edgould1...@comcast.net (Ed Gould) writes:
> Remember the *OLD* days there was a 16MB max on (even) an MP? Never
> mind the cost of $10K per meg (if memory serves me on a 168).
> Yes the newer machines have more memory but in reality you really
> don't get all that more functionality, and yes there
On 16Feb24:2100-0500, zMan wrote:
>
> I remember $1/byte back in the 360 era. Amazing times.
Even more amazing: according to the https://www.minneapolisfed.org/
inflation calculator, that equates to about $7/byte in today's
dollar's purchasing power.
--
May the LORD God bless you exceedingly ab
ssion List
Subject: Re: Introducing the New z13s: Tim's Hardware Highlights
Ed Gould wrote:
>Remember the *OLD* days there was a 16MB max on (even) an MP? Never mind
the cost of $10K per meg (if memory serves me on a 168).
Maybe at the end of the 370 era. Per http://www.jcmit.com/memoryp
Ed Gould wrote:
>Remember the *OLD* days there was a 16MB max on (even) an MP? Never mind
the cost of $10K per meg (if memory serves me on a 168).
Maybe at the end of the 370 era. Per http://www.jcmit.com/memoryprice.htm
it wasn't until 1979 or so that it got that cheap.
I remember $1/byte back i
On 23 Feb 2016 20:46:21 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
>Ed Gould wrote:
>>Seriously the issue is absence of debugging tools to find the leak
>>seems like it would be simpler to have them.
>
>Who said they didn't? They had quite excellent problem determination tools
>(plural).
>
>Keep i
Ed Gould wrote:
>Seriously the issue is absence of debugging tools to find the leak
>seems like it would be simpler to have them.
Who said they didn't? They had quite excellent problem determination tools
(plural).
Keep in mind the mission-critical application was in production. Neither
planned n
On Feb 22, 2016, at 2:05 PM, R.S. wrote:
W dniu 2016-02-18 o 10:30, Timothy Sipples pisze:
-
SNIP
memory than the biggest available mainframe did
until 2015.
Well, it was a *shame* for mainframe. Both: memory limit and the
W dniu 2016-02-18 o 10:30, Timothy Sipples pisze:
1. Memory! [...]
Just to underscore how revolutionary 4 TB of main memory is in the z13s,
the zEC12 -- the largest model mainframe introduced in 2012 -- supported
"only" 3 TB of main memory. This supposed "mid-range" z13s mainframe
supports 33% mo
On 22 Feb 2016 10:14:18 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
>All for the cost of a new Mainframe?
>Seriously the issue is absence of debugging tools to find the leak
>seems like it would be simpler to have them.
The joy can be understanding why the bug, fixing it so that you don't
cause
All for the cost of a new Mainframe?
Seriously the issue is absence of debugging tools to find the leak
seems like it would be simpler to have them.
Ed
On Feb 22, 2016, at 2:40 AM, Timothy Sipples wrote:
For the record, the memory leak in the specific situation I
described was
due to a cus
For the record, the memory leak in the specific situation I described was
due to a customer's in-house written application code. That's what I wrote
originally, but I'd like to repeat that point since there seems to be some
misunderstanding.
I think it's a fantastic story, one of the hallmark aspe
Never meant to suggest that going backwards was the direction I desired.
Simply stating that having a few weird features can be a good thing when
struck with a production issue, service level agreements and (insert "other
institution specific intractable" here).
Ideally, it would be great to have
On Feb 20, 2016, at 11:25 AM, Rob Schramm wrote:
But isn't it the point? We would all prefer to live in a world
where bad
coding doesn't happen. I would venture a guess that most have been
in a
situation that called for a bad temporary solution until a fix
could be
found. In which case t
But isn't it the point? We would all prefer to live in a world where bad
coding doesn't happen. I would venture a guess that most have been in a
situation that called for a bad temporary solution until a fix could be
found. In which case the expertise of the system programmer comes into
play and
On Feb 19, 2016, at 6:09 PM, Clark Morris wrote:
-
SNIP-
-
Ed, they did fix the bug but it took several weeks to do it. With
memory they were able to stay afloat while the repair was being done.
Clark Morris
On 19 Feb 2016 12:27:09 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
>On Feb 19, 2016, at 12:15 AM, Timothy Sipples wrote:
>
>> Andrew Rowley wrote:
>>> I will make the same comment I made last time this topic came up -
>>> avoiding garbage collection is not usually a wise goal.
>>
>> It depends on
On Feb 19, 2016, at 12:15 AM, Timothy Sipples wrote:
Andrew Rowley wrote:
I will make the same comment I made last time this topic came up -
avoiding garbage collection is not usually a wise goal.
It depends on the workload(s). The point I made is that with the
z13 and
z13s you have more s
On 18 February 2016 at 18:50, Mark Post wrote:
>> Just a comment, the name z13s did not appear to me to be a name of a new
>> system, but rather just the plural of z13, i.e. "Look at those z13s run!".
>> Took me a while to figure out this was in fact a new name and a new offering.
>>
>> Perhaps I'
On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 10:07:50 -0600, Mike Schwab wrote:
>The twenty first century since CE:20xx,
The 21st century is from 2001 through 2100
>and the third millennium since CE: 2xxx.
The third millennium is the years from 2001-3000.
--
Tom Marchant
-
2965 or 2965s?
On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 20:57:57 -0500, Ken Smith wrote:
>Maybe right:
>
>z13 is a single z13
>z13's is more than one z13
>z13s is a single z13s
>z13s' is more than one z13s
>z13* or z13x is one or more z13*'s or z13x's
>
>where x or * is any char including null
>
; https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker
>
>
>
> From: "Joel C. Ewing"
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Date: 19/02/2016 02:33
> Subject:Re: Introducing the New z13s: Tim's Hardware Highlights
> Sent by:
For confusion's sake, the 2000s have three meanings.
The two hundredth one decade since CE: 200x,
The twenty first century since CE:20xx,
and the third millennium since CE: 2xxx.
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 8:33 PM, Joel C. Ewing wrote:
> The recognized punctuation rules are no longer black and white
On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 18:16:53 +1100, Andrew Rowley
wrote:
>Memory leaks are not a usual case, but I would suggest you will still
>want to garbage collect.
>
>I'm not arguing against large memory - I am all in favour of as much as
>you can afford. It's just the suggestion that avoiding Java GC is
On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 08:56:17 +, Martin Packer
wrote:
>And if you think that's bad try making your favourite slide or email
>editor keep the "z" lower case. Permanent nightmare. :-)
Amen. But the Ctrl-z every time after you type it reinforces what platform
you're writing about. :)
Scott
-
On 16Feb19:0411-0500, Aled Hughes wrote:
> Just to be the awkward one here: the use of 's for
> plural is grammatically incorrect, personally I don't
> care if it is universally accepted - it is wrong and
> should be avoided. It is on a par with the misuse
> of examples such as 'their' when meanin
27;here, here' when 'hear, hear' is meant. I
know language evolves, but grammar does not.
We need Mr Gilmore here!
-Original Message-
From: Joel C. Ewing
To: IBM-MAIN
Sent: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 2:33
Subject: Re: Introducing the New z13s: Tim's Hardware Highlight
n_pac...@uk.ibm.com
Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker
Blog:
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker
From: "Joel C. Ewing"
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date: 19/02/2016 02:33
Subject: Re: Introducing the New z13s: Tim's Hardw
ntroducing the New z13s: Tim's Hardware Highlights
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List
On 19/02/2016 05:15 PM, Timothy Sipples wrote:
> Andrew Rowley wrote:
>> I will make the same comment I made last time this topic came up -
>> avoiding garbage collection is not us
Frank Swarbrick wrote:
>Perhaps I'm the only one...
Maybe not literally the only person, but
I would point out that the largest technology company in the world in terms
of market capitalization, Apple, is now selling the iPhone 6s and 6s Plus.
Apple also still sells the iPhone 5s, and Apple o
Well, at least I'm glad some agree about the poor naming of the new system.
But I'm actually responding to your remark, Timothy, that you can get a
reduction of 13% on your MLC bill when compared to a zBC12 when you're under 30
MSU. I don't think that's the case. AEWLC was first introduced with
On 19/02/2016 05:15 PM, Timothy Sipples wrote:
Andrew Rowley wrote:
I will make the same comment I made last time this topic came up -
avoiding garbage collection is not usually a wise goal.
It depends on the workload(s). The point I made is that with the z13 and
z13s you have more such options
Andrew Rowley wrote:
>I will make the same comment I made last time this topic came up -
>avoiding garbage collection is not usually a wise goal.
It depends on the workload(s). The point I made is that with the z13 and
z13s you have more such options, when/as they make sense.
To pick an example,
On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 20:57:57 -0500, Ken Smith wrote:
>Maybe right:
>
>z13 is a single z13
>z13's is more than one z13
>z13s is a single z13s
>z13s' is more than one z13s
>z13* or z13x is one or more z13*'s or z13x's
>
>where x or * is any char including null
>
Hmmm ...
Actress Nominative sin
On 18/02/2016 20:30, Timothy Sipples wrote:
Huge memory makes it possible to run completely new classes of workloads,
for example ... Java heaps that never garbage collect during a batch run
I will make the same comment I made last time this topic came up -
avoiding garbage collection is not
The recognized punctuation rules are no longer black and white where z13
and z13s are involved. The rule of always using an apostrophe for
plurals of "non-words" is no longer universal:
One rule is apostrophe "s" is used for plural for "words" that are not
normally a noun; but z13 in our context
Maybe right:
z13 is a single z13
z13's is more than one z13
z13s is a single z13s
z13s' is more than one z13s
z13* or z13x is one or more z13*'s or z13x's
where x or * is any char including null
Ken
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 7:50 PM, Ed Gould wrote:
> On Feb 18, 2016, at 3:30 AM, Timothy Sipple
On Feb 18, 2016, at 3:30 AM, Timothy Sipples wrote:
-
SNIP-
4. IBM has greatly relaxed the data center environmental
requirements for
this model, expanding the temperature and humidity envelopes. It's
much
more realistic no
OK, not being negative, but this is just the BC version of a z13, right?
With some minor other stuff? Not unimpressive, but not quite the revolution
that the announcement tries to make it sound like.
Or am I missing something?
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 6:50 PM, Mark Post wrote:
> >>> On 2/18/2016
>>> On 2/18/2016 at 06:20 PM, Frank Swarbrick
>>> wrote:
> Just a comment, the name z13s did not appear to me to be a name of a new
> system, but rather just the plural of z13, i.e. "Look at those z13s run!".
> Took me a while to figure out this was in fact a new name and a new offering.
>
>
You're not the only one. It's just asking for trouble.
"I need you to IPL all the z13s this weekend, but not the z13s."
??
Frank Swarbrick wrote:
Just a comment, the name z13s did not appear to me to be a name of a new system, but
rather just the plural of z13, i.e. "Look at those z13s run!".
On 18 February 2016 at 18:20, Frank Swarbrick
wrote:
> Just a comment, the name z13s did not appear to me to be a name of a new
> system, but rather just the plural of z13, i.e. "Look at those z13s run!".
> Took me a while to figure out this was in fact a new name and a new offering.
But I ass
Just a comment, the name z13s did not appear to me to be a name of a new
system, but rather just the plural of z13, i.e. "Look at those z13s run!".
Took me a while to figure out this was in fact a new name and a new offering.
Perhaps I'm the only one...
> Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 17:30:16 +0800
I will add a complete list of all the new functions/features later on. In the
meantime, the following ITSO Redbooks are available. Note these are the 'draft'
versions and subject to change(s).
IBM z13s Technical Guide (SG24-8294-00)
IBM z13 Technical Guide (SG24-8251-01)
IBM z13 and z13s Technic
43 matches
Mail list logo
