Re: z/PoO (was: Radix Partition Trees)
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 08:13:47 -0800, Edward Jaffe wrote: > >For many years now, those of us that routinely discuss assembler >language programming and related matters have been posting links to >various sections in the z/Architecture Principles of Operation via the >excellent web-based reader provided by IBM for this purpose. > >For example, in a discussion about block concurrency and consistency, I >was able to refer others to these relevant sections in the book: > >http://publibfp.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr/BOOKS/dz9zr003/5.13.9.3 >http://publibfp.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr/BOOKS/dz9zr003/5.13.9.4 > >However, during a recent discussion involving the Breaking Event Address >Register (BEAR) on ASSEMBLER-LIST, I found myself unable to post >references to the relevant sections because the most recent editions of >the book have not been made available via IBM's web-based reader. The >PDF document -- a "gigantic", print-ready image of the entire book -- is >practically useless for this purpose, with or without the ALS index. The >discussion was never resolved satisfactorily and the lack of adequate >references appears to be, at least in part, to blame. > >Direct, web-based links to sections within the latest z/Architecture >Principles of Operation are invaluable when discussing the various >complex topics comprising z/Architecture. Without a common way for us to >cite and access the same authoritative reference in real-time, the >discussion devolves quickly into "I think it works this way" or "I >remember it worked that way". Or, "near the bottom of page xx in the -04 >edition it says " :-( I agree. I've also requested that they bring back POO.BOO. -- Tom Marchant -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z/PoO (was: Radix Partition Trees)
Don Leahy wrote: True, but at least is is equipped with the "Advanced Linguistic Search" capability, which makes PDF a much more tolerable format. For many years now, those of us that routinely discuss assembler language programming and related matters have been posting links to various sections in the z/Architecture Principles of Operation via the excellent web-based reader provided by IBM for this purpose. For example, in a discussion about block concurrency and consistency, I was able to refer others to these relevant sections in the book: http://publibfp.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr/BOOKS/dz9zr003/5.13.9.3 http://publibfp.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr/BOOKS/dz9zr003/5.13.9.4 However, during a recent discussion involving the Breaking Event Address Register (BEAR) on ASSEMBLER-LIST, I found myself unable to post references to the relevant sections because the most recent editions of the book have not been made available via IBM's web-based reader. The PDF document -- a "gigantic", print-ready image of the entire book -- is practically useless for this purpose, with or without the ALS index. The discussion was never resolved satisfactorily and the lack of adequate references appears to be, at least in part, to blame. Direct, web-based links to sections within the latest z/Architecture Principles of Operation are invaluable when discussing the various complex topics comprising z/Architecture. Without a common way for us to cite and access the same authoritative reference in real-time, the discussion devolves quickly into "I think it works this way" or "I remember it worked that way". Or, "near the bottom of page xx in the -04 edition it says " :-( -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 Los Angeles, CA 90045 310-338-0400 x318 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z/PoO (was: Radix Partition Trees)
On Jan 11, 2008 6:47 PM, Graeme Gibson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Arrrgh! Cancel that, it's just a PDF version! > > > Here's SA22-7832-04 : > > > http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/download/A2278324.pdf?DT=20060213202835&XKS=DZ9ZBK05 > > True, but at least is is equipped with the "Advanced Linguistic Search" capability, which makes PDF a much more tolerable format. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Radix Partition Trees
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Stack) writes: > Unfortunately, this seems to have little to do with sorts performed > using CFC and UPT. In Knuth's terms, these instructions implement a > loser tournament sort using a complete binary tree. The codeword > created by CFC is a representation of the offset at which the > comparison of two keys fails. The radix (2) of the keys has nothing > to do with the result. The UPT instruction "percolates" an > appropriate key upward - by comparing codewords - to the root of the > tree where it becomes the "winner" of that round. The advantage is > that costly key comparisons are reduced. re: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008.html#64 Radix Partition Trees http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008.html#72 Radix Partition Trees my original comment was "for the fun of it" ... look at the mainframe instructions ... on par with other comments about considering red-black trees, etc. the other comment was with respect to Luther ... who I believe has been involved in both. note a radix partition tree implementation can use bit strings and involve the bit displacement/place that the strings differ ... in such a situation ... rather than doing something like calculating a key for the entry ... take the bit string value itself and create a tree with forks at where there is a bits different. radix as in numerical encoding system: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radix from above: The highest symbol of a positional numeral system usually has the value one less than the value of the radix of that numeral system. ... snip ... radix as in radix tree: Radix tree: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radix_tree from above: Unlike balanced trees, radix trees permit lookup, insertion, and deletion in O(k) time rather than O(log n). This doesn't seem like an advantage, since normally k ≥ log n, but in a balanced tree every comparison is a string comparison requiring O(k) worst-case time, many of which are slow in practice due to long common prefixes. In a trie, all comparisons require constant time, but it takes m comparisons to look up a string of length m. Radix trees can perform these operations with fewer comparisons and require many fewer nodes. Hash tables are commonly said to have expected O(1) insertion and deletion times, but this is only true when considering computation of the hash of the key to be a constant time operation. When hashing the key is taken into account, hash tables have expected O(k) insertion and deletion times, but will take longer in the worst-case depending on how collisions are handled. Radix trees have worst-case O(k) insertion and deletion. The successor/predecessor operations of radix trees are also not implemented by hash tables. ... snip ... i.e. rather than treating each bit in a value for tree position ... deal only with the location where there are bit differences ... difference displacements that are shorter (nearer the front of the string) will appear higher in the tree. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: radix partition trees
duplicate with subject provided I do not routinely post to IBM-MAIN anymore, but I was alerted to this thread by someone who does, and I have a generic suggestion to make. To obtain technical information about these RPTs--- including information about Google's own patents on certain operations on them---use http://scholar.google.com instead of a vanilla google search. The scholar.google facility is still available only in a beta version; but it is eminently usable; there are no restrictions on accesses to it; and for purposes of this sort it is very much more productive than a traditional http://www.google.com search because it excludes (almost all of) the dreck. John Gilmore Ashland, MA 01721-1817 USA _ Share life as it happens with the new Windows Live. http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_012008 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Radix Partition Trees
The discussion of "radix partition trees" and "radix partition sort" has been going on for a while now, and I guess it's time to display my ignorance. glen herrmannsfeldt's comments in http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002q.html#10 below exactly match my notion of a radix sort. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radix_sort for a description of LSD (least significant digit) radix sort. Very fast for short keys. Googling "radix partition tree" finds a good result at (watch the break) http://delivery.acm.org/10.1145/33/322146/p457-strong.pdf?key1=322146&key2=7165110021&coll=GUIDE&dl=GUIDE&CFID=11867738&CFTOKEN=24654762 from which the following is extracted: -- The radix partition tree is a binary tree of pointers set up to branch on bit values of the key rather than key comparisons. Radix partition trees can support the function NEXT HIGHER KEY by left to right tree traversal (as in B-trees), and they can support the function IS A PREFIX OF much more rapidly than any of the strategies we have studied. A study of radix partition tree strategies of[10] or Patrician strategies as presented in [3] is beyond the scope of this paper. However, under our uniformity assumptions, the radix partition tree is no faster and can be considerably slower than a full Binary Search (section size 1), which is in turn no faster than optimal Binary Search. -- Unfortunately, this seems to have little to do with sorts performed using CFC and UPT. In Knuth's terms, these instructions implement a loser tournament sort using a complete binary tree. The codeword created by CFC is a representation of the offset at which the comparison of two keys fails. The radix (2) of the keys has nothing to do with the result. The UPT instruction "percolates" an appropriate key upward - by comparing codewords - to the root of the tree where it becomes the "winner" of that round. The advantage is that costly key comparisons are reduced. So, if anyone can tell me how the term "radix partition" applies this process, I'll be really, really grateful. Keep in mind that I'm NOT arguing that it doesn't apply, I'm just trying to understand it. Thanks! Michael Stack At 07:18 PM 1/11/2008, you wrote: >The following message is a courtesy copy of an article >that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main as well. > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (W. Kevin Kelley) writes: >> I see that I screwed up and I owe Luther an apology. It should >> read "...tightest assembly language programs.." There were few problems with >> Luther's program (other than figuring out how they worked!). > >re: >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008.html#65 Radix Partition Trees > > >a few old posts mentioning luther: >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#19 S/360 operating systems geneaology >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#20 Reviving the OS/360 thread (Questions >about OS/360) >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#2 A new "Remember when?" period >happening right now >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001d.html#28 Very CISC Instuctions (Was: why the >machine word size ...) >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#73 Most complex instructions >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002.html#14 index searching >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002d.html#18 Mainframers: Take back the light >(spotlight, that is) >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002q.html#10 radix sort >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003e.html#80 "Super-Cheap" Supercomputing >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003i.html#58 assembler performance superiority: a >given >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003i.html#83 A Dark Day >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004l.html#10 Complex Instructions >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005c.html#35 [Lit.] Buffer overruns >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005c.html#38 [Lit.] Buffer overruns >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005e.html#37 Where should the type information be? >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007l.html#57 How would a relational operating >system look like? >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007o.html#55 mainframe performance, was Is a RISC >chip more expensive? >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007u.html#18 Folklore references to CP67 at >Lincoln Labs >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008.html#68 Computer Science Education: Where Are >the Software Engineers of Tomorrow? > >-- >For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO >Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Radix Partition Trees
W. Kevin Kelley wrote: You could, of course, consult Knuth... Which I did - about ten years ago I worked on a consulting contract for a government agency I won't name, except that they collect money from everyone Volume 3 has a very nice algorithm for building and updating a balanced tree. After I implemented that, scanning 300-odd million records to extract information became a lot quicker than what they had (insertion table). Of course reading out the tree sequentially was left as an exercise for the reader Gerhard Postpischil Bradford, VT -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Radix Partition Trees
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main as well. [EMAIL PROTECTED] (W. Kevin Kelley) writes: > I see that I screwed up and I owe Luther an apology. It should > read "...tightest assembly language programs.." There were few problems with > Luther's program (other than figuring out how they worked!). re: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008.html#65 Radix Partition Trees a few old posts mentioning luther: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#19 S/360 operating systems geneaology http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#20 Reviving the OS/360 thread (Questions about OS/360) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#2 A new "Remember when?" period happening right now http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001d.html#28 Very CISC Instuctions (Was: why the machine word size ...) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#73 Most complex instructions http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002.html#14 index searching http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002d.html#18 Mainframers: Take back the light (spotlight, that is) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002q.html#10 radix sort http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003e.html#80 "Super-Cheap" Supercomputing http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003i.html#58 assembler performance superiority: a given http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003i.html#83 A Dark Day http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004l.html#10 Complex Instructions http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005c.html#35 [Lit.] Buffer overruns http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005c.html#38 [Lit.] Buffer overruns http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005e.html#37 Where should the type information be? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007l.html#57 How would a relational operating system look like? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007o.html#55 mainframe performance, was Is a RISC chip more expensive? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007u.html#18 Folklore references to CP67 at Lincoln Labs http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008.html#68 Computer Science Education: Where Are the Software Engineers of Tomorrow? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Radix Partition Trees
I see that I screwed up and I owe Luther an apology. It should read "...tightest assembly language programs.." There were few problems with Luther's program (other than figuring out how they worked!). >Rick, > >One of the world experts in radix partition trees is Luther Woodrum and I >suspect if you do a Google search you'll turn up some of his stuff. Luther is a >bit of a legend around Poughkeepsie, with a reputation for some of the >tightest assembly language problems you'll find anywhere. Back in the 1970's >the system that kept track of the chips passing through the IBM East Fishkill >plant was built around Luther's radix partition trees. > >You could, of course, consult Knuth... > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Radix Partition Trees
Rick, One of the world experts in radix partition trees is Luther Woodrum and I suspect if you do a Google search you'll turn up some of his stuff. Luther is a bit of a legend around Poughkeepsie, with a reputation for some of the tightest assembly language problems you'll find anywhere. Back in the 1970's the system that kept track of the chips passing through the IBM East Fishkill plant was built around Luther's radix partition trees. You could, of course, consult Knuth... W. Kevin Kelley IBM Pok Lab -- z/OS Core Technical Development & Service -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z/PoO (was: Radix Partition Trees)
Arrrgh! Cancel that, it's just a PDF version! Here's SA22-7832-04 : http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/download/A2278324.pdf?DT=20060213202835&XKS=DZ9ZBK05 Graeme. At 05:18 PM 1/11/2008, you wrote: Paul Gilmartin wrote: On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 22:19:25 -0500, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: for the fun of it look at: http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/DZ9ZR003/A.7?SHELF=DZ9ZBK03&DT=20040504121320 Thank you; Thank you; Thank you! A z/Architecture PoO in HTML; Far more usable than PDF. Of course, it's August 2003, but better than s/390. Can anyone point me to a newer one? (We may have it on CD-ROM, but Bookie, then, not HTML?) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z/PoO (was: Radix Partition Trees)
Here's SA22-7832-04 : http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/download/A2278324.pdf?DT=20060213202835&XKS=DZ9ZBK05 Graeme. At 05:18 PM 1/11/2008, you wrote: Paul Gilmartin wrote: On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 22:19:25 -0500, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: for the fun of it look at: http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/DZ9ZR003/A.7?SHELF=DZ9ZBK03&DT=20040504121320 Thank you; Thank you; Thank you! A z/Architecture PoO in HTML; Far more usable than PDF. Of course, it's August 2003, but better than s/390. Can anyone point me to a newer one? (We may have it on CD-ROM, but Bookie, then, not HTML?) How timely! Just today, I received a response from a note I sent to the PoO "owner" asking for a link to newer edition of the softcopy book. He replied: "Sorry, but the /z/Architecture Principles of Operation/ is currently available only in PDF format. There are publication folks who are aware of your concerns, but I don't know if/when a solution will be provided." -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 Los Angeles, CA 90045 310-338-0400 x318 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Radix Partition Trees
-- The instructions used for sorting, UPT and CFC, are implemented over radix partition trees, and the doc is in the Principles of Operation. They are extremely fast, since both of these instructions are implemented in millicode. However, using these instructions is not for the faint of heart. I have given a SHARE session on using them for sorting (their intended use) and will be giving another at the summer SHARE this year, along with Michael Stack (a double session). There is additional documentation if you search with Google, and as I recall Lynn Wheeler knew the person who was the definitive expert of radix partition trees. I've not seen them used for a binary search, but it might just work if you're very clever. -- Thanks, Tom. I'm trying to figure out how to productively use the RPT software that's in OS/390 and z/OS, with an eye toward using this software on another platform that may not (read DOESN'T) have those two instructions. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Radix Partition Trees
We recently had to solve that problem -- again. Our table was 18 million entries. In the past I used simple hashing: adding the bytes of the "key" together and using the rightmost byte as index to a table of 256 string heads. the most recent occasion had worst case scenario data -- only 10 hashes were formed. The quick fix was to add the 1st, 3rd, 5th, ... bytes to the accumulator, but add the 2nd, 4th, 6th, ... bytes shifted left by 4 bits. Got the worst case up to 100+ hashes which seems to get us out of the woods. If there is any chance the table might get paged (we did when I first worked on this here), allocate new entries a page at a time. Make the free element table also have 256 entries. This gives storage isolation for another performance boost. We are still looking at the most recent worst case (it is part of a 100# in a 5# bag problem). When I have time I am going to increase the table to 1024 enties (one page) to see if there is any benefit. If it seems there is I will use a three step hash w/ 3 bit offset. Note our emergency solution was to partition the whole problem into 9 segments and then get each segment into 6 parallel processing runs. We are trying to get a batch year-end process to finish before the end of the 1st quarter. IBM Mainframe Discussion List wrote on 01/10/2008 09:38:42 PM: > Has anyone every seen any doc on using radix partition trees? I'm > thinking it may have been one of the "rainbow" books. > I vaguely remember data tree structures and I've got a table search > problem that might be the perfect application for a tree-structured data > repository. The table might have up to 1,000,000 entries, all in > storage, and a balanced n-ary tree has GOT to be faster than using a > binary search. The nature of the data is such that a plain old-fashioned > list, in sorted order, isn't real amenable to a binary search, either. - The information contained in this communication (including any attachments hereto) is confidential and is intended solely for the personal and confidential use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. The information may also constitute a legally privileged confidential communication. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, copying, or unauthorized use of this information, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message. Thank you -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z/PoO (was: Radix Partition Trees)
Sorry, that should have been "right top area". On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 08:47:37 -0600, Big Iron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >You should be able to click on the book download icon next to the PDF >download icon in the left top area of the page to get a copy of the book in >.BOO format. > >Bill > >On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 08:21:35 -0600, Tom Marchant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >wrote: > >>On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 22:28:58 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote: >> >>>Thank you; Thank you; Thank you! A z/Architecture PoO in HTML; >>>Far more usable than PDF. >>> >>>Of course, it's August 2003, but better than s/390. Can anyone point >>>me to a newer one? (We may have it on CD-ROM, but Bookie, then, not >>>HTML?) >> >>It's actually a .BOO book, but served up by Bookserver, which converts it to >>HTML on the fly. I haven't been able to find a .BOO version of the POO that is >>newer than the -3. :( >> >>It was on the z/OS 1.7 and earlier collections. >> >>-- >>Tom Marchant >> > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z/PoO (was: Radix Partition Trees)
You should be able to click on the book download icon next to the PDF download icon in the left top area of the page to get a copy of the book in .BOO format. Bill On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 08:21:35 -0600, Tom Marchant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 22:28:58 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote: > >>Thank you; Thank you; Thank you! A z/Architecture PoO in HTML; >>Far more usable than PDF. >> >>Of course, it's August 2003, but better than s/390. Can anyone point >>me to a newer one? (We may have it on CD-ROM, but Bookie, then, not >>HTML?) > >It's actually a .BOO book, but served up by Bookserver, which converts it to >HTML on the fly. I haven't been able to find a .BOO version of the POO that is >newer than the -3. :( > >It was on the z/OS 1.7 and earlier collections. > >-- >Tom Marchant > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z/PoO (was: Radix Partition Trees)
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 22:28:58 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote: >Thank you; Thank you; Thank you! A z/Architecture PoO in HTML; >Far more usable than PDF. > >Of course, it's August 2003, but better than s/390. Can anyone point >me to a newer one? (We may have it on CD-ROM, but Bookie, then, not >HTML?) It's actually a .BOO book, but served up by Bookserver, which converts it to HTML on the fly. I haven't been able to find a .BOO version of the POO that is newer than the -3. :( It was on the z/OS 1.7 and earlier collections. -- Tom Marchant -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z/PoO (was: Radix Partition Trees)
Paul Gilmartin wrote: On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 22:19:25 -0500, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: for the fun of it look at: http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/DZ9ZR003/A.7?SHELF=DZ9ZBK03&DT=20040504121320 Thank you; Thank you; Thank you! A z/Architecture PoO in HTML; Far more usable than PDF. Of course, it's August 2003, but better than s/390. Can anyone point me to a newer one? (We may have it on CD-ROM, but Bookie, then, not HTML?) How timely! Just today, I received a response from a note I sent to the PoO "owner" asking for a link to newer edition of the softcopy book. He replied: "Sorry, but the /z/Architecture Principles of Operation/ is currently available only in PDF format. There are publication folks who are aware of your concerns, but I don't know if/when a solution will be provided." -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 Los Angeles, CA 90045 310-338-0400 x318 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
z/PoO (was: Radix Partition Trees)
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 22:19:25 -0500, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: > >for the fun of it look at: >http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/DZ9ZR003/A.7?SHELF=DZ9ZBK03&DT=20040504121320 > Thank you; Thank you; Thank you! A z/Architecture PoO in HTML; Far more usable than PDF. Of course, it's August 2003, but better than s/390. Can anyone point me to a newer one? (We may have it on CD-ROM, but Bookie, then, not HTML?) -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Radix Partition Trees
Rick, The instructions used for sorting, UPT and CFC, are implemented over radix partition trees, and the doc is in the Principles of Operation. They are extremely fast, since both of these instructions are implemented in millicode. However, using these instructions is not for the faint of heart. I have given a SHARE session on using them for sorting (their intended use) and will be giving another at the summer SHARE this year, along with Michael Stack (a double session). There is additional documentation if you search with Google, and as I recall Lynn Wheeler knew the person who was the definitive expert of radix partition trees. I've not seen them used for a binary search, but it might just work if you're very clever. Tom Harper IMS Utilities Development Team NEON Enterprise Software, Inc. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Fochtman Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 8:39 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Radix Partition Trees Has anyone every seen any doc on using radix partition trees? I'm thinking it may have been one of the "rainbow" books. I vaguely remember data tree structures and I've got a table search problem that might be the perfect application for a tree-structured data repository. The table might have up to 1,000,000 entries, all in storage, and a balanced n-ary tree has GOT to be faster than using a binary search. The nature of the data is such that a plain old-fashioned list, in sorted order, isn't real amenable to a binary search, either. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Radix Partition Trees
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main as well. [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rick Fochtman) writes: > Has anyone every seen any doc on using radix partition trees? I'm > thinking it may have been one of the "rainbow" books. > > I vaguely remember data tree structures and I've got a table search > problem that might be the perfect application for a tree-structured > data repository. The table might have up to 1,000,000 entries, all in > storage, and a balanced n-ary tree has GOT to be faster than using a > binary search. The nature of the data is such that a plain > old-fashioned list, in sorted order, isn't real amenable to a binary > search, either. for the fun of it look at: http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/DZ9ZR003/A.7?SHELF=DZ9ZBK03&DT=20040504121320 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Radix Partition Trees
> Has anyone every seen any doc on using radix partition trees? I'm > thinking it may have been one of the "rainbow" books. > > I vaguely remember data tree structures and I've got a table search > problem that might be the perfect application for a tree-structured data > repository. The table might have up to 1,000,000 entries, all in > storage, and a balanced n-ary tree has GOT to be faster than using a > binary search. The nature of the data is such that a plain old-fashioned > list, in sorted order, isn't real amenable to a binary search, either. I notice red-black trees are used in the Linux kernel - for their performance characteristics no doubt. Might be worth a look. Wikipedia (of course) has a paper - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_black_tree Shane ... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Radix Partition Trees
Has anyone every seen any doc on using radix partition trees? I'm thinking it may have been one of the "rainbow" books. I vaguely remember data tree structures and I've got a table search problem that might be the perfect application for a tree-structured data repository. The table might have up to 1,000,000 entries, all in storage, and a balanced n-ary tree has GOT to be faster than using a binary search. The nature of the data is such that a plain old-fashioned list, in sorted order, isn't real amenable to a binary search, either. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
