Re: context switching
Well, how about this for confusing then. If you can run Linux/390 on a PC using an emulator, and the emulator cranks out about 12 MIPS on a 1ghz machine, then it is pretty fair to say that the PC is doing something around 12 MIPS, right? (Well, maybe not quite that simple. We do run several sets of baselines that both measure processor, I/O, and mixed processing loads. We take that in account. Now the way I do it is to use a handy dandy little program we have here that measures performance in terms of doing the things we normally do in our processing, such as read/write files, process data with several various and more or less complex formulae, retrieve records in various ways from data files, and lastly, do some kind of interactive performance. The reason the interactive is last is that it is the hardest to measure, of course. We run the program under Emulation, then recompile it and run it under Intel Linux. That gives us a rough baseline measure. we can then extrapolate by factoring in the MIPS we expect to be available to the process. While the measure is still pretty rough, it does give us general guidelines to expected performance. If it performs x well on the emulated system, the we can expect it to perform x(y) on a non-emulated system with differences in DASD and etc taken into account. Of course, one nasty factor to take into account is that MIPS are devilishly hard to determine on an Intel processor. I think they did that on purpose. But anyway, a 1.3 gigahertz PIII (or comparable chip in the same range) delivers just under 1000 MIPS of performance in our boxes. 1000 Intel MIPS == 12 Mainframe MIPS is the very rough measure. Actually, all the other factors combined work out (In our case! Your mileage will vary! :) to 1000 Intel MIPS = 18.3 Mainframe MIPS. Roughly speaking, in terms of the processing we do, that means we would need an Intel box processing around 13.5ghz to equal a 192MIP IFL engine. Obviously, other factors come into play that tend to either mollify or exaggerate this rough ratio, but we find it pretty darn close in terms of pure processor work. Note, I am not saying that a 13.5ghz Intel Box can replace a mainframe. I am merely saying that with our processing mixture, we find that ratio to be more or less true for comparison. - Original Message - From: John R. Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, April 06, 2003 8:29 PM Subject: Re: context switching Phil Payne wrote: I'm confused. And I've been following this whole discussion from the beginning. Can one of you, or any of you, reiterate? I've ben here since 1969, and I still get confused. Yup. Mind you, I like to *sow* some confusion, given how often I seem to reap it without originally planting it. The ultimate issue is the assumption that there is - somewhere - a magic metric. Something that will let us divide what (e.g.) a zSeries does with what some iteration of what Intel does and derive a factor letting us compare price/performance. Ah, the Holy Grail. What metric? Is it behind that little bunny? T'ain't so. And the problem is that it is incredibly easy for the purveyors of such low-end and (apparently) cheap boxes to postulate these challenges, and it's a multi-million dollar issue (literally) for someone like IBM to demonstrate the superiority of (e.g.) zSeries in a really serious environment involving dozens or hundreds of images on a single system. Actually, I think Appendix A of the original Linux for S/390 redbook had a good comparison of the various trade-offs and priorities between a mainframe like the s/390 and a desktop. I was once surprised to find a definition of a mainframe that I did as a lark used as a quoting point. I originally said that a mainframe takes the following into account: 1)Maximum single-thread performance. 2)Maximum I/O Connectivity. 3)Maximum I/O Throughput. SANs impact 2 and 3 above but they take no prisoners in their effort to provide connectivity (capacity expansion) and speed (delivery). The first point is due to many of the workloads being single threaded (the merge phase of a Sort, no matter how much you can subdivide it, can't be multithred without some serious Heisenbugs forming). I missed one point in my original comment: 4)Maximum Reliability. Which is one place where the S/390 itself has few competitors. Based on Appendix A the throughput of an s/390 is limited by the desire to ensure accurate and reliable results, so there's a performance hit (though I doubt it's all that much of an impact) in the desperate quest to make sure that all the results are CORRECT. Add another 500 users. No
[no subject]
That's basically what I meant. While 80MIPS will do a heck of a lot under OS/390 or z/OS, when normally considering UNIX, it isn't all that much. Unless of course, you consider that the processor is NOT doing I/O on a mainframe, or managing a memory mapped display, or ... well, you get the picture. Also, 390 instructions tend to do a whole lot more than say, PowerPC instructions. We are looking at a z800 with only IFL engines on it, and it looks like it will really meet our needs bigtime. Using software emulators like Flex or Hercules, we see acceptable performance on PC's, though the MIP ratings are very difficult to pin down. At 16MIPS of emulated speed, Linux is usable for 10 - 20 people (we have DASD on EMC and other high speed RAID devices, so your mileage may vary!) - we expect a 192MIP engine, even carved up with so/VM and a couple LPARS, will do quite nicely. :) -Paul - Original Message - From: Post, Mark K [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2003 9:49 AM Paul, That's the whole point. The GP on a 0A1 is 80 MIPS, not 192. An IFL that gets added to the box would run at 192, but not the GP. Mark Post -Original Message- From: Paul Raulerson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2003 12:00 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Hey Jim - is a 0A1 the crippled processor able to run z/OS? Basically, while I am not disputing your expertise, I sure don't follow your logic. I *know* that a 2.8mhz PC system running Linux will bog down, even when connected to an EMC storage unit for DASD, a whole lot faster than a z800 will. :) 192 mainframe MIPS goes a LONG way. - Original Message - From: Jim Elliott [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 1:55 PM From: Noll, Ralph [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: performance the performance of linux on s390 doesn't seem to be as fast as an x86 box i am using suse sles8 31 bit for s/390 on a z/800 0a1 running vm 4.3 with 2 vse's and 6 linux instances when i do the ind command.. following.. doesn't look busy Ralph: A z800-0A1 is equivalent (in pure compute power) to a 280MHz Intel system. Don't forget, this is the second smallest system IBM sells today in the zSeries family. Regards, Jim
Re: DASD technology for VM and Linux
We are looking along those lines right now as well. Would anyone posting private e-mails on this please include me too? :) Thanks -Paul - Original Message - From: Ward, Garry [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 7:09 AM Subject: Re: DASD technology for VM and Linux Ok; this is the 2nd place I've see a reference to a 3390 mod 27. Would someone point me down a short path to the details on this beast? TIA Garry E. Ward Senior Software Specialist Maritz Research, Automotive Research Group 419-725-4123 -Original Message- From: Marcy Cortes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 4:24 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: DASD technology for VM and Linux To: VM/ESA Mailing Lis [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** crossposted to VM-ESA and linux-390 ** I realize that this request is somewhat like asking you all what color looks best on me when you've never seen me in person.. but here goes anyway. My knowledge about DASD technology is pretty dated. We've usually just been given whatever os/390 is finished with, which, to be honest, has usually been adequate here for VM needs (although we do have an i/o bound FOCUS job that is having trouble meeting it's deadline that must be addressed too). Now we've been asked to put together a list of what Linux on VM might need in terms of DASD. Our situation so far has been build it and they will come. They are starting to come (we have 13 or so Linux guests now) but don't have a grand scheme of replacing the world (yet :). So far, we're mainly doing apache and another app which uses mysql. So what would you ask for if you didn't know what you needed and wanted to be prepared:) Our MVS environment has moved to all mod 9, mod 27, and FICON. Are these well suited to Linux? How about remote copy support (we do run our disaster recovery in house). Marcy Cortes Wells Fargo Services Co Confidentiality Warning: This e-mail contains information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, any dissemination, publication or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. The sender does not accept any responsibility for any loss, disruption or damage to your data or computer system that may occur while using data contained in, or transmitted with, this e-mail. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify us by return e-mail. Thank you.
Re: Linux/390 Assembler Guru's...
Thanks John- I'll post this reply to both groups as a polite way of doing so then. :) Most of our (my!) problems are with the different Linkage conventions under Linux of course. It uses a simple register based method to pass arguments to SVCs and C-Libraries functions, and yet it still uses a stack. More accurately, a stack frame. It does appear to be blazingly fast when written in assembler, even though handwritten assembler isn't using the pipelining tricks and such that are possible on zSeries hardware. (S/390 hardware.) And one of the issues we have to address is the current code runs in 24bit mode, but Linux only runs in 31 or 64 bit mode. I do not have any ideas what kind of weird and fascinating issues lie in our future based upon that... :) -Paul - Original Message - From: John Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 12:08 AM Subject: Re: Linux/390 Assembler Guru's... Paul, Ya. Get on the Linux/390 list. mailto://[EMAIL PROTECTED] with subscribe LINUX-390 firstname lastname in the email body. The folks there will LOVE to help you out. Several on this list are also on the Linux/390 list, so you'll get the help you need one way or the other. -jcf -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Raulerson Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 8:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Linux/390 Assembler Guru's... Hey guys - We are looking at a really cool port. Taking about a million lines of Wang Assembler (i.e. 370 code) and putting it on a z800 running, yep Linux. Dave Bond over at Tachyon has an assembler that eats HLASM syntax, and better yet, runs native under L/390, and by putting a few other pieces together (i.e. an indexed file system, block mode terminal handling, etc...) we seem to have a really doable and very very smart move on our hands. Except I am still a bit of a dummy on Linux/390 and assembler, despite Dave's patient coaching. :) So my question is pretty simple, is anyone else out there using assembler (HLASM) under Linux/.390 and if so, is there a discussion area / group for it? If not, would it be appropriate to ask questions and discuss issues here? Thanks -Paul Raulerson P.S. -If you haven't tried out the Tachyon assembler under L/390, call 'em up and ask for a demo. It is unbelivably fast.
[no subject]
Hey Jim - is a 0A1 the crippled processor able to run z/OS? Basically, while I am not disputing your expertise, I sure don't follow your logic. I *know* that a 2.8mhz PC system running Linux will bog down, even when connected to an EMC storage unit for DASD, a whole lot faster than a z800 will. :) 192 mainframe MIPS goes a LONG way. - Original Message - From: Jim Elliott [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 1:55 PM From: Noll, Ralph [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: performance the performance of linux on s390 doesn't seem to be as fast as an x86 box i am using suse sles8 31 bit for s/390 on a z/800 0a1 running vm 4.3 with 2 vse's and 6 linux instances when i do the ind command.. following.. doesn't look busy Ralph: A z800-0A1 is equivalent (in pure compute power) to a 280MHz Intel system. Don't forget, this is the second smallest system IBM sells today in the zSeries family. Regards, Jim
Favorite Distribution for 390
Hi guys - we are looking *hard* at purchasing a new z800 0FL machine to run Linux as our primary host computer at work. This is a great idea I think, but I could really use some advice on the distributions. First, pricing... glancing at SuSE's sight, I see what appears to be restricitve licensing (can only run on one machine image?) and some high pricing ($16K for a single image?). Either I am looking in the wrong place, or they have lost their minds. I even saw something that seemed to indicate the license was per year. Not acceptable. Which irritates me a lot because SuSE is my favorite distribution, and the SuSE V7 release I have here (which does not appear to have the kind of restrinctions) is simply too old. Redhat does not seem to post pricing at all for390 images, and reading the last 800 or 900 messages in this newsgroup I am not all that enthused with them anyway. Which narrows things down pretty much to Debian, I think. (TurboLinux says they don't sell in the U.S.) There is also ThinkBlue, but it appears to be two years old as well. In any case, my ideal distribution would have zero restrictions regarding licensing (except of course, for the individual licenses of individual software packages and so forth...) and support available, if I want to pay for it. I understand that IBM says they support ever distribution avaiable for 390, at a cost of course, but I want to get more opinions. So... which distributions do you guys prefer, what kind of costing an I looking at, and if we decide to go with Debian, has anyone got any experience with it in a production environment? Thanks -Paul Raulerson
Re: SCO FILES LAWSUIT AGAINST IBM
Hah! Did I or did I not say not to trust those Caldera/SCO buggers?! The complaint is online at their website, and boy, does it read really stupidly. From what I understand, they are targeting IBM because they claim IBM introduced SCO licensed technology into Linux. Further they claim that IBM did it in an attempt to damage SCO! Yeesh... even I can see 4 glaring holes in their logic - they have no hope of winning. I think they simply tanked their business from greed, and are now wanting IBM to buy them out. I hope IBM does buy them out and throw all the SCO code into the public domain. Bah! -Paul - Original Message - From: Phil Payne [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 7:46 AM Subject: SCO FILES LAWSUIT AGAINST IBM SCO FILES LAWSUIT AGAINST IBM
Re: DB2 UDB and Websphere
What in particular do you want to do with it? If you are using it in client/server mode, then Access, and all that Windows stuff work just fine. If you want a Web based interface, and WebSphere is too expensive, then there are a few dozen other application servers out there ranging from BEA down to ZOPE and even (gasp!) just using CGI based programs and HTML. :) Honestly, I did not mean that to sound as smug as it does, but without a better idea of what you are trying to accomplish, it is like shooting in the dark, at least for me. :) -Paul - Original Message - From: Diana Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 9:42 AM Subject: DB2 UDB and Websphere We have just set up DB2 UDB in the linux environment. We are looking for a new front-end. Thinking about Websphere, we are currently using Microsoft Access. I would appreciate any thoughts or solutions that have worked for anyone. Diana Reynolds City of Rochester
Re: DB2 UDB and Websphere
Ah, now that makes more sense. That narrows it does a lot. By the way, that is really a good way to go, narrow the applications down to one or at most two platforms and go from there. A couple more quick questions: (1) Where do you want these common applications to be? On the mainframe (in COBOL?), or under CICS control, or do you want to shut down the mainframe and migrate to an alternate platform? (2) Do you want the applications to look like Windows applications, or like CICS green screen apps, a Web Application or some combination? If in combination, roughly what percent goes where? (3) Do you have Java expertise on site, or wish to develop Java expertise? (4) Is this a budgeted project, or something you have to pull off as a (no/low) cost demo to provide proof of concept? - Original Message - From: Diana Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 3:02 PM Subject: Re: DB2 UDB and Websphere Okay, here is the situation, we are exploring alternatives. We have DB2 UDB running on a linux server. We have legacy systems running under cobol/cics/vsam on a 390. we have access applications with access databases on servers. We want to get to a common ground. we have loaded one of our access databases into DB2 UDB, we have also downloaded some of our legacy vsam files into DB2 UDB. Now the question is, what do we use as a common front end. We want to get to some type of web base portal type situation. I am not sure that I am explaining this very well. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 02/26/03 03:34PM What in particular do you want to do with it? If you are using it in client/server mode, then Access, and all that Windows stuff work just fine. If you want a Web based interface, and WebSphere is too expensive, then there are a few dozen other application servers out there ranging from BEA down to ZOPE and even (gasp!) just using CGI based programs and HTML. :) Honestly, I did not mean that to sound as smug as it does, but without a better idea of what you are trying to accomplish, it is like shooting in the dark, at least for me. :) -Paul - Original Message - From: Diana Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 9:42 AM Subject: DB2 UDB and Websphere We have just set up DB2 UDB in the linux environment. We are looking for a new front-end. Thinking about Websphere, we are currently using Microsoft Access. I would appreciate any thoughts or solutions that have worked for anyone. Diana Reynolds City of Rochester
Re: vi vs. ISPF
- Original Message - From: Tzafrir Cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 4:22 PM Subject: Re: vi vs. ISPF You probably won't be able to get this work. A 3270 data stream is block oriented, and requires a much more intelligent terminal that I have ever been able to describein a termcap or terminfo entry. :) Actually, vi requires character by character keystrokes so that it knows what to do next. This is not really expensive under UNIX, but is terrifically expensive in terms of I/O under OS/390 or VM. Even though it gives the illusion of editing a page at a time, it really does not. It simply keeps track of where the cursor is on a virutal screen (a text mode backing store to be accurate.) -Paul I saw that there is a terminfo entry of ibm327x . When I tried to use it pico (sorry, that is the only ncurses program I have at my disposal at tha machine) blantly refused: 'ibm327x': I need something more specific. I tried some other 'ibm*' entries, all of them were accepted, but I got all sorts of different garbages: the escape sequeces were clearly not interpreted by the terminal. Is there any way to get proper termcap/terminfo entries working? (e.g: avoid the need for unalias ls?) Or is any general solution in this path needs to be more radical (e.g: some specific support inside ncurses for 3270 terminals? I don't know terminal devices very well) -- Tzafrir Cohen mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir
Re: ISPF for Linux + Other Question
Sure - what address would you like a copy at? I'll send it along and if you have questions, I'd be willing to answer them here or on some real-time chat channel. I need the practice, I have not taught a course in almost a year. :) -Paul - Original Message - From: Lionel Dyck [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 8:45 AM Subject: Re: ISPF for Linux + Other Question You wouldn't be willing to share your teaching materials would you Lionel B. Dyck, Systems Software Lead Kaiser Permanente Information Technology 25 N. Via Monte Ave Walnut Creek, Ca 94598 Phone: (925) 926-5332 (tie line 8/473-5332) E-Mail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sametime: (use Lotus Notes address) AIM:lbdyck Paul Raulerson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: Linux on 390 Port [EMAIL PROTECTED] 02/18/2003 04:56 PM Please respond to Linux on 390 Port [EMAIL PROTECTED] To [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc Subject Re: ISPF for Linux + Other Question LOL! I prefer ISPF myself, but I teach a Vi at GunPoint course that most people get through in about 10 mins of lecture, 10 mins of demonstration, 30 mins of lab, and 10 mins of wrapup. Vi is very much simpler than ISPF, once you memorize about 12 often used commands, and another 10 that are used often but don't need to be memorized. - Original Message - From: Eric Bielefeld [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 3:04 PM Subject: Re: ISPF for Linux + Other Question Alan and others, Thanks for the info. The one from UnEclipse Software can be bought on special right now for $89. I used to use XEDIT, so I can probably get by with the hessling-editor also, which is free. I do very little progamming or REXX, so I don't think I would want to try to do that. I know that once I get Linux up on the mainframe, I want to avoid the Vi editor at all costs. The hour I worked on it at an IBM class for AIX long ago convinced me I want to stay away from Vi. Thanks Eric Bielefeld Sr. MVS Systems Programmer PH Mining Equipment Milwaukee, WI 414-671-7849 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 02/18/03 02:21PM You can use the editor THE, which is xedit like, but with a bit of (profile) work can look like VERY like ISPF. I use it in USS all the time. It is free at: http://hessling-editor.sourceforge.net/ it also interfaces with REXX. Its just way cool ... Al. -Original Message- From: Post, Mark K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 8:39 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: ISPF for Linux I'm not aware of any free packages. There are two commercial ones listed at http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries/solutions/s390da/linuxproduct.h tml: SPF for S390/linux - http://www.uneclipse.com uni-SPF - http://www.wrkgrp.com/uniSPF/index.html Mark Post + This electronic mail transmission contains information from P H Mining Equipment which is confidential, and is intended only for the use of the proper addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately at the return address on this transmission, or by telephone at (414) 671-4400, and delete this message and any attachments from your system. Unauthorized use, copying, disclosing, distributing, or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this transmission is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. +
Re: ISPF for Linux + Other Question
LOL! I prefer ISPF myself, but I teach a Vi at GunPoint course that most people get through in about 10 mins of lecture, 10 mins of demonstration, 30 mins of lab, and 10 mins of wrapup. Vi is very much simpler than ISPF, once you memorize about 12 often used commands, and another 10 that are used often but don't need to be memorized. - Original Message - From: Eric Bielefeld [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 3:04 PM Subject: Re: ISPF for Linux + Other Question Alan and others, Thanks for the info. The one from UnEclipse Software can be bought on special right now for $89. I used to use XEDIT, so I can probably get by with the hessling-editor also, which is free. I do very little progamming or REXX, so I don't think I would want to try to do that. I know that once I get Linux up on the mainframe, I want to avoid the Vi editor at all costs. The hour I worked on it at an IBM class for AIX long ago convinced me I want to stay away from Vi. Thanks Eric Bielefeld Sr. MVS Systems Programmer PH Mining Equipment Milwaukee, WI 414-671-7849 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 02/18/03 02:21PM You can use the editor THE, which is xedit like, but with a bit of (profile) work can look like VERY like ISPF. I use it in USS all the time. It is free at: http://hessling-editor.sourceforge.net/ it also interfaces with REXX. Its just way cool ... Al. -Original Message- From: Post, Mark K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 8:39 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: ISPF for Linux I'm not aware of any free packages. There are two commercial ones listed at http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries/solutions/s390da/linuxproduct.h tml: SPF for S390/linux - http://www.uneclipse.com uni-SPF - http://www.wrkgrp.com/uniSPF/index.html Mark Post + This electronic mail transmission contains information from P H Mining Equipment which is confidential, and is intended only for the use of the proper addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately at the return address on this transmission, or by telephone at (414) 671-4400, and delete this message and any attachments from your system. Unauthorized use, copying, disclosing, distributing, or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this transmission is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. +
Re: Pervasiveness
Ah Hah! A challenge I can answer. Simply have her daddy log onto www.dell.com or www.gateway.com and buy here a nice new P4 machine, with at least 80gigs of harddrive, a nice 15 flatscreen monitor, plenty of RAM, nice speakers, and CD-RW/DVD drives in it. With warranty. Problem solved. (At least, this is the way *my* kids think things should be resolved! :) -Paul - Original Message - From: John Summerfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2003 3:58 AM Subject: Re: Pervasiveness Not really. There are lots of ways of being hosed, and I've seen lots of ways of not being able to boot Linux on desktops. My daughter has a hosed Pentium II system, but I defy you to offer decent help without better information.
Block Mode Terminal and Terminal Server Programs
My current issue is how to support a whole boatload of interactive text screen users coming from a program running under both Mainframe and OS/400 systems. Both systems are capable of supporting really fast and efficient terminal operations, because they use block mode terminal capabilities. In other words, a 3270 terminal doesn't send every keystroke back to the host while the user is typing; it returns entire screen's worth of information at one time. So, other than coding a BMS replacement and TN3270 server, are there any -- existing -- and -- easy --- way to run a block mode terminal under UNIX? If not, it doesn't appear too difficult to write a client/server system that would operate as a block mode system,but if anyone has any pointers, I am all ears. :) BTW: I know that the HTML based web stuff does act that way, but following the precepts of don't break it if it ain't broke, the easiest path for me to be able to run hundred of users reliably and without screen delays from UNIX seems to be a block mode terminal. Opposing, supporting, or otherwise informative opinions welcome! :) Thanks -Paul
Re: VSAM or Lightweight Database?
Well I'll be doggonned! Thank you Jim - that really answers a big question. :) -Paul - Original Message - From: Jim Elliott [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 6:55 AM Subject: Re: VSAM or Lightweight Database? The Berkeley db stuff is no where near robust enough to take the place of a mainframe VSAM implementation. We would like to use the Informix C-ISAM, but that is not available for Linux/390. Paul: Informix C-ISAM certainly IS available for Linux for S/390. It was the first product from Informix availabe for this environment and has been available for over a year. I know that the web page (first below) does not show this, but on the same web page is the second link which does. Contact your IBM Software rep for assistance on this. If you still can't get the right answer, contact me offline. http://www-3.ibm.com/software/data/informix/cisam/ http://www-3.ibm.com/software/data/informix/pubs/portfolio/cisam.pdf Regards, Jim Elliott
Re: VSAM or Lightweight Database?
The people I talked to spent 10 minutes understanding that I wasn't talking about 'MVS' (i.e. OS/390) and then told me that Linux only ran on PCs. (*sigh*) Perhaps I was just having a bad luck day with contacting them. -Paul - Original Message - From: Scott Courtney [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 9:00 AM Subject: Re: VSAM or Lightweight Database? On Tuesday 17 September 2002 11:32 pm, Paul Raulerson wrote: I looked at the FairCom Server and C-TREE stuff, which is very very good, but again, it is not currently available under Linux/390. I thought C-TREE was available in ANSI C source code. Is the situation that they know it won't port to Linux/390, or that they simply don't know and therefore don't officially support it? (I realize from other posts that this isn't relevant to your original question any more, but I am curious what the FairCom folks said when you contacted them.) Scott -- - Scott D. Courtney, Senior Engineer Sine Nomine Associates [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sinenomine.net/
Re: VSAM or Lightweight Database?
grin You are about to be amazed. I am and obviously I don't know everything there is to know about the new Tachyon stuff. I am looking at the VSAM emulation and it appears to be single user, but wow, is it nice stuff. :) Paul - Original Message - From: Ledbetter, Scott E [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 9:49 AM Subject: Re: VSAM or Lightweight Database? Ooops. The previous message was intended to be a private reply, but as long as it is public, perhaps David can give everyone a short message illustrating how his Tachyon products can be used in S390 Linux-OS/390 cross-development. We (STK) have been using the Tachyon Assembler for several years to assemble S390 code on Solaris. I hadn't looked at the Tachyon site in a while, and there is even more good stuff available. Scott Ledbetter StorageTek -Original Message- From: Ledbetter, Scott E Sent: September 18, 2002 8:37 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: VSAM or Lightweight Database? David, It was good to run into you at SHARE. Hope all is well. Tachyon OS?? You have been very busy, haven't you? Is this somehow based on Hercules, or is it something you've conjured up yourself? I looked at the web page, and it looks intriguing Scott Ledbetter STK -Original Message- From: David Bond [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: September 17, 2002 7:25 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: VSAM or Lightweight Database? Paul Raulerson wrote: I'd like to explore moving some OS/390 VSAM files to Linux on the 390. Can anyone point me to some appropriate resources? I would like to stay with VSAM (ISAM, C-ISAM, etc.) files, since some of the code that uses those files is written in assembler. Record locking would be necessary however. Paul, You can use the Tachyon z/Assembler to reassemble your programs and produce ELF objects to run on Linux for S/390 or zSeries. You would need to supply replacement macros for the ACB, GET, PUT, RPL and other VSAM services. You might also look at running your programs on the Tachyon Operating System to provide VSAM emulation. David Bond - Tachyon Software LLC - http://www.tachyonsoft.com
VSAM or Lightweight Database?
I'd like to explore moving some OS/390 VSAM files to Linux on the 390. Can anyone point me to some appropriate resources? I would like to stay with VSAM (ISAM, C-ISAM, etc.) files, since some of the code that uses those files is written in assembler. Record locking would be necessary however. A web Search did not turn up much of any useful information. Thanks -Paul
Re: Intel Architecture Emulated with Linux/390?
Unless of course, they do a lot of bit manipulation, in which case that rotten Intel Arch. is inverted and out of order... -Paul - Original Message - From: David Boyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 12:11 PM Subject: Re: Intel Architecture Emulated with Linux/390? As I am investigating vendor support for Linux/390, I have run into a question I cannot answer. Vendors want to know if Linux/390 emulates Intel architecture. No, it does not. Apparently, when programming in C, they have to write the application to the specific architecture and that it will not work on non-Intel based systems. If you're getting crap like this from your vendors, you need new vendors. Your vendors will have to recompile their applications for the appropriate processor architecture, but if they're too clueless to be able to understand this, I'd be pretty wary of them in the first place. -- db
Re: VSAM or Lightweight Database?
Well, we have the Tachyon assembler here, which uses HLASM syntax, and has the capability to run under Linux/390. We should be able to pretty much replace the macros and get away with just rewriting a small portion of the code. Remember that though file access is important, there is a heck of a lot of logic embedded in that code that runs faster on a S/390 than any assembler generated code. grin That is *why* it is in assembler in the first place. ;) -Paul - Original Message - From: McKown, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 7:52 AM Subject: Re: VSAM or Lightweight Database? -Original Message- From: Paul Raulerson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 6:27 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: VSAM or Lightweight Database? I'd like to explore moving some OS/390 VSAM files to Linux on the 390. Can anyone point me to some appropriate resources? I would like to stay with VSAM (ISAM, C-ISAM, etc.) files, since some of the code that uses those files is written in assembler. Record locking would be necessary however. A web Search did not turn up much of any useful information. Thanks -Paul I'm definately not a guru, just a learner at present (don't have Linux/390 at work, installed at home under Hercules). But that won't stop me from shooting off my mouth grin. You do realize that your assembler code will need to be totally rewritten anyway, don't you? All the ACB, GET, PUT, and RPL macros will need to be redone to use whatever macros your VSAM-replacement uses. Also, your assembler code is likely in HLASM format. Unless you have an HLASM compatable assembler, such as from Dignus (http://www.dignus.com), then you'll need to rewrite into the GNU assembler (GAS). GAS doesn't support macros anyway, from what I understand. You'd do yourself a large favor to simply rewrite the code into C/C++ and use MySQL or PostgreSQL (my fav) for your storage. Of course, I'm an RDBMS bigot. But if you insist on using an ISAM system, then I'd suggest using Berkeley DB from Sleepycat. http://www.sleepycat.com This product is highly regarded and used by a lot of Linux software. -- John McKown Senior Technical Specialist UICI Insurance Center Applications Solutions Team +1.817.255.3225
Re: Redhat Linux Problem
You are on the right path; make sure you rebuilt the kernel and included support (either built-in or module level) for wireless processing and the particular card(s) you are using. That should clear up your problem. We use a few wireless access points on the mainframe here, though they are external devices. I don't believe I have heard of anyone needing to collect this kind of information who was not writing device drivers though. If you would be so kind as to share, what kind of project are you working on, and what plan do you have for mainframe Linux? :) -Paul - Original Message - From: Sabari Arasu (CTC) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 19, 2002 4:13 AM Subject: Redhat Linux Problem Hi, here is a standing problem in redhat linux , if any of you have the solution please send it across: Details: OS: Redhat Linux kernel version 2.4.7-10 2.4.19 Wireless Extension : 14 Wireless card: Lucent Orinoco Silver card Driver for the card: orinoco_cs driver(IEEE 802.11b) Let me explain my situation here: 1) When i try to run the iwevent it hangs up.This iwevent is very important because i need to find the details abt the information iam gathering and also the beacon interval. 2) I tried applying the orinoco_cs patch for version 0.11b.The patch is updated in the orinoco.11b directory.But still the iwevent hangs up. 3) Actually when i compile the files it says implicit declaration of min_t,max_t error.So to avoid that i found the pcmcia-cs package from david hind's website.When i apply the patch it says the patch is rejected in orinoco_cs files.And i have the .rej files.But that doesnt give me any info abt the iwevent thing. 4) So i went ahead and updated the kernel version to 2.4.19 but now it is not even recognising the driver for the card(meaning iam just hearing 1 high beep and 1 low beep,instead of 2 high beeps). Can you suggest me anything to get the iwevent running? Thanks and Regards, Sabari Arasu
