harris...@gmail.com (Graham Harris) writes: > Doesn't deadline scheduling count?
as undergraduate in the 60s, I did dynamic adaptive resource management that was picked up and shipped in CP/67 (customers periodically referred to as fairshare scheduler or wheeler scheduler because default policy was fairshare). http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#fairshare in the morph from CP/67 to VM/370 there was a lot of things dropped and simplified ... including all the scheduling stuff. At the science center during the FS period, I continued to work on 360 & 370 stuff ... even periodically ridiculing the FS activity. http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#futuresys with death of FS, there was mad rush to get stuff back into 370 product pipelines .... which contributed to decision to release some amount of the stuff I had been doing. Some of it was shipped in standard release. Note that earlier in the 23Jun1969 unbundling announcement, ibm started to charge for se services, maintenance, (application) software ... but made the case that kernel software should still be free. http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#unbundle During the FS period, the lack of 370 products is credited with given clone processors a market foothold. So part of resuming 370 efforts, the decision was made to also transition to start charging for all kernel software (likely motivated by 370 clone makers getting market foothold). The decision was made to make the scheduling work a guinee pig as separate charged-for kernal product (I had to spend a lot of time with lawyers and business people about kernel charging policies). After the transition was complete to charging for all kernel software in the 80s ... the next step was the OCO-wars (aka only shipping object code). As part of the product review process somebody in Armonk said he wouldn't approve it unless it had customer setable parameters because everybody knew that the state of the art was setable performance parameters (MVS would have this huge array of setable paremters ... there would be lots of SHARE presentations about various tests of random walks of all the setable parameters with various workloads). I tried to explain to him what dynamic adaptive management met ... but eventually had to implement some customer setable parameters. However, there was a joke that I took from operations research and "degrees of freedom". The range of values for the manually setable parameters was less than what the dynamic adaptive calculations could do ... so effectively the dynamic adaptive calculations could compensate for human selected values. -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
