Not a 2 MiB region; that was the installed memory. I don't recall how big our TSO regions were. This was on a 370/165 running OS/360, then upgraded* to a 370/168 running SVS. We had a fixd-head disk, which helped performance.
The students ran PL/I and FORTRAN programs on TSO, not just assembler. * Yes, I know, you supposedly can only upgrade to a 370/165 II, but IBM really did not want the Technion to go to CDC. ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of Leonard D Woren <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, September 7, 2023 3:56 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days What was the first OS that you had a 2 MB TSO region? What hardware. MVT TSO on the 4 MB 360/91 at UCLA was about 3/4 MB . There was a lot you could do, although it was slow. I did experiment with overlay modules though. Bleah. The reason you could do a lot in 3/4 MB is that it was done in efficient languages, like Assembler. None of these modern bloatware languages that make every app on my phone 32 MB minimum, and often up to 500 MB. /Leonard Seymour J Metz wrote on 9/7/2023 3:32 AM: > I never had TSO in less than 2 MiB; 768 KiB gives me shudders. > > ________________________________________ > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of > Clem Clarke <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2023 6:38 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Is the IBM Assembler List still alive - Dumps - Early days > > > Running TSO in 3/4 of a meg was interesting. And VERY slow. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
