[email protected] (Scott Ford) writes: > Check this out, boy this looks vaguely familiar like CICS or DB2 .. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hadoop_1.png
note that CICS was originally to avoid having to use as few os/360 resources as possible ... because os/360 processing was horrendously heavy weight and bloated. CICS had originally been developed at customer site before being selected for releasing as product. disclaimer: univ. library got an ONR grant to do online catalog ... part of the money was used to get a 2321 datacell. The project was also selected to betatest for the original CICS product. As undergraudate, in the 60s, I got tasked with debugging and supporting CICS in the betatest. misc. past posts mentioning CICS and/or BDAM http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#cics original relational was Codd in bldg. 28 and the original relational/sql implementation was system/r on vm370 370/145 in bldg. 28. misc. past posts mentioning system/r http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#systemr However, nearly everybody else in the industry released RDBMS product before IBM got around to it. In part because the company was so focused on new flagship DBMS EAGLE product, under the radar (so to speak) we were able to do technology transfer from bldg. 28 to Endicott for release as SQL/DS. Later after EAGLE imploded there was request about how fast could a port of be done to MVS (which eventually became DB2). In this reference about meeting on HA/CMP cluster scaleup, early Jan1992 in Ellison conference room http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/95.html#13 we are working with oracle for RDBMS cluster scaleup for HA/CMP ... misc. old email mentioning cluster scaleup for both commercial and scientific/numeric-intensive http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/lhwemail.html#medusa the issue was that Oracle's Unix product had cluster built in since it also ran on vax/cluster. I had to provide an HA/CMP API that had some of the look&feel of vax/cluster ... but there was also a list things that vax/cluster had done "wrong" ... that I got to correct (plus draing on the mainframe experience). The IBM non-mainframe "DB2" of the period was in the process of being developed for OS2 and had none of the high-end, high-throughput features that were required. However, the mainframe people do complain if I'm allowed to continue ... it will be a minimum of five years ahead of where mainframe DB2 is. In any case, end of Jan1992, possibly only hrs after the last email mentioned above ... the cluster scaleup is transferred and we are told we can't work on anything with more than four processors. A couple weeks later there is this for numeric-intensive *ONLY* (17Feb1992) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001n.html#6000clusters1 and later in the spring reference to it coming as complete *SURPRISE* to the company (11May1992) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001n.html#6000clusters2 and then much more recently for commercial/DBMS http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009p.html#43 From The Annals of Release No Software Before Its Time referencing (not quite 20yrs later): DB2 announces technology that trumps Oracle RAC and Exadata http://freedb2.com/2009/10/10/for-databases-size-does-matter/ IBM pureScale Technology Redefines Transaction Processing Economics. New DB2 Feature Sets the Bar for System Performance on More than 100 IBM Power Systems http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/28593.wss -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
