> On May 29, 2015, at 2:20 PM, Johnny Billquist <b...@update.uu.se> wrote:
>
> On 2015-05-29 16:35, paul_kon...@dell.com wrote:
>>
>>> ...
>>> DAP would be really nice, but it's complex. But I like the capabilities.
>>
>> I wouldn’t have thought of DAP as all that complex; after all it fits in
>> PDP11 systems. You can probably subset it pretty nicely if you don’t need
>> all the features. Just file transfer, as opposed to transparent file I/O,
>> is likely to simplify things substantially. The DECnet/Linux implementation
>> of DAP does this, I believe, and it does a reasonably good job. I think I
>> even got it to talk successfully to a RSTS/E system at one time.
>
> I've never managed to get DAP under Linux to talk with an RSX node...
> And I don't think you can subset it much. Depending on the remote machine,
> different parts will be exercised. But I guess things like indexing file
> access could be left out. But it's still rather more complex than anything
> I've seen under Unix. But possibly various remote db protocols would be
> similar.
>
> File transfer and file access in DAP is the same thing, I believe. Or maybe
> you mean this in some way I'm missing.
No, transfering a whole file is a single stream of stuff; reading individual
records is a more complex handshake. And apart from that, things get
significantly simpler if you only support Sequential files. Simpler still if
you limit it to just two cases: fixed:512, and stream.
paul
