Very, Very early in implementing SMS (the minimal implementation) is managing 
VIO. 

Since we've been SMS for a long time, there aren't even any devices in our 
EDT(s) for VIO

> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]]
> On Behalf Of Norman.Hollander
> Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 2:45 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
> 
> Maybe a bunch of JCL with UNIT=VIO is a cause to make you fuss?
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]]
> On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
> Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 1:18 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
> 
> Memory is abundant‎ in most shops and cheap overall. So, why all fuss about
> VIO? Make s decision, implement it, forget it.
> 
> -teD
>   Original Message
> From: Norman.Hollander
> Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 12:19
> To: [email protected]
> Reply To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
> 
> Track size. We actually used to use a 2305 "drum" definition for VIO. But if
> you genned 1 dummy address, you had to gen all 8. Made for a larger IO-gen.
> So we would go for the next best tracksize of the 2314. So- how many 4K
> pages fit into a track without wasting too much of it? Plus the 2314 was 
> small,
> so quick sorts in VIO might be possible, but it prevented sorting a kabillion
> records. I'm pretty sure 2305 support was removed a long time ago, so you
> couldn't define it today. Probably true for the 2311/2314/2319. Last time I
> went through IODF, a fake 3390 (address DEFF) was defined as the only VIO
> capable device. With all the various Sort and Memory exits today, it's
> probably just a good history lesson. Oh- way back in the 70s, a company
> named Ampex (IIRC) made look alike (aka cheaper) memory and Disk storage.
> Think their mountable disk was the 3314. OK- discuss further...
> 
> zNorman
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]]
> On Behalf Of Martin Packer
> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 10:45 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
> 
> 
> It's sort of come back to me:
> 
> A small track size limits the virtual storage window (probably usually below
> the line in 1989 when I looked at this). Or it might've been cylinder. But I
> think it was track.
> 
> I'm wondering if anyone else remembers something like this.
> 
> Cheers, Martin
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> On 19 May 2016, at 05:20, Edward Gould <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> 
> >> On May 18, 2016, at 7:50 PM, Charles Mills <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I remember them well. I was answering Steve's two implied questions.
> >>
> >> 2321 was certainly characterized as DASD. It was indeed a direct
> >> access
> storage device. Not a disk, but DASD nonetheless. Certainly not magnetic
> tape (though it had a family resemblance!) and certainly not unit record.
> >
> > It addressing had MMBBCCHHR(R?) so I guess you could address it directly.
> Anyone remember how to do that? (progr5amming for a 2321 is a lost art
> (where is Seymour?).
> >
> > Ed
> >
> >>
> >> I don't think anyone recalls a 3314. I think the OP said it was a
> >> typo,
> 2314 mis-remembered as 3000-series DASD.
> >>
> >> Charles
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-
> [email protected]]
> >> On
> Behalf Of Edward Gould
> >> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 5:33 PM
> >> To: [email protected]
> >> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
> >>
> >> Chales,
> >>
> >> 2321 was a data cell (magnetic strip) hardly could be called DASD) I
> don’t recall a 3314 . The removable 3340 (not sure the number anyone?)
> >>
> >> Ed
> >>
> >>> On May 16, 2016, at 7:47 PM, Charles Mills <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 2301, 2321.
> >>> CharlesSent from a mobile; please excuse the brevity
> >>>
> >>> -------- Original message --------
> >>> From: Steve Thompson <[email protected]>
> >>> Date: 05/16/2016 4:51 PM (GMT-08:00)
> >>> To: [email protected]
> >>> Subject: Re: What was a 3314? (was: Whither VIO)
> >>>
> >>> 2314, 2419, 2311, these are just a few of the "IBM" DASD that I've
> >>> had the pleasure of working with. I've forgotten the drum device
> >>> numbers and the noodle snatcher model number.
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> - 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
> >Unless stated otherwise above:
> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
> 741598.
> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
> 3AU
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to