On 8/21/08 5:49 PM, "Karl Severson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The > compiler was originally written to run on MVS but it was tweaked for us t > o > run on VM in 370 mode back in the mid 1980¹s. If you truly still need 370 mode, you're going to be hard pressed to find a system that will still run true 370 mode. Most (if not all) the modern systems no longer have true 370 mode microcode. > My organization is > considering re-hosting Jovial on some sort of Windows platform Considering the amount of work on not just the applications but all the surrounding environment and data management, this would be a REALLY bad idea. You might be better off talking to HP about a VMS-based solution (they offered, and AFAIK, still offer a fairly decent Jovial compiler, and at least VMS understands labeled tapes and batch natively. It'd probably be less work to update the compiler you have for a modern CMS, or port it to Linux (either on Z or on some Intelish thing), and cost the Army less to run it as well. > to keep this an IBM operation if at all possible. We also heavily use Unix, > Linux and Windows on other platforms. To offset some of the cost of a new > system (z9 at a minimum) maybe it could do double or triple duty replacing > some of those other platforms. Good thought. A combination of Linux, CMS and OpenSolaris virtual machines would be a very compelling case. > Of my options, which would be the most efficient? The latest zVM with a > VM/ESA guest? The latest zOS with a VM/ESA guest? Some other combination? > Or, heaven forbid, go with re-hosting to Windows? If you have source for the Jovial compiler and runtime, go to the latest z/VM and the latest CMS and ditch the VM/ESA system, or at least limit its use to a migration system. Z/OS is very unlikely to be cost-effective (and can't run VM/ESA as a guest anyway). Windows will be the most expensive option if you incorporate all the porting costs and the surrounding environment necessary to make this work. A Linux port would be very cost effective, especially if you can pick up some additional virtual workload in the process (and IFLs would make the new machine LOADS cheaper). Check out the OpenVMS solution as well. Since you're being systematic about it, the HP Integrity boxes are a lot of bang for the buck for VMS. -- db
