> -----Original Message-----
> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Jim Bohnsack
> Sent: 06 May 2008 03:15
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: SFS
> 
> Alan Altmark wrote:
> <snip>
> <esnip>
> 
> Yeah, but anyone who was around in VM/SP R6 days remembers SFS as being
> something that you wanted to stay away from.
> 

Speaking as some one who was around in those days, but who only has
peripheral involvement in VM these days, I would have said that for many
applications SFS was a great tool. No one ever had enough 3380s, the floor
space and power they used saw to that. Then when you physically carve them
into MINIDISKS you "waste" a huge chunk of them, because every one has their
own private chunk of free space. Where I worked we would have loved to give
every one SFS "A" disk.

One problem that slowed its deployment was getting IBM products to support
it. I can see from

http://vm.marist.edu/~vmshare/browse?fn=6SP02&ft=PROB

That VM/SP6 came out some time in early 89 (or perhaps late 88 which would
give us 20 years of SFS, was it that long ago)

But I can also see from:-

http://vm.marist.edu/~vmshare/browse?fn=OVVM&ft=PROB&args=sfs#hit

That almost three years later, in March 92 PROFS would not support SFS "A"
disks. I don't think real PROFS ever supported SFS "A" disk, I think we had
to have OV/VM for that...

I must admit I now find it mildly amusing to have IBM telling us we need to
use it....

Dave


> Jim
> > So while I appreciate the frustration of having to worry about SFS when
> > you haven't in the past, the time has come for us to exploit something
> we
> > introduced over 20 years ago in VM/SP Release 6.
> >
> > Regards,
> >       Alan
> >
> > Alan Altmark
> > Sr. Software Engineer
> > IBM z/VM Development
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --
> Jim Bohnsack
> Cornell University
> (607) 255-1760
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to