html#7 Dyadic http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004c.html#35 Computer-oriented license plates http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004e.html#44 Infiniband - practicalities for small clusters http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005.html#22 The Soul of Barb's New Machine (was Re: creat) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005j.html#16 Performance and Capacity Planning http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005m.html#55 54 Processors? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005o.html#44 Intel engineer discusses their dual-core design http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005s.html#7 Performance of zOS guest
Re: Mainframe articles
Care to talk about the various slugged (and not slugged) models. And base vs X? Cheers, Martin Martin Packer Performance Consultant IBM United Kingdom Ltd +44-20-8832-5167 +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter ID: MartinPacker They're figuring out that collaboration isn't a productivity hit, it makes them smarter. Sam Palmisano on BlogCentral, 26 November 2008 Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- 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
Re: Mainframe articles
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main as well. re: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009g.html#66 Mainframe articles http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009g.html#67 Mainframe articles http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009g.html#68 IT Infrastructure Slideshow: The IBM Mainframe: 50 Years of Big Iron Innovation the pre-occupation with future system (which was going to replace all 370 ... in much the way 360 replaced all the stuff before it) ... resulted in the 370 software hardware pipeline to drain. http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#futuresys when future system was killed, there was mad rush to get stuff back in 370 product pipeline ... and basically a 308x 370-xa effort was kicked off (expected to take 6-8 yrs) ... in parallel with crash 303x, QD stop-gap effort until 308x. 303x channel director was basically 158-3 processor engine with just the integrated channel microcode and the 370 microcode removed 3031 was 158-3 with the integrated channel microcode removed (only 370 microcode) and reconfigured to work with 303x channel director (i.e. 158-3 bascially multiplexed integrated channel microcode on 370 microcode on single engine, 3031 had two processor engines, one dedicated to integrated channel microcode and one dedicated to 370 microcode) http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/mainframe/mainframe_2423PH3031.html 3032 was 168-3 reconfigured to work with 303x channel director(s) http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/mainframe/mainframe_2423PH3032.html 3033 started out as 168-3 wiring diagram mapped to faster chip technology ... originally only going to abe 20% faster than 168-3. the chips were 20% faster ... the chips also had about ten times the circuits per chip ... but using the 168-3 wiring diagrams would have left all the additional circuits unused. during the 3033 development, there were some critical path redesign that took advantage of the higher onchip density resulting in 3033 being closer to 50% faster than 168-3. http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/3033/3033_album.html as soon as the 3033 was out the door ... that group started on 3090 (overlapped with 3081 activity). http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/mainframe/mainframe_2423PH3090.html initial 3081 ... was 3081D where each processor was about five mips ... not a whole lot faster than 3033 two-processor. fairly quickly after that, 3081K shipped with each processor about seven mips (14mips aggregate). 3083 was bascially single 3081k processor with x-cache slowdown removed so it ran about 15% faster or approx. 8mips http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/mainframe/mainframe_2423PH3083.html -- 40+yrs virtualization experience (since Jan68), online at home since Mar1970 -- 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
Re: Mainframe articles
On Tue, 12 May 2009 07:14:32 -0400, Anne Lynn Wheeler wrote: 3082 waas the service processor. One of the issues was that field engineering required a boot-strap diagnostic process ... which started with scoping failed components and going up from there. TCMs in 308x were not scope'able ... so things started with a service processor that was simpler technology and was scope'able ... then a working service processor had all sorts of diagnostices instrumentation into the TCMs. This is similar to what Amdahl did with the 470 series. It used a Data General Nova processor for what they called the console processor. Each Multi-Chip Carrier (MCC) had circuitry to interface to the console processor. The MCC's were scope' able though, but it was rarely necessary to scope them. There were lots of issues with developing a roll-your-own operating system and diagnostic applications for the service processor in the 308x ... so for the 3090 ... it was decided to go with a standard (low-end, scope' able) 370 for the service process. The 3090 effort started out with 4331 running a customized version of vm370 release six and all the service screens implemented in cms ios3720. Similarly, on the Amdahl 580 series, the DG Nova was replaced by a 370 processor that ran UTS (Universal Timesharing System perhaps I forget), which was the Unix system that Amdahl had been offering for the 370. The console processor on the 580 could not be scoped, though, as it was implemented on one MCC in the pizza oven. The MCC's on the 580s were about 15 inches square, IIRC and slid into slots between the two side panels that were used to connect them together. We used to refer to the processor cage as a pizza oven because of the way that the MCC's slid in. -- Tom Marchant -- 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
Re: 308x Processors - was Mainframe articles
We had 3081's at a time share back in the mid 80's. At one point we took 2 3081G's and had IBM put them together to form a 3084 Q64 w/PIF. --- On Tue, 5/12/09, Martin Packer martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com wrote: From: Martin Packer martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Subject: 308x Processors - was Mainframe articles To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Tuesday, May 12, 2009, 9:39 AM 3083 was Uni, 3081 was Dyadic (2 -way Non-Partitionable), 3084 was Partitionable 4-way. Base and X models with almost unrememberable model letters. Interestingly, later on you could get a 1+1 2-way and a 2+1 3-way. The benefits of these were larger caches (as you got 2 of them). I'm not sure who bought these, though. Martin Martin Packer Performance Consultant IBM United Kingdom Ltd +44-20-8832-5167 +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter ID: MartinPacker They're figuring out that collaboration isn't a productivity hit, it makes them smarter. Sam Palmisano on BlogCentral, 26 November 2008 Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- 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 -- 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
Re: Mainframe articles
On Tue, 12 May 2009 11:03:04 +0200, Vernooy, C.P. - SPLXM kees.vern...@klm.com wrote: Bruno Sugliani oldti...@wanadoo.fr wrote in message news:listserv%200905120314167138.0...@bama.ua.edu... On Tue, 12 May 2009 01:51:26 -0400, Scott T. Harder scottyt.har...@gmail.com wrote: Maybe it was a 3080 when I first logged on to TSO??? Sorry... a bit foggy. I would guess a 3081 Bruno Sugliani I think so too. A 3082 and 3083 were parts of the 3081 complex. When you bolted 2 3081's together, you got a 3084. Well i am not sure But as far as i remember) The 3081 was a dyadic box made of 2 processors But IIRC the 3083 was a box with only one processor And yes the 3084 was an MP made of 2 x 3081 The 3082 was the processor controller ( 43xx with its 3370) the 3089 was the 400hz supply generator and the 3087 the cooling unit ( coming in 2 flavours air or water cooled) But it was a long time ago so it is a bit hazy Bruno Sugliani zxnetconsult(at)free(dot)fr http://zxnetconsult.free.fr -- 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
Re: Mainframe articles
In a message dated 5/12/2009 8:20:44 A.M. Central Daylight Time, l...@garlic.com writes: initial 3081 ... was 3081D where each processor was about five mips ... not a whole lot faster than 3033 two-processor. fairly quickly after that, 3081K shipped with each processor about seven mips (14mips aggregate). Don't remember the details. The ACP versions were 9081 and 9190? We tried to frontend IMS with TPF under VM on 4381's in mid 80's but was less than successful. Albeit a great learning experience. **A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221322936x1201367173/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072hmpgID=115bcd =Mayfooter51209NO115) -- 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
Fw: Re: 308x Processors - was Mainframe articles
Correction they were 3081K 32's, one of the other posts jolted my memory back into focus. Sorry for the drift. --- On Tue, 5/12/09, Patrick Falcone patrick.falco...@verizon.net wrote: From: Patrick Falcone patrick.falco...@verizon.net Subject: Re: 308x Processors - was Mainframe articles To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Tuesday, May 12, 2009, 1:59 PM We had 3081's at a time share back in the mid 80's. At one point we took 2 3081G's and had IBM put them together to form a 3084 Q64 w/PIF. --- On Tue, 5/12/09, Martin Packer martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com wrote: From: Martin Packer martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Subject: 308x Processors - was Mainframe articles To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: Tuesday, May 12, 2009, 9:39 AM 3083 was Uni, 3081 was Dyadic (2 -way Non-Partitionable), 3084 was Partitionable 4-way. Base and X models with almost unrememberable model letters. Interestingly, later on you could get a 1+1 2-way and a 2+1 3-way. The benefits of these were larger caches (as you got 2 of them). I'm not sure who bought these, though. Martin Martin Packer Performance Consultant IBM United Kingdom Ltd +44-20-8832-5167 +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter ID: MartinPacker They're figuring out that collaboration isn't a productivity hit, it makes them smarter. Sam Palmisano on BlogCentral, 26 November 2008 Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- 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
Re: Fw: Re: 308x Processors - was Mainframe articles
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main as well. patrick.falco...@verizon.net (Patrick Falcone) writes: Correction they were 3081K 32's, one of the other posts jolted my memory back into focus. Sorry for the drift. re: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009g.html#66 Mainframe articles http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009g.html#67 Mainframe articles http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009g.html#68 IT Infrastructure Slideshow: The IBM Mainframe: 50 Years of Big Iron Innovation http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009g.html#70 Mainframe articles 3033 and 3081 in 370 mode were 24bit (16mbyte) addressing (real virtual). issue was that disk thruputs weren't keeping pace with the rest of the system infrastructure ... i.e. processing memory performance was increasing faster than disk performance. I had started pontificating in the 70s about the growing performance mismatch. what was happening was that increasing amounts of electronic storage (starting with real memory on the processor and then disk controller cache) was being used to cache disk information to compensate for the increasing disk thruput bottleneck. this is referencing comparing 360/67 to 3081k (separated by almost 15 yrs) running similar (virtual machine) CMS workload ... and claiming that relative system disk thruput had declined by a factor of ten times in the period. http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#31 Big I/O or Kicking the Mainframe out the Door some disk division executives took some offense with the claims and assigned the division performance group to refute my statements. after a few weeks, the group came back and effectively said that I had slightly understated the problem. That study eventually turned into a SHARE (63) presentation (B874) recommending how to configure/manage disks to improve system thruput. old post with reference: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006f.html#3 using 3390 mod-9s http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006o.html#68 DASD Response Time (on antique 3390?) in any case, it was starting to become a real issue in the 3033 time-frame. it was possible to configure vm clusters of 4341s with higher aggregate thruput than 3033 at a lower cost. furthermore, each 4341 could have 16mbytes (and six i/o channels) compared to 3033's with 16mbytes (and 16 i/o channels). to somewhat address/compensate ... there was a hardware hack to have 3033 configured with 32mbytes of real storage (even though the processor was restricted to both real virtual 16mbytes addressing). the hack involved 1) using (31bit) IDALs to being able to do I/O for real addresses above 16mbyte line (most importantly being able to read/write pages above the line) 2) page table entry was defined as 16bits, 12bit page number (4096 4096byte pages or 16mbytes), 2 defined bits and 2 undefined bits. the two undefined bits were re-allocated for prepending to the page number allowing up to 16384 4096byte pages or up to 64mbytes real storage, but only max. of 16mbytes per virtual address space). ... lots of things would require virtual pages, that were above the (16mbyte) line to be brought into the first 16mbytes of real storage. initially there was a definition where the software would write the (above the line) virtual page out to disk and then read it back into real storage (below the line). I generated some example code that involved special virtual address space and fiddling the real page numbers in two page table entries ... allowing 4k of real storage above the line to be copied/moved to 4k of real storage below the line (avoiding having to write to disk and read back in). this hack (for real storage 16mbytes) was carried forward for 3081s operating in 370 (24bit, 16mbyte) addressing mode. a few past posts discussing (3033/3081) 16mbyte http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004o.html#59 Integer types for 128-bit addressing http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006m.html#27 Old Hashing Routine http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006t.html#15 more than 16mbyte support for 370 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006w.html#23 Multiple mappings http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006y.html#9 The Future of CPUs: What's After Multi-Core? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007b.html#34 Just another example of mainframe costs http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007g.html#59 IBM to the PCM market(the sky is falling!!!the sky is falling!!) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008f.html#12 Fantasy-Land_Hierarchal_NUMA_Memory-Model_on_Vertical http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009d.html#48 Mainframe Hall of Fame: 17 New Members Added and some number of past posts mentioning vm/4341 clusters http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001m.html#15 departmental servers http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004o.html#57 Integer types for 128-bit addressing http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005.html#34 increasing addressable memory via paged memory? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005n.html#11 Code density and performance? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005p.html#1 Intel engineer discusses their dual-core design http
Re: Fw: Re: 308x Processors - was Mainframe articles
-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Anne Lynn Wheeler Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 12:40 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: Fw: Re: 308x Processors - was Mainframe articles SNIP 3033 and 3081 in 370 mode were 24bit (16mbyte) addressing (real virtual). SNIPPAGE Didn't the 30xx machines have 26 bit addressing (the 3033 mode) when operating in S/370 mode? Starting with the 3033MP? Regards, Steve Thompson -- 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
Re: Mainframe articles
re: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009g.html#66 Mainframe articles http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009g.html#67 Mainframe articles http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009g.html#68 IT Infrastructure Slideshow: The IBM Mainframe: 50 Years of Big Iron Innovation http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009g.html#70 Mainframe articles http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009g.html#71 Mainframe articles for totally unrelated 3081k topic drift I was also doing HSDT (high-speed data transport) project and connecting it to the internal network running high-speed links (full duplex T1 and faster). The internal network was larger than the arpanet/internet from just about the beginning until possibly late '85 or early '86. The internal network also required all links leaving physical corporate property to be encrypted. Somebody commented in '85 time-frame that the internal network had over half of all link encryptors in the world. This was not bad for 56kbit links ... but it started to become much more of problem when running at (full-duplex) T1 (1.5mbits/sec in each direction) and higher speeds. old email mentioning internal network approaching 2000 nodes and needing a whole lot of (DES) link encryptors http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006t.html#email850625 in this post http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006t.html#50 old email complaing that (370) software DES was taking about 1 sec. of 3081K processor time per 150kbytes ... which would require full, dedicated 3081K to handle sustained full-duplex T1 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006n.html#email841115 in this post http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006n.html#36 for other drift, one friday (in that time-frame), somebody from the communication group set-out an announcement for a new networking discussion conference on the internal network ... which included the following definition: low-speed 9.6kbits medium-speed19.2kbits high-speed 56kbits very high-speed 1.5mbits that weekend I left on business trip to the other side of the pacific to look at getting some hardware for HSDT project ... and monday morning on a wall of a conference room there was the following: low-speed 20mbits medium-speed100mbits high-speed 200-300mbits very high-speed 600mbits -- 40+yrs virtualization experience (since Jan68), online at home since Mar1970 -- 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
Re: Fw: Re: 308x Processors - was Mainframe articles
steve_thomp...@stercomm.com (Thompson, Steve) writes: SNIP 3033 and 3081 in 370 mode were 24bit (16mbyte) addressing (real virtual). SNIPPAGE Didn't the 30xx machines have 26 bit addressing (the 3033 mode) when operating in S/370 mode? Starting with the 3033MP? re: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009g.html#71 308x Processors - was Mainframe articles ... the 3033 had special page table entry definition for 14-bit real page number (16384 4096byte real pages or 64mbytes). the internal 3033 hardware could address more than 16mbites ... but instructions (both real and virtual) were limited to 24bits. 3033 hardware hack for 16mbytes ... supported 16mbyte effective addresses from (31bit) IDALs or as output of virtual address translation (using 14bit page number in the page number entry). however instruction addressing (whether running in virtual addressing mode or running w/o virtual address translation turned on) was still limited to 24bit addressing. the 32mbyte option was independent of 3033mp. -- 40+yrs virtualization experience (since Jan68), online at home since Mar1970 -- 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
Re: Fw: Re: 308x Processors - was Mainframe articles
3033 and 3081 in 370 mode were 24bit 16mbyte) addressing (real virtual). We had 40M on our 3081 in 370 mode. Virtual was 16, but the OS could use the extra 24M, not as efficiently as XA, but it was used. - Too busy driving to stop for gas! -- 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
Mainframe articles
A nice slide show on the history of IBM mainframes: http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Infrastructure/The-IBM-Mainframe-50-Years-of -Big-Iron-Innovation-583073/?kc=EWKNLEDP05112009A http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Infrastructure/50-Years-of-IBM-Mainframe-Mil estones-136541/?kc=EWKNLEDP05112009C Why the mainframe will never die http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Infrastructure/IBM-Why-the-Mainframe-Will-Ne ver-Die-Part-I-164505/?kc=EWKNLEDP05112009B http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Infrastructure/CA-Sees-Strong-Future-for-Mai nframes-234697/?kc=EWKNLEDP05112009D -- 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
Re: Mainframe articles
Very cool. Funny, though... I remember first logging onto TSO on what I thought was a 3082 (although I didn't know what even DASD was at the time). Then, when I finally got my hands on a mainframe in MCO, it was a 3084. This slideshow shows a 3083, which I don't have any recollection of. Looks like a 3084, from what I can remember, though. All the best, Scott On 5/11/09, Howard Brazee howard.bra...@cusys.edu wrote: A nice slide show on the history of IBM mainframes: http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Infrastructure/The-IBM-Mainframe-50-Years-of -Big-Iron-Innovation-583073/?kc=EWKNLEDP05112009A http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Infrastructure/50-Years-of-IBM-Mainframe-Mil estones-136541/?kc=EWKNLEDP05112009C Why the mainframe will never die http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Infrastructure/IBM-Why-the-Mainframe-Will-Ne ver-Die-Part-I-164505/?kc=EWKNLEDP05112009B http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Infrastructure/CA-Sees-Strong-Future-for-Mai nframes-234697/?kc=EWKNLEDP05112009D -- 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 -- All the best, Scott T. Harder -- 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
Re: Mainframe articles
Maybe it was a 3080 when I first logged on to TSO??? Sorry... a bit foggy. On 5/11/09, Scott T. Harder scottyt.har...@gmail.com wrote: Very cool. Funny, though... I remember first logging onto TSO on what I thought was a 3082 (although I didn't know what even DASD was at the time). Then, when I finally got my hands on a mainframe in MCO, it was a 3084. This slideshow shows a 3083, which I don't have any recollection of. Looks like a 3084, from what I can remember, though. All the best, Scott On 5/11/09, Howard Brazee howard.bra...@cusys.edu wrote: A nice slide show on the history of IBM mainframes: http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Infrastructure/The-IBM-Mainframe-50-Years-of -Big-Iron-Innovation-583073/?kc=EWKNLEDP05112009A http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Infrastructure/50-Years-of-IBM-Mainframe-Mil estones-136541/?kc=EWKNLEDP05112009C Why the mainframe will never die http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Infrastructure/IBM-Why-the-Mainframe-Will-Ne ver-Die-Part-I-164505/?kc=EWKNLEDP05112009B http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Infrastructure/CA-Sees-Strong-Future-for-Mai nframes-234697/?kc=EWKNLEDP05112009D -- 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 -- All the best, Scott T. Harder -- All the best, Scott T. Harder -- 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
