Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Neil Duffee]

Caveat:  daily digester back from a long weekend (in Canada) -> responses are 
implicitly delayed.

Martin: using ISMF, in the VIO Storage Pool definition is VIO Unit (beside the 
MaxSize).  I haven't been able to find a complete list of available device 
types but v2.1 documentation focus is on 3390 with the occasional mention of 
3380.  Supposedly any valid device could be used. [pause]  hey, managed to 
locate it. [1]  Presumably it's used to determine byte to track conversions for 
SPACE=. Similar to " Default Device Geometry :" in the CDS Base panels. [2]

From Implementing SMS manual,  " The VIO device type is virtual and is 
unrelated to actual devices on your system. "

[1] 
DGTHDT06 HELP   DEVICE TYPES SUPPORTED BY ISMF  --HELP
COMMAND ===>

   The following list contains the device types that are supported by ISMF.

 DASD Device Types:   TAPE Device Types:

  3380 3400-3
  3390 3400-4
  9345 3400-5
   3400-6
   3400-9
   3480
   3480X
   3490
   3590-1

[2]  
DGTHBS07 HELP   DEFAULT DEVICE GEOMETRY  -HELP
COMMAND ===>

   The DEFAULT DEVICE GEOMETRY field specifies the default values to use when
   converting all requests for space into KB or MB.  These values appear in the
   BYTES/TRACK and TRACKS/CYLINDER fields.

>  signature = 8 lines follows  <
Neil Duffee, Joe Sysprog, uOttawa, Ottawa, Ont, Canada
telephone:1 613 562 5800 x4585  fax:1 613 562 5161
mailto:NDuffee of uOttawa.ca http:/ /aix1.uOttawa.ca/ ~nduffee
“How *do* you plan for something like that?”  Guardian Bob, Reboot
“For every action, there is an equal and opposite criticism.”
“Systems Programming: Guilty, until proven innocent”  John Norgauer 2004
"Schrodinger's backup: The condition of any backup is unknown until a restore 
is attempted."  John McKown 2015

-Original Message-
From: Martin Packer [mailto:ma..pac..@UK.. ..COM] 
Sent: May 20, 2016 01:48
Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

Right. My (now long gone, I fear) VIOTOES presentation majored on (the then
new) DFSMS implementation. In particular ACS Routines and VIOMAXSIZE.

But I still thought you had to have some VIO devices defined.


> On 19 May 2016, at 22:53, Gibney, David Allen <gi...@ws...edu> wrote:
>
> Very, Very early in implementing SMS (the minimal implementation) is managing 
> VIO.
>
> Since we've been SMS for a long time, there aren't even any devices in our 
> EDT(s) for VIO
 [snip]

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Jesse 1 Robinson]

I'm not sure how this interacts with the SMS limit on VIO, but we once 
experienced a near system meltdown from TSO TRANSMIT of a large file. There's a 
parameter in the TRANSREC entry in SYS1.PARMLIB(IKJTSO00) to control use of 
VIO. The pertinent keyword is VIO(xxx), which if defaulted (at least at that 
time) allowed the use of VIO for the XMIT temporary data set. We now specify 
VIO(SYSALLDA), which pushes the temporary file to real DASD. 

.
.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler 
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-302-7535 Office
robin...@sce.com


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Martin Packer
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 11:39 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)


The "all 16 extents" applies to VIOMAXSIZE calculation, by the way.

Cheers, Martin

Sent from my iPad

> On 20 May 2016, at 17:26, Paul Gilmartin
<000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
>> On 2016-05-19, at 15:04, Longabaugh, Robert E wrote:
>>
>> ...  Also VIO would get all 16 extents at once, so saying TRK(1,1) 
>> was
not better than saying TRK(16).  When a job did the VIO allocation, it got the 
page slots.
>>
> Perhaps not quite.  My experience is that it gets the page slot as 
> each
page
> is accessed.  Thereby hangs a tale.
>
> I had a job that passed a temp DS I had overallocated as CYL(0,large);
primary
> 0 to circumvent the then behavior of reading residual data if the DS 
> was
never
> written; EODAD was entered at end-of-extent.
>
> Then I tried UNIT=VIO.  Worked fine and only page slots actually 
> written
were
> allocated.  Until once when the first step didn't open it for output.  
> In
the
> second step, VIO read every slot looking for EOF.  Page storage exhaused.
> For everybody.  Ouch!
>
> -- gil


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Martin Packer]

The "all 16 extents" applies to VIOMAXSIZE calculation, by the way.

Cheers, Martin

Sent from my iPad

> On 20 May 2016, at 17:26, Paul Gilmartin
<000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
>> On 2016-05-19, at 15:04, Longabaugh, Robert E wrote:
>>
>> ...  Also VIO would get all 16 extents at once, so saying TRK(1,1) was
not better than saying TRK(16).  When a job did the VIO allocation, it got
the page slots.
>>
> Perhaps not quite.  My experience is that it gets the page slot as each
page
> is accessed.  Thereby hangs a tale.
>
> I had a job that passed a temp DS I had overallocated as CYL(0,large);
primary
> 0 to circumvent the then behavior of reading residual data if the DS was
never
> written; EODAD was entered at end-of-extent.
>
> Then I tried UNIT=VIO.  Worked fine and only page slots actually written
were
> allocated.  Until once when the first step didn't open it for output.  In
the
> second step, VIO read every slot looking for EOF.  Page storage exhaused.
> For everybody.  Ouch!
>
> -- gil
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>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...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Paul Gilmartin]

On 2016-05-19, at 15:04, Longabaugh, Robert E wrote:

> ...  Also VIO would get all 16 extents at once, so saying TRK(1,1) was not 
> better than saying TRK(16).  When a job did the VIO allocation, it got the 
> page slots.  
>  
Perhaps not quite.  My experience is that it gets the page slot as each page
is accessed.  Thereby hangs a tale.

I had a job that passed a temp DS I had overallocated as CYL(0,large); primary
0 to circumvent the then behavior of reading residual data if the DS was never
written; EODAD was entered at end-of-extent.

Then I tried UNIT=VIO.  Worked fine and only page slots actually written were
allocated.  Until once when the first step didn't open it for output.  In the
second step, VIO read every slot looking for EOF.  Page storage exhaused.
For everybody.  Ouch!

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Ray Pearce]

A few remaining synapses at the back of my brain are saying
"Module, Bin, Cylinder, Head, Record"

But they could be telling lies

Ray

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Ward, Mike S
Sent: 19 May 2016 23:24
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

Wasn't the MM the bon number?

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Edward Gould
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 11:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

> On May 18, 2016, at 7:50 PM, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote:
> 
> I remember them well. I was answering Steve's two implied questions.
> 
> 2321 was certainly characterized as DASD. It was indeed a direct access 
> storage device. Not a disk, but DASD nonetheless. Certainly not magnetic tape 
> (though it had a family resemblance!) and certainly not unit record.

It addressing had MMBBCCHHR(R?) so I guess you could address it directly. 
Anyone remember how to do that? (progr5amming for a 2321 is a lost art (where 
is Seymour?).

Ed

> 
> I don't think anyone recalls a 3314. I think the OP said it was a typo, 2314 
> mis-remembered as 3000-series DASD.
> 
> Charles
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
> On Behalf Of Edward Gould
> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 5:33 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
> 
> Chales,
> 
> 2321 was a data cell (magnetic strip) hardly could be called DASD) I 
> don’t recall a 3314 . The removable 3340 (not sure the number anyone?)
> 
> Ed
> 
>> On May 16, 2016, at 7:47 PM, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 2301, 2321.
>> CharlesSent from a mobile; please excuse the brevity
>> 
>>  Original message ----
>> From: Steve Thompson <ste...@copper.net>
>> Date: 05/16/2016  4:51 PM  (GMT-08:00)
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
>> 
>> 2314, 2419, 2311, these are just a few of the "IBM" DASD that I've 
>> had the pleasure of working with. I've forgotten the drum device 
>> numbers and the noodle snatcher model number.
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send 
> email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

==
This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and intended 
solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you 
have received this email in error, please notify the system manager. This 
message contains confidential information and is intended only for the 
individual named. If you are not the named addressee, you should not 
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender 
immediately by e-mail if you have received this message by mistake and delete 
this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient, you are 
notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in 
reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

-- 
This e-mail message has been scanned and cleared by Google Message Security 
and the UNICOM Global security systems. This message is for the named 
person's use only. If you receive this message in error, please delete it 
and notify the sender. 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Martin Packer]

Right. My (now long gone, I fear) VIOTOES presentation majored on (the then
new) DFSMS implementation. In particular ACS Routines and VIOMAXSIZE.

But I still thought you had to have some VIO devices defined.

Cheers, Martin

Sent from my iPad

> On 19 May 2016, at 22:53, Gibney, David Allen <gib...@wsu.edu> wrote:
>
> Very, Very early in implementing SMS (the minimal implementation) is
managing VIO.
>
> Since we've been SMS for a long time, there aren't even any devices in
our EDT(s) for VIO
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
>> On Behalf Of Norman.Hollander
>> Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 2:45 PM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
>>
>> Maybe a bunch of JCL with UNIT=VIO is a cause to make you fuss?
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
>> On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
>> Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 1:18 PM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
>>
>> Memory is abundant‎ in most shops and cheap overall. So, why all fuss
about
>> VIO? Make s decision, implement it, forget it.
>>
>> -teD
>>  Original Message
>> From: Norman.Hollander
>> Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 12:19
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
>> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
>>
>> Track size. We actually used to use a 2305 "drum" definition for VIO.
But if
>> you genned 1 dummy address, you had to gen all 8. Made for a larger
IO-gen.
>> So we would go for the next best tracksize of the 2314. So- how many 4K
>> pages fit into a track without wasting too much of it? Plus the 2314 was
small,
>> so quick sorts in VIO might be possible, but it prevented sorting a
kabillion
>> records. I'm pretty sure 2305 support was removed a long time ago, so
you
>> couldn't define it today. Probably true for the 2311/2314/2319. Last
time I
>> went through IODF, a fake 3390 (address DEFF) was defined as the only
VIO
>> capable device. With all the various Sort and Memory exits today, it's
>> probably just a good history lesson. Oh- way back in the 70s, a company
>> named Ampex (IIRC) made look alike (aka cheaper) memory and Disk
storage.
>> Think their mountable disk was the 3314. OK- discuss further...
>>
>> zNorman
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
>> On Behalf Of Martin Packer
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 10:45 PM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
>>
>>
>> It's sort of come back to me:
>>
>> A small track size limits the virtual storage window (probably usually
below
>> the line in 1989 when I looked at this). Or it might've been cylinder.
But I
>> think it was track.
>>
>> I'm wondering if anyone else remembers something like this.
>>
>> Cheers, Martin
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On 19 May 2016, at 05:20, Edward Gould <edgould1...@comcast.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> On May 18, 2016, at 7:50 PM, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org>
>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I remember them well. I was answering Steve's two implied questions.
>>>>
>>>> 2321 was certainly characterized as DASD. It was indeed a direct
>>>> access
>> storage device. Not a disk, but DASD nonetheless. Certainly not magnetic
>> tape (though it had a family resemblance!) and certainly not unit
record.
>>>
>>> It addressing had MMBBCCHHR(R?) so I guess you could address it
directly.
>> Anyone remember how to do that? (progr5amming for a 2321 is a lost art
>> (where is Seymour?).
>>>
>>> Ed
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't think anyone recalls a 3314. I think the OP said it was a
>>>> typo,
>> 2314 mis-remembered as 3000-series DASD.
>>>>
>>>> Charles
>>>>
>>>> -Original Message-
>>>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-
>> m...@listserv.ua.edu]
>>>> On
>> Behalf Of Edward Gould
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 5:33 PM
>>>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>>>> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
>>>>
>>>> Chales,
>>>>
>>>> 2321 was a data cell (magnetic strip) hardly could be called DASD) I
>> don’t recal

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Tony Harminc]

On 19 May 2016 at 16:56, Martin Packer  wrote:
> The whole disk is NOT in your virtual storage; The track window IS (IIRC).

Well I wasn't thinking *your* (the caller's) virtual storage;
obviously it can't all be there. I was thinking there would be a VSM
mapping of the whole device in *some* virtual space, but clearly this
wouldn't have worked with 24-bit addressing. So I guess my mental
model for this is wrong; presumably VIO is a driver of ASM at the same
level as VSM is. And there must be a track (or some larger or smaller
page-multiple) buffer that forms the interface to ASM.

Well I guess going and looking at the code would be best; MVS 3.8 is
still out there for the reading.

Tony H.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Ward, Mike S]

Wasn't the MM the bon number?

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Edward Gould
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 11:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

> On May 18, 2016, at 7:50 PM, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote:
> 
> I remember them well. I was answering Steve's two implied questions.
> 
> 2321 was certainly characterized as DASD. It was indeed a direct access 
> storage device. Not a disk, but DASD nonetheless. Certainly not magnetic tape 
> (though it had a family resemblance!) and certainly not unit record.

It addressing had MMBBCCHHR(R?) so I guess you could address it directly. 
Anyone remember how to do that? (progr5amming for a 2321 is a lost art (where 
is Seymour?).

Ed

> 
> I don't think anyone recalls a 3314. I think the OP said it was a typo, 2314 
> mis-remembered as 3000-series DASD.
> 
> Charles
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
> On Behalf Of Edward Gould
> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 5:33 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
> 
> Chales,
> 
> 2321 was a data cell (magnetic strip) hardly could be called DASD) I 
> don’t recall a 3314 . The removable 3340 (not sure the number anyone?)
> 
> Ed
> 
>> On May 16, 2016, at 7:47 PM, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 2301, 2321.
>> CharlesSent from a mobile; please excuse the brevity
>> 
>>  Original message ----
>> From: Steve Thompson <ste...@copper.net>
>> Date: 05/16/2016  4:51 PM  (GMT-08:00)
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
>> 
>> 2314, 2419, 2311, these are just a few of the "IBM" DASD that I've 
>> had the pleasure of working with. I've forgotten the drum device 
>> numbers and the noodle snatcher model number.
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send 
> email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

==
This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and intended 
solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you 
have received this email in error, please notify the system manager. This 
message contains confidential information and is intended only for the 
individual named. If you are not the named addressee, you should not 
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender 
immediately by e-mail if you have received this message by mistake and delete 
this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient, you are 
notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in 
reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Gibney, David Allen]

Very, Very early in implementing SMS (the minimal implementation) is managing 
VIO. 

Since we've been SMS for a long time, there aren't even any devices in our 
EDT(s) for VIO

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
> On Behalf Of Norman.Hollander
> Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 2:45 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
> 
> Maybe a bunch of JCL with UNIT=VIO is a cause to make you fuss?
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
> On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
> Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 1:18 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
> 
> Memory is abundant‎ in most shops and cheap overall. So, why all fuss about
> VIO? Make s decision, implement it, forget it.
> 
> -teD
>   Original Message
> From: Norman.Hollander
> Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 12:19
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
> 
> Track size. We actually used to use a 2305 "drum" definition for VIO. But if
> you genned 1 dummy address, you had to gen all 8. Made for a larger IO-gen.
> So we would go for the next best tracksize of the 2314. So- how many 4K
> pages fit into a track without wasting too much of it? Plus the 2314 was 
> small,
> so quick sorts in VIO might be possible, but it prevented sorting a kabillion
> records. I'm pretty sure 2305 support was removed a long time ago, so you
> couldn't define it today. Probably true for the 2311/2314/2319. Last time I
> went through IODF, a fake 3390 (address DEFF) was defined as the only VIO
> capable device. With all the various Sort and Memory exits today, it's
> probably just a good history lesson. Oh- way back in the 70s, a company
> named Ampex (IIRC) made look alike (aka cheaper) memory and Disk storage.
> Think their mountable disk was the 3314. OK- discuss further...
> 
> zNorman
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
> On Behalf Of Martin Packer
> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 10:45 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
> 
> 
> It's sort of come back to me:
> 
> A small track size limits the virtual storage window (probably usually below
> the line in 1989 when I looked at this). Or it might've been cylinder. But I
> think it was track.
> 
> I'm wondering if anyone else remembers something like this.
> 
> Cheers, Martin
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> On 19 May 2016, at 05:20, Edward Gould <edgould1...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
> 
> >> On May 18, 2016, at 7:50 PM, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I remember them well. I was answering Steve's two implied questions.
> >>
> >> 2321 was certainly characterized as DASD. It was indeed a direct
> >> access
> storage device. Not a disk, but DASD nonetheless. Certainly not magnetic
> tape (though it had a family resemblance!) and certainly not unit record.
> >
> > It addressing had MMBBCCHHR(R?) so I guess you could address it directly.
> Anyone remember how to do that? (progr5amming for a 2321 is a lost art
> (where is Seymour?).
> >
> > Ed
> >
> >>
> >> I don't think anyone recalls a 3314. I think the OP said it was a
> >> typo,
> 2314 mis-remembered as 3000-series DASD.
> >>
> >> Charles
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-
> m...@listserv.ua.edu]
> >> On
> Behalf Of Edward Gould
> >> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 5:33 PM
> >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> >> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
> >>
> >> Chales,
> >>
> >> 2321 was a data cell (magnetic strip) hardly could be called DASD) I
> don’t recall a 3314 . The removable 3340 (not sure the number anyone?)
> >>
> >> Ed
> >>
> >>> On May 16, 2016, at 7:47 PM, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 2301, 2321.
> >>> CharlesSent from a mobile; please excuse the brevity
> >>>
> >>>  Original message 
> >>> From: Steve Thompson <ste...@copper.net>
> >>> Date: 05/16/2016 4:51 PM (GMT-08:00)
> >>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> >>> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
> >>>
> >>&g

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Norman.Hollander]

Maybe a bunch of JCL with UNIT=VIO is a cause to make you fuss?

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 1:18 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

Memory is abundant‎ in most shops and cheap overall. So, why all fuss about 
VIO? Make s decision, implement it, forget it.

-teD
  Original Message
From: Norman.Hollander
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 12:19
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

Track size. We actually used to use a 2305 "drum" definition for VIO. But if 
you genned 1 dummy address, you had to gen all 8. Made for a larger IO-gen. So 
we would go for the next best tracksize of the 2314. So- how many 4K pages fit 
into a track without wasting too much of it? Plus the 2314 was small, so quick 
sorts in VIO might be possible, but it prevented sorting a kabillion records. 
I'm pretty sure 2305 support was removed a long time ago, so you couldn't 
define it today. Probably true for the 2311/2314/2319. Last time I went through 
IODF, a fake 3390 (address DEFF) was defined as the only VIO capable device. 
With all the various Sort and Memory exits today, it's probably just a good 
history lesson. Oh- way back in the 70s, a company named Ampex (IIRC) made look 
alike (aka cheaper) memory and Disk storage. Think their mountable disk was the 
3314. OK- discuss further...

zNorman

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Martin Packer
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 10:45 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)


It's sort of come back to me:

A small track size limits the virtual storage window (probably usually below 
the line in 1989 when I looked at this). Or it might've been cylinder. But I 
think it was track.

I'm wondering if anyone else remembers something like this.

Cheers, Martin

Sent from my iPad

On 19 May 2016, at 05:20, Edward Gould <edgould1...@comcast.net> wrote:

>> On May 18, 2016, at 7:50 PM, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote:
>>
>> I remember them well. I was answering Steve's two implied questions.
>>
>> 2321 was certainly characterized as DASD. It was indeed a direct 
>> access
storage device. Not a disk, but DASD nonetheless. Certainly not magnetic tape 
(though it had a family resemblance!) and certainly not unit record.
>
> It addressing had MMBBCCHHR(R?) so I guess you could address it directly.
Anyone remember how to do that? (progr5amming for a 2321 is a lost art (where 
is Seymour?).
>
> Ed
>
>>
>> I don't think anyone recalls a 3314. I think the OP said it was a 
>> typo,
2314 mis-remembered as 3000-series DASD.
>>
>> Charles
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
>> On
Behalf Of Edward Gould
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 5:33 PM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
>>
>> Chales,
>>
>> 2321 was a data cell (magnetic strip) hardly could be called DASD) I
don’t recall a 3314 . The removable 3340 (not sure the number anyone?)
>>
>> Ed
>>
>>> On May 16, 2016, at 7:47 PM, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2301, 2321.
>>> CharlesSent from a mobile; please excuse the brevity
>>>
>>>  Original message 
>>> From: Steve Thompson <ste...@copper.net>
>>> Date: 05/16/2016 4:51 PM (GMT-08:00)
>>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>>> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
>>>
>>> 2314, 2419, 2311, these are just a few of the "IBM" DASD that I've 
>>> had the pleasure of working with. I've forgotten the drum device 
>>> numbers and the noodle snatcher model number.
>>
>> -
>> - For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, 
>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO 
>> IBM-MAIN
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send 
>email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN 
>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 / archi

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Martin Packer]

ESCTVIO (Expanded Storage Criterion Age for VIO) was supposed to control
it. Current Migration Age was compared to the Criterion Age.

(I think Criterion Age SINGULAR for VIO. Someone correct me if I'm wrong,
please.)

Cheers, Martin

Sent from my iPad

> On 19 May 2016, at 22:05, Longabaugh, Robert E <robert.longaba...@ca.com>
wrote:
>
> Small track sizes were considered more efficient for VIO because of the
number of page slots that had to be used in order to satisfy the
allocation.  Also VIO would get all 16 extents at once, so saying TRK(1,1)
was not better than saying TRK(16).  When a job did the VIO allocation, it
got the page slots.
>
> In 1990 or 1991 (before I worked for Sterling Software and now CA) my
employer had a series of system slowdowns which were caused by paging slot
shortages, or exhaustion.  We found that many jobs were using VIO for
SORTWKnn DDs.  This all traced back to an individual application programmer
who knew just enough about VIO to see it was virtual, but did not grasp the
difference between "virtual" and "unlimited".
>
> I don't remember there being a way to put a hard limit on the total
amount of VIO in use by the system. Now in the days of cached and solid
state DASD the I/O performance payback isn't as big.  As in the previous
response, the system did not set aside an entire 2314 (or 3330) worth of
page slots to back the VIO requests.  It just fulfilled the requests for
"tracks" as they came in.
>
>
> Bob Longabaugh
> CA Technologies
> Storage Management
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Martin Packer
> Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 3:56 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
>
>
> The whole disk is NOT in your virtual storage; The track window IS
(IIRC).
>
> Cheers, Martin
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>>> On 19 May 2016, at 21:45, Tony Harminc <t...@harminc.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 19 May 2016 at 01:44, Martin Packer <martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com>
wrote:
>>> It's sort of come back to me:
>>>
>>> A small track size limits the virtual storage window (probably
>>> usually below the line in 1989 when I looked at this). Or it might've
>>> been cylinder. But I think it was track.
>>>
>>> I'm wondering if anyone else remembers something like this.
>>
>> I'm not sure I get the "virtual storage window" idea. VIO emulates an
>> entire disk drive in virtual storage. So where is there a window? The
>> whole disk has to be in virtual storage at once. Well, I suppose there
>> could be logic to not allocate Virtual until used, but that would
>> surely better be left to VSM's and RSM's expertise at managaing their
>> respective kinds of storage.
>>
>> Now maybe VIO was changed much later (surely there wasn't expanded
>> storage in 1989...?) to use or perhaps favour expanded storage, in
>> which case a window model could make some sense. But only if VIO was
>> directly dealing with expanded storage rather than just requesting
>> that RSM use it to back virtual storage used to hold the VIO disk
>> data.
>>
>> Tony H.
>>
>> --
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,  send
>> email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>> 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...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAINUnless 
> 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...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Longabaugh, Robert E]

Small track sizes were considered more efficient for VIO because of the number 
of page slots that had to be used in order to satisfy the allocation.  Also VIO 
would get all 16 extents at once, so saying TRK(1,1) was not better than saying 
TRK(16).  When a job did the VIO allocation, it got the page slots.  

In 1990 or 1991 (before I worked for Sterling Software and now CA) my employer 
had a series of system slowdowns which were caused by paging slot shortages, or 
exhaustion.  We found that many jobs were using VIO for SORTWKnn DDs.  This all 
traced back to an individual application programmer who knew just enough about 
VIO to see it was virtual, but did not grasp the difference between "virtual" 
and "unlimited".

I don't remember there being a way to put a hard limit on the total amount of 
VIO in use by the system. Now in the days of cached and solid state DASD the 
I/O performance payback isn't as big.  As in the previous response, the system 
did not set aside an entire 2314 (or 3330) worth of page slots to back the VIO 
requests.  It just fulfilled the requests for "tracks" as they came in.


Bob Longabaugh
CA Technologies 
Storage Management

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Martin Packer
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 3:56 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)


The whole disk is NOT in your virtual storage; The track window IS (IIRC).

Cheers, Martin

Sent from my iPad

> On 19 May 2016, at 21:45, Tony Harminc <t...@harminc.net> wrote:
>
>> On 19 May 2016 at 01:44, Martin Packer <martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com> wrote:
>> It's sort of come back to me:
>>
>> A small track size limits the virtual storage window (probably 
>> usually below the line in 1989 when I looked at this). Or it might've 
>> been cylinder. But I think it was track.
>>
>> I'm wondering if anyone else remembers something like this.
>
> I'm not sure I get the "virtual storage window" idea. VIO emulates an 
> entire disk drive in virtual storage. So where is there a window? The 
> whole disk has to be in virtual storage at once. Well, I suppose there 
> could be logic to not allocate Virtual until used, but that would 
> surely better be left to VSM's and RSM's expertise at managaing their 
> respective kinds of storage.
>
> Now maybe VIO was changed much later (surely there wasn't expanded 
> storage in 1989...?) to use or perhaps favour expanded storage, in 
> which case a window model could make some sense. But only if VIO was 
> directly dealing with expanded storage rather than just requesting 
> that RSM use it to back virtual storage used to hold the VIO disk 
> data.
>
> Tony H.
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,  send 
>email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN 
>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...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Martin Packer]

The whole disk is NOT in your virtual storage; The track window IS (IIRC).

Cheers, Martin

Sent from my iPad

> On 19 May 2016, at 21:45, Tony Harminc  wrote:
>
>> On 19 May 2016 at 01:44, Martin Packer  wrote:
>> It's sort of come back to me:
>>
>> A small track size limits the virtual storage window (probably usually
>> below the line in 1989 when I looked at this). Or it might've been
>> cylinder. But I think it was track.
>>
>> I'm wondering if anyone else remembers something like this.
>
> I'm not sure I get the "virtual storage window" idea. VIO emulates an
> entire disk drive in virtual storage. So where is there a window? The
> whole disk has to be in virtual storage at once. Well, I suppose there
> could be logic to not allocate Virtual until used, but that would
> surely better be left to VSM's and RSM's expertise at managaing their
> respective kinds of storage.
>
> Now maybe VIO was changed much later (surely there wasn't expanded
> storage in 1989...?) to use or perhaps favour expanded storage, in
> which case a window model could make some sense. But only if VIO was
> directly dealing with expanded storage rather than just requesting
> that RSM use it to back virtual storage used to hold the VIO disk
> data.
>
> Tony H.
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>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...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Tony Harminc]

On 19 May 2016 at 01:44, Martin Packer  wrote:
> It's sort of come back to me:
>
> A small track size limits the virtual storage window (probably usually
> below the line in 1989 when I looked at this). Or it might've been
> cylinder. But I think it was track.
>
> I'm wondering if anyone else remembers something like this.

I'm not sure I get the "virtual storage window" idea. VIO emulates an
entire disk drive in virtual storage. So where is there a window? The
whole disk has to be in virtual storage at once. Well, I suppose there
could be logic to not allocate Virtual until used, but that would
surely better be left to VSM's and RSM's expertise at managaing their
respective kinds of storage.

Now maybe VIO was changed much later (surely there wasn't expanded
storage in 1989...?) to use or perhaps favour expanded storage, in
which case a window model could make some sense. But only if VIO was
directly dealing with expanded storage rather than just requesting
that RSM use it to back virtual storage used to hold the VIO disk
data.

Tony H.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Ted MacNEIL]

Memory is abundant‎ in most shops and cheap overall. So, why all fuss about 
VIO? Make s decision, implement it, forget it.

-teD
  Original Message  
From: Norman.Hollander
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 12:19
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

Track size. We actually used to use a 2305 "drum" definition for VIO. But if 
you genned 1 dummy address,
you had to gen all 8. Made for a larger IO-gen. So we would go for the next 
best tracksize of the 2314. So-
how many 4K pages fit into a track without wasting too much of it? Plus the 
2314 was small, so quick sorts in VIO
might be possible, but it prevented sorting a kabillion records. I'm pretty 
sure 2305 support was removed a long
time ago, so you couldn't define it today. Probably true for the 
2311/2314/2319. Last time I went through IODF,
a fake 3390 (address DEFF) was defined as the only VIO capable device. With all 
the various Sort and Memory exits
today, it's probably just a good history lesson. Oh- way back in the 70s, a 
company named Ampex (IIRC) made look
alike (aka cheaper) memory and Disk storage. Think their mountable disk was the 
3314. OK- discuss further...

zNorman

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Martin Packer
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 10:45 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)


It's sort of come back to me:

A small track size limits the virtual storage window (probably usually below 
the line in 1989 when I looked at this). Or it might've been cylinder. But I 
think it was track.

I'm wondering if anyone else remembers something like this.

Cheers, Martin

Sent from my iPad

On 19 May 2016, at 05:20, Edward Gould <edgould1...@comcast.net> wrote:

>> On May 18, 2016, at 7:50 PM, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote:
>>
>> I remember them well. I was answering Steve's two implied questions.
>>
>> 2321 was certainly characterized as DASD. It was indeed a direct 
>> access
storage device. Not a disk, but DASD nonetheless. Certainly not magnetic tape 
(though it had a family resemblance!) and certainly not unit record.
>
> It addressing had MMBBCCHHR(R?) so I guess you could address it directly.
Anyone remember how to do that? (progr5amming for a 2321 is a lost art (where 
is Seymour?).
>
> Ed
>
>>
>> I don't think anyone recalls a 3314. I think the OP said it was a 
>> typo,
2314 mis-remembered as 3000-series DASD.
>>
>> Charles
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
>> On
Behalf Of Edward Gould
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 5:33 PM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
>>
>> Chales,
>>
>> 2321 was a data cell (magnetic strip) hardly could be called DASD) I
don’t recall a 3314 . The removable 3340 (not sure the number anyone?)
>>
>> Ed
>>
>>> On May 16, 2016, at 7:47 PM, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2301, 2321.
>>> CharlesSent from a mobile; please excuse the brevity
>>>
>>>  Original message 
>>> From: Steve Thompson <ste...@copper.net>
>>> Date: 05/16/2016 4:51 PM (GMT-08:00)
>>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>>> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
>>>
>>> 2314, 2419, 2311, these are just a few of the "IBM" DASD that I've 
>>> had the pleasure of working with. I've forgotten the drum device 
>>> numbers and the noodle snatcher model number.
>>
>> -
>> - For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, 
>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO 
>> IBM-MAIN
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send 
>email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN 
>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...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Thu, 19 May 2016 13:40:48 +, Roach, Dennis wrote:

>Since almost all "3390" DASD resides on FBA arrayed disks, the software exists 
>and is running in the control units to convert ECKD to FBA requests.
> 
Kinda proprietary, though, whether from IBM or competitors, and hard to make
a business case for any of them to install in a thumb drive.

>[Default] On 18 May 2016 19:31:34 -0700, (Steve Thompson) wrote:
>>> snip
>>Makes one very glad to have things like thumb drives that we have 
>>today. Now if I could just get one big enough to IPL z/OS...

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Norman.Hollander]

Track size.  We actually used to use a 2305 "drum" definition for VIO.  But if 
you genned 1 dummy address,
you had to gen all 8.  Made for a larger IO-gen.  So we would go for the next 
best tracksize of the 2314. So-
how many 4K pages fit into a track without wasting too much of it?  Plus the 
2314 was small, so quick sorts in VIO
might be possible, but it prevented sorting a kabillion records.  I'm pretty 
sure 2305 support was removed a long
time ago, so you couldn't define it today.  Probably true for the 
2311/2314/2319.  Last time I went through IODF,
a fake 3390 (address DEFF) was defined as the only VIO capable device. With all 
the various Sort and Memory exits
today, it's probably just a good history lesson. Oh- way back in the 70s, a 
company named Ampex (IIRC) made look
alike (aka cheaper)  memory and Disk storage.  Think their mountable disk was 
the 3314.   OK- discuss further...

zNorman

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Martin Packer
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 10:45 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)


It's sort of come back to me:

A small track size limits the virtual storage window (probably usually below 
the line in 1989 when I looked at this). Or it might've been cylinder. But I 
think it was track.

I'm wondering if anyone else remembers something like this.

Cheers, Martin

Sent from my iPad

On 19 May 2016, at 05:20, Edward Gould <edgould1...@comcast.net> wrote:

>> On May 18, 2016, at 7:50 PM, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote:
>>
>> I remember them well. I was answering Steve's two implied questions.
>>
>> 2321 was certainly characterized as DASD. It was indeed a direct 
>> access
storage device. Not a disk, but DASD nonetheless. Certainly not magnetic tape 
(though it had a family resemblance!) and certainly not unit record.
>
> It addressing had MMBBCCHHR(R?) so I guess you could address it directly.
Anyone remember how to do that? (progr5amming for a 2321 is a lost art (where 
is Seymour?).
>
> Ed
>
>>
>> I don't think anyone recalls a 3314. I think the OP said it was a 
>> typo,
2314 mis-remembered as 3000-series DASD.
>>
>> Charles
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
>> On
Behalf Of Edward Gould
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 5:33 PM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
>>
>> Chales,
>>
>> 2321 was a data cell (magnetic strip) hardly could be called DASD) I
don’t recall a 3314 . The removable 3340 (not sure the number anyone?)
>>
>> Ed
>>
>>> On May 16, 2016, at 7:47 PM, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2301, 2321.
>>> CharlesSent from a mobile; please excuse the brevity
>>>
>>>  Original message 
>>> From: Steve Thompson <ste...@copper.net>
>>> Date: 05/16/2016  4:51 PM  (GMT-08:00)
>>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>>> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
>>>
>>> 2314, 2419, 2311, these are just a few of the "IBM" DASD that I've 
>>> had the pleasure of working with. I've forgotten the drum device 
>>> numbers and the noodle snatcher model number.
>>
>> -
>> - For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, 
>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO 
>> IBM-MAIN
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,  send 
>email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN 
>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...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[R.S.]

W dniu 2016-05-19 o 15:40, Roach, Dennis pisze:

Since almost all "3390" DASD resides on FBA arrayed disks, the software exists 
and is running in the control units to convert ECKD to FBA requests.

Not so easy.
USB stick use USB "CCW", so without hardware changes on mainframe side 
there would be no possibility to IPL from that. No USB port on mainframe.

Or change USB tisk to support mainframe "CCW" and FICON...
Another possibility is to create standalone Linux x64 image on the 
stick, with Hercules or zPDT, with some z/OS image.

;-)

--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland






---
Tre tej wiadomoci moe zawiera informacje prawnie chronione Banku 
przeznaczone wycznie do uytku subowego adresata. Odbiorc moe by jedynie 
jej adresat z wyczeniem dostpu osób trzecich. Jeeli nie jeste adresatem 
niniejszej wiadomoci lub pracownikiem upowanionym do jej przekazania 
adresatowi, informujemy, e jej rozpowszechnianie, kopiowanie, rozprowadzanie 
lub inne dziaanie o podobnym charakterze jest prawnie zabronione i moe by 
karalne. Jeeli otrzymae t wiadomo omykowo, prosimy niezwocznie 
zawiadomi nadawc wysyajc odpowied oraz trwale usun t wiadomo 
wczajc w to wszelkie jej kopie wydrukowane lub zapisane na dysku.

This e-mail may contain legally privileged information of the Bank and is 
intended solely for business use of the addressee. This e-mail may only be 
received by the addressee and may not be disclosed to any third parties. If you 
are not the intended addressee of this e-mail or the employee authorized to 
forward it to the addressee, be advised that any dissemination, copying, 
distribution or any other similar activity is legally prohibited and may be 
punishable. If you received this e-mail by mistake please advise the sender 
immediately by using the reply facility in your e-mail software and delete 
permanently this e-mail including any copies of it either printed or saved to 
hard drive.

mBank S.A. z siedzib w Warszawie, ul. Senatorska 18, 00-950 Warszawa, 
www.mBank.pl, e-mail: kont...@mbank.pl
Sd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy XII Wydzia Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru 
Sdowego, nr rejestru przedsibiorców KRS 025237, NIP: 526-021-50-88. 
Wedug stanu na dzie 01.01.2016 r. kapita zakadowy mBanku S.A. (w caoci 
wpacony) wynosi 168.955.696 zotych.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Roach, Dennis]

Since almost all "3390" DASD resides on FBA arrayed disks, the software exists 
and is running in the control units to convert ECKD to FBA requests.

Dennis Roach, CISSP, PMP
IAM Access Administration - Consumer - Senior Analyst 
2929 Allen Parkway, America Building, 3rd Floor, Houston, TX 77019
Work:  713-831-8799
Cell:  713-591-1059
Email:  dennis.ro...@aig.com 

All opinions expressed by me are mine and may not agree with my employer or any 
person, company, or thing, living or dead, on or near this or any other planet, 
moon, asteroid, or other spatial object, natural or manufactured, since the 
beginning of time.

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Clark Morris
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 8:29 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Default] On 18 May 2016 19:31:34 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main 
ste...@copper.net (Steve Thompson) wrote:

>> snip
>Makes one very glad to have things like thumb drives that we have 
>today. Now if I could just get one big enough to IPL z/OS...

Would 128 gigabytes be enough.  I think I have seen 256 GB.
The software to emulate ECKD would be interesting.

Clark Morris

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Clark Morris]

[Default] On 18 May 2016 19:31:34 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
ste...@copper.net (Steve Thompson) wrote:

>> snip
>Makes one very glad to have things like thumb drives that we have 
>today. Now if I could just get one big enough to IPL z/OS...

Would 128 gigabytes be enough.  I think I have seen 256 GB.
The software to emulate ECKD would be interesting.

Clark Morris
>
>Regards,
>Steve Thompson
>
>
>On 05/18/2016 09:07 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>> On Wed, 18 May 2016 17:50:53 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:
>>
>>> ... It was indeed a direct access storage device. Not a disk, but DASD 
>>> nonetheless. Certainly not magnetic tape (though it had a family 
>>> resemblance!) and certainly not unit record.
>>>
>> What's the criterion?  Max/Min latency ratio?  Statistical distribution of 
>> latency
>> between randomly selected records?  For tape, it's sort of triangular; for 
>> DASD
>> it has a sort of plateau.
>>
>> Addressable by block and writable randomly without corrupting other blocks?
>> DECtape had preformatted addressable blocks; it held a filesystem with a
>> directory.  It moved from reel to reel past a stationary R/W head.  It met 
>> some
>> criteria for DASD and some for tape; it was both.
>>
>> -- gil
>>
>> --
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>>
>
>--
>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[John McKown]

On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 7:33 PM, Edward Gould 
wrote:

> Chales,
>
> 2321 was a data cell (magnetic strip) hardly could be called DASD)
>

​Technically, it was because you could get to a particular "block" of data
"directly" (DASD == Direct Access Storage Device) as opposed to a "serial"
device like tape (no "seek" on the original tape drives). It definitely
was​ wasn't a "random access" device because of the seek time (the same is
true of all disk devices). SSD and Flash are possibly the only non-volatile
true "random" access mass storage devices at present. And I'm not totally
sure about them.



> I don’t recall a 3314 . The removable 3340 (not sure the number anyone?)
>
> Ed
>
>

-- 
The unfacts, did we have them, are too imprecisely few to warrant our
certitude.

Maranatha! <><
John McKown

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Martin Packer]

It's sort of come back to me:

A small track size limits the virtual storage window (probably usually
below the line in 1989 when I looked at this). Or it might've been
cylinder. But I think it was track.

I'm wondering if anyone else remembers something like this.

Cheers, Martin

Sent from my iPad

On 19 May 2016, at 05:20, Edward Gould <edgould1...@comcast.net> wrote:

>> On May 18, 2016, at 7:50 PM, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote:
>>
>> I remember them well. I was answering Steve's two implied questions.
>>
>> 2321 was certainly characterized as DASD. It was indeed a direct access
storage device. Not a disk, but DASD nonetheless. Certainly not magnetic
tape (though it had a family resemblance!) and certainly not unit record.
>
> It addressing had MMBBCCHHR(R?) so I guess you could address it directly.
Anyone remember how to do that? (progr5amming for a 2321 is a lost art
(where is Seymour?).
>
> Ed
>
>>
>> I don't think anyone recalls a 3314. I think the OP said it was a typo,
2314 mis-remembered as 3000-series DASD.
>>
>> Charles
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Edward Gould
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 5:33 PM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
>>
>> Chales,
>>
>> 2321 was a data cell (magnetic strip) hardly could be called DASD) I
don’t recall a 3314 . The removable 3340 (not sure the number anyone?)
>>
>> Ed
>>
>>> On May 16, 2016, at 7:47 PM, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2301, 2321.
>>> CharlesSent from a mobile; please excuse the brevity
>>>
>>>  Original message 
>>> From: Steve Thompson <ste...@copper.net>
>>> Date: 05/16/2016  4:51 PM  (GMT-08:00)
>>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>>> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
>>>
>>> 2314, 2419, 2311, these are just a few of the "IBM" DASD that I've had
>>> the pleasure of working with. I've forgotten the drum device numbers
>>> and the noodle snatcher model number.
>>
>> --
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>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...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Edward Gould]

> On May 18, 2016, at 7:50 PM, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote:
> 
> I remember them well. I was answering Steve's two implied questions.
> 
> 2321 was certainly characterized as DASD. It was indeed a direct access 
> storage device. Not a disk, but DASD nonetheless. Certainly not magnetic tape 
> (though it had a family resemblance!) and certainly not unit record.

It addressing had MMBBCCHHR(R?) so I guess you could address it directly. 
Anyone remember how to do that? (progr5amming for a 2321 is a lost art (where 
is Seymour?).

Ed

> 
> I don't think anyone recalls a 3314. I think the OP said it was a typo, 2314 
> mis-remembered as 3000-series DASD.
> 
> Charles
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
> Behalf Of Edward Gould
> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 5:33 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
> 
> Chales,
> 
> 2321 was a data cell (magnetic strip) hardly could be called DASD) I don’t 
> recall a 3314 . The removable 3340 (not sure the number anyone?)
> 
> Ed
> 
>> On May 16, 2016, at 7:47 PM, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 2301, 2321.
>> CharlesSent from a mobile; please excuse the brevity
>> 
>>  Original message ----
>> From: Steve Thompson <ste...@copper.net>
>> Date: 05/16/2016  4:51 PM  (GMT-08:00)
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
>> 
>> 2314, 2419, 2311, these are just a few of the "IBM" DASD that I've had 
>> the pleasure of working with. I've forgotten the drum device numbers 
>> and the noodle snatcher model number.
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Steve Thompson]

Well, the S/360-20 had TPS (Tape Processing System, not to be 
confused with Tape Operating System) which had a RESVOL that was 
a tape. And there were utilities to update the tape in place (not 
copy to another tape and then back, actual update blocks in 
place). From time to time one would have to make a new copy of 
the REsVOL to, kinda defrag it as I remember.


By the time I got to TPS (Tape Processing System), IBM was no 
longer putting out maint. Or we just weren't getting any maint 
for it from IBM (1977-78 when I was working on that system).


The Noodle snatcher had "data cells" which were segments that had 
x strips of tape hanging in them (where x is a number that I've 
forgotten). It was tape that could be randomly accessed, so it 
was a kind of DASD.


It had a very interesting instruction. RFWBS, Read Forward, Write 
Backward with Shredding. Yep, catch that mylar strip (aka, 
noodle) on the edge of the slot and it would peal/slice it in 
two. That could wreck you whole day.


And if you had just had maintenance done, and one of the segments 
was not correctly fastened in place, when that sucker would 
rotate, it would fling that segment right through the "glass" and 
well, things just got exciting for a bit.


Makes one very glad to have things like thumb drives that we have 
today. Now if I could just get one big enough to IPL z/OS...


Regards,
Steve Thompson


On 05/18/2016 09:07 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:

On Wed, 18 May 2016 17:50:53 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:


... It was indeed a direct access storage device. Not a disk, but DASD 
nonetheless. Certainly not magnetic tape (though it had a family resemblance!) 
and certainly not unit record.


What's the criterion?  Max/Min latency ratio?  Statistical distribution of 
latency
between randomly selected records?  For tape, it's sort of triangular; for DASD
it has a sort of plateau.

Addressable by block and writable randomly without corrupting other blocks?
DECtape had preformatted addressable blocks; it held a filesystem with a
directory.  It moved from reel to reel past a stationary R/W head.  It met some
criteria for DASD and some for tape; it was both.

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Wed, 18 May 2016 17:50:53 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:

> ... It was indeed a direct access storage device. Not a disk, but DASD 
> nonetheless. Certainly not magnetic tape (though it had a family 
> resemblance!) and certainly not unit record.
>
What's the criterion?  Max/Min latency ratio?  Statistical distribution of 
latency
between randomly selected records?  For tape, it's sort of triangular; for DASD
it has a sort of plateau.

Addressable by block and writable randomly without corrupting other blocks?
DECtape had preformatted addressable blocks; it held a filesystem with a
directory.  It moved from reel to reel past a stationary R/W head.  It met some
criteria for DASD and some for tape; it was both.

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Charles Mills]

I remember them well. I was answering Steve's two implied questions.

2321 was certainly characterized as DASD. It was indeed a direct access storage 
device. Not a disk, but DASD nonetheless. Certainly not magnetic tape (though 
it had a family resemblance!) and certainly not unit record.

I don't think anyone recalls a 3314. I think the OP said it was a typo, 2314 
mis-remembered as 3000-series DASD.

Charles

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Edward Gould
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 5:33 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

Chales,

2321 was a data cell (magnetic strip) hardly could be called DASD) I don’t 
recall a 3314 . The removable 3340 (not sure the number anyone?)

Ed

> On May 16, 2016, at 7:47 PM, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 2301, 2321.
> CharlesSent from a mobile; please excuse the brevity
> 
>  Original message 
> From: Steve Thompson <ste...@copper.net>
> Date: 05/16/2016  4:51 PM  (GMT-08:00)
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
> 
> 2314, 2419, 2311, these are just a few of the "IBM" DASD that I've had 
> the pleasure of working with. I've forgotten the drum device numbers 
> and the noodle snatcher model number.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Edward Gould]

Chales,

2321 was a data cell (magnetic strip) hardly could be called DASD)
I don’t recall a 3314 . The removable 3340 (not sure the number anyone?)

Ed

> On May 16, 2016, at 7:47 PM, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 2301, 2321.
> CharlesSent from a mobile; please excuse the brevity
> 
>  Original message 
> From: Steve Thompson <ste...@copper.net> 
> Date: 05/16/2016  4:51 PM  (GMT-08:00) 
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO) 
> 
> 2314, 2419, 2311, these are just a few of the "IBM" DASD that 
> I've had the pleasure of working with. I've forgotten the drum 
> device numbers and the noodle snatcher model number.
> 
> Regards,
> Steve Thompson
> 
> On 05/16/2016 07:24 PM, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote:
>> OK, the sleeping dog wants some attention. Before my first reply, I 
>> carefully Googled device type 2314 to verify the number. Then I typed '3314' 
>> because who has ever worked with DASD that started with something other than 
>> '33'? 2314 remained valid in the IODEVICE macro long, long after the final 
>> one disappeared into the sunset. And as I said, I was advised to use it for 
>> VIO because of 'device architecture', whatever that meant. Track size, I 
>> guess, from what others have posted.
>> 
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> J.O.Skip Robinson
>> Southern California Edison Company
>> Electric Dragon Team Paddler
>> SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
>> 323-715-0595 Mobile
>> 626-302-7535 Office
>> robin...@sce.com
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
>> Behalf Of Clark Morris
>> Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 4:16 PM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: (External):Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
>> 
>> [Default] On 16 May 2016 07:01:50 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main 
>> jcal...@narsil.org (Jerry Callen) wrote:
>> 
>>> In the "Whither VIO" thread, J.O.Skip Robinson wrote:
>>> 
>>>>In a previous life, we defined VIO (I believe) to device 3314 even
>>>> though we had none left on the floor
>>> 
>>> That's a device type I've never heard of, and the Google knows not of. 
>>> Could this be a typo for "2314"?
>> 
>> I believe the OP meant 2314 which had 7294 bytes per track.  It was a 
>> removable disk.
>> 
>> Clark Morris
>>> 
>>> -- Jerry
>> 
>> --
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>> 
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> 
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Edward Finnell]

Lots of OEM's changed 1st digit but kept geometry.CDC, Memorex, Telex,  
Amdahl, StoraeTek.
 
 
In a message dated 5/16/2016 6:40:33 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
charl...@mcn.org writes:

You are  going to get some replies on  that!


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Rugen, Len]

The real odd balls, 3340, 3344, 3370 & 3375's :-)

3340's had the coolest looking removable disk assembly.

I suspected that the 3344 was a code-hacked 3350, it just carved 4 70Mb disks 
out of the larger physical disk.  

Len Rugen

University of Missouri
Division of Information Technology
Systems & Operations - Metrics & Automation Team


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Steve Thompson [ste...@copper.net]
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 6:51 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

2314, 2419, 2311, these are just a few of the "IBM" DASD that
I've had the pleasure of working with. I've forgotten the drum
device numbers and the noodle snatcher model number.

Regards,
Steve Thompson

On 05/16/2016 07:24 PM, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote:
> OK, the sleeping dog wants some attention. Before my first reply, I carefully 
> Googled device type 2314 to verify the number. Then I typed '3314' because 
> who has ever worked with DASD that started with something other than '33'? 
> 2314 remained valid in the IODEVICE macro long, long after the final one 
> disappeared into the sunset. And as I said, I was advised to use it for VIO 
> because of 'device architecture', whatever that meant. Track size, I guess, 
> from what others have posted.
>
> .
> .
> .
> J.O.Skip Robinson
> Southern California Edison Company
> Electric Dragon Team Paddler
> SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
> 323-715-0595 Mobile
> 626-302-7535 Office
> robin...@sce.com
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
> Behalf Of Clark Morris
> Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 4:16 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: (External):Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
>
> [Default] On 16 May 2016 07:01:50 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main 
> jcal...@narsil.org (Jerry Callen) wrote:
>
>> In the "Whither VIO" thread, J.O.Skip Robinson wrote:
>>
>>>   In a previous life, we defined VIO (I believe) to device 3314 even
>>> though we had none left on the floor
>>
>> That's a device type I've never heard of, and the Google knows not of. Could 
>> this be a typo for "2314"?
>
> I believe the OP meant 2314 which had 7294 bytes per track.  It was a 
> removable disk.
>
> Clark Morris
>>
>> -- Jerry
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Steve Thompson]

2314, 2419, 2311, these are just a few of the "IBM" DASD that 
I've had the pleasure of working with. I've forgotten the drum 
device numbers and the noodle snatcher model number.


Regards,
Steve Thompson

On 05/16/2016 07:24 PM, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote:

OK, the sleeping dog wants some attention. Before my first reply, I carefully 
Googled device type 2314 to verify the number. Then I typed '3314' because who 
has ever worked with DASD that started with something other than '33'? 2314 
remained valid in the IODEVICE macro long, long after the final one disappeared 
into the sunset. And as I said, I was advised to use it for VIO because of 
'device architecture', whatever that meant. Track size, I guess, from what 
others have posted.

.
.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-302-7535 Office
robin...@sce.com


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Clark Morris
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 4:16 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Default] On 16 May 2016 07:01:50 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main 
jcal...@narsil.org (Jerry Callen) wrote:


In the "Whither VIO" thread, J.O.Skip Robinson wrote:


  In a previous life, we defined VIO (I believe) to device 3314 even
though we had none left on the floor


That's a device type I've never heard of, and the Google knows not of. Could this be a 
typo for "2314"?


I believe the OP meant 2314 which had 7294 bytes per track.  It was a removable 
disk.

Clark Morris


-- Jerry


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Charles Mills]

> who has ever worked with DASD that started with something other than '33'?

You are going to get some replies on that!

Charles

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Jesse 1 Robinson
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 4:24 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

OK, the sleeping dog wants some attention. Before my first reply, I
carefully Googled device type 2314 to verify the number. Then I typed '3314'
because who has ever worked with DASD that started with something other than
'33'? 2314 remained valid in the IODEVICE macro long, long after the final
one disappeared into the sunset. And as I said, I was advised to use it for
VIO because of 'device architecture', whatever that meant. Track size, I
guess, from what others have posted. 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Jesse 1 Robinson]

OK, the sleeping dog wants some attention. Before my first reply, I carefully 
Googled device type 2314 to verify the number. Then I typed '3314' because who 
has ever worked with DASD that started with something other than '33'? 2314 
remained valid in the IODEVICE macro long, long after the final one disappeared 
into the sunset. And as I said, I was advised to use it for VIO because of 
'device architecture', whatever that meant. Track size, I guess, from what 
others have posted. 

.
.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler 
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-302-7535 Office
robin...@sce.com


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Clark Morris
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 4:16 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Default] On 16 May 2016 07:01:50 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main 
jcal...@narsil.org (Jerry Callen) wrote:

>In the "Whither VIO" thread, J.O.Skip Robinson wrote:
>
>>  In a previous life, we defined VIO (I believe) to device 3314 even 
>> though we had none left on the floor
>
>That's a device type I've never heard of, and the Google knows not of. Could 
>this be a typo for "2314"?

I believe the OP meant 2314 which had 7294 bytes per track.  It was a removable 
disk.

Clark Morris
>
>-- Jerry

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[Clark Morris]

[Default] On 16 May 2016 07:01:50 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
jcal...@narsil.org (Jerry Callen) wrote:

>In the "Whither VIO" thread, J.O.Skip Robinson wrote:
>
>>  In a previous life, we defined VIO (I believe) to device 3314 even though 
>> we had none left on the floor
>
>That's a device type I've never heard of, and the Google knows not of. Could 
>this be a typo for "2314"?

I believe the OP meant 2314 which had 7294 bytes per track.  It was a
removable disk.

Clark Morris
>
>-- Jerry
>
>--
>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[John McKown]

On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 9:09 AM, R.S. 
wrote:

> W dniu 2016-05-16 o 16:01, Jerry Callen pisze:
>
>> In the "Whither VIO" thread, J.O.Skip Robinson wrote:
>>
>>   In a previous life, we defined VIO (I believe) to device 3314 even
>>> though we had none left on the floor
>>>
>> That's a device type I've never heard of, and the Google knows not of.
>> Could this be a typo for "2314"?
>>
> IMHO anything older than 3380 is prehistory or a myth ;-)
>

​Hum, I had a 1316 disk volume (dismountable like )​ when I was in
college. It was used in the 1311 disk storage unit, attached to a 1620
computer. I loved that machine. A kind of "personal computer" for running
FORTRAN II programs.



>
> --
> Radoslaw Skorupka
> Lodz, Poland
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
> Treść tej wiadomości może zawierać informacje prawnie chronione Banku
> przeznaczone wyłącznie do użytku służbowego adresata. Odbiorcą może być
> jedynie jej adresat z wyłączeniem dostępu osób trzecich. Jeżeli nie jesteś
> adresatem niniejszej wiadomości lub pracownikiem upoważnionym do jej
> przekazania adresatowi, informujemy, że jej rozpowszechnianie, kopiowanie,
> rozprowadzanie lub inne działanie o podobnym charakterze jest prawnie
> zabronione i może być karalne. Jeżeli otrzymałeś tę wiadomość omyłkowo,
> prosimy niezwłocznie zawiadomić nadawcę wysyłając odpowiedź oraz trwale
> usunąć tę wiadomość włączając w to wszelkie jej kopie wydrukowane lub
> zapisane na dysku.
>
> This e-mail may contain legally privileged information of the Bank and is
> intended solely for business use of the addressee. This e-mail may only be
> received by the addressee and may not be disclosed to any third parties. If
> you are not the intended addressee of this e-mail or the employee
> authorized to forward it to the addressee, be advised that any
> dissemination, copying, distribution or any other similar activity is
> legally prohibited and may be punishable. If you received this e-mail by
> mistake please advise the sender immediately by using the reply facility in
> your e-mail software and delete permanently this e-mail including any
> copies of it either printed or saved to hard drive.
>
> mBank S.A. z siedzibą w Warszawie, ul. Senatorska 18, 00-950 Warszawa,
> www.mBank.pl, e-mail: kont...@mbank.pl
> Sąd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy XII Wydział Gospodarczy Krajowego
> Rejestru Sądowego, nr rejestru przedsiębiorców KRS 025237, NIP:
> 526-021-50-88. Według stanu na dzień 01.01.2016 r. kapitał zakładowy mBanku
> S.A. (w całości wpłacony) wynosi 168.955.696 złotych.
>
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>



-- 
The unfacts, did we have them, are too imprecisely few to warrant our
certitude.

Maranatha! <><
John McKown

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)

[R.S.]

W dniu 2016-05-16 o 16:01, Jerry Callen pisze:

In the "Whither VIO" thread, J.O.Skip Robinson wrote:


  In a previous life, we defined VIO (I believe) to device 3314 even though we 
had none left on the floor

That's a device type I've never heard of, and the Google knows not of. Could this be a 
typo for "2314"?

IMHO anything older than 3380 is prehistory or a myth ;-)

--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland






---
Treść tej wiadomości może zawierać informacje prawnie chronione Banku 
przeznaczone wyłącznie do użytku służbowego adresata. Odbiorcą może być jedynie 
jej adresat z wyłączeniem dostępu osób trzecich. Jeżeli nie jesteś adresatem 
niniejszej wiadomości lub pracownikiem upoważnionym do jej przekazania 
adresatowi, informujemy, że jej rozpowszechnianie, kopiowanie, rozprowadzanie 
lub inne działanie o podobnym charakterze jest prawnie zabronione i może być 
karalne. Jeżeli otrzymałeś tę wiadomość omyłkowo, prosimy niezwłocznie 
zawiadomić nadawcę wysyłając odpowiedź oraz trwale usunąć tę wiadomość 
włączając w to wszelkie jej kopie wydrukowane lub zapisane na dysku.

This e-mail may contain legally privileged information of the Bank and is 
intended solely for business use of the addressee. This e-mail may only be 
received by the addressee and may not be disclosed to any third parties. If you 
are not the intended addressee of this e-mail or the employee authorized to 
forward it to the addressee, be advised that any dissemination, copying, 
distribution or any other similar activity is legally prohibited and may be 
punishable. If you received this e-mail by mistake please advise the sender 
immediately by using the reply facility in your e-mail software and delete 
permanently this e-mail including any copies of it either printed or saved to 
hard drive.

mBank S.A. z siedzibą w Warszawie, ul. Senatorska 18, 00-950 Warszawa, 
www.mBank.pl, e-mail: kont...@mbank.pl
Sąd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy XII Wydział Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru 
Sądowego, nr rejestru przedsiębiorców KRS 025237, NIP: 526-021-50-88. 
Według stanu na dzień 01.01.2016 r. kapitał zakładowy mBanku S.A. (w całości 
wpłacony) wynosi 168.955.696 złotych.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN