In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 03/09/2007
at 08:14 AM, (IBM Mainframe Discussion List) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
Which gave rise to another scurrilous nickname that I heard used for
the 2321: Pluck, suck, and wrap.
Sometimes pluck, suck, wrap, crinkle :-(
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz,
that 3850 originally was
envisioned as (also) being much more of a 2321 kind of operation
(having up to 4720 cartridges ... possibly also fitting into the BB
specification).
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007f.html#5 FBA rant
for other topic drift ... this post started out as a question about
In a message dated 3/9/2007 12:19:05 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
BB in BBCCHH may have been planned for a number
of related products ... besides the 2321. i have some vague
recollection of discussions related to 1360/pdss which may have also
motivated the
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 03/07/2007
at 05:29 PM, Anne Lynn Wheeler [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
about the only thing that i remember that would use the
2byte/3mbyte/sec channel was the 2505-1 fixed head disk.
That was certainly the first, but I believe that there were two
others; one an array
In a message dated 3/9/2007 6:55:20 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
which selected the addressed strip and wrapped it around a drum.
Which gave rise to another scurrilous nickname that I heard used for the
2321: Pluck, suck, and wrap.
Bill Fairchild
Plainfield,
Andreas F. Geissbuehler wrote:
The venerable IBM 2321 A.K.A the strip picker, the one responsible for
the mbb in mbbcchhr -- did CP/67 or VM ever support the 2321 ?
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#51 FBA rant
addenda and more topic drift.
the reason given for periodically roping
In a message dated 3/8/2007 9:50:22 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andreas F. Geissbuehler wrote:
The venerable IBM 2321 A.K.A the strip picker, the one responsible for the
mbb in mbbcchhr -- did CP/67 or VM ever support the 2321 ?
The 2321 was only responsible
cylinder to place correct bin under the
read/write heads ... rotation somewhat would reminded me of
washing machine.
past posts mentioning 2321 in this thread:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#51 FBA rant
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#63 FBA rant
there is some slight physical
In a message dated 3/8/2007 11:44:21 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
seek CCW has six byte length ... bbcchh
Right. And what device, other than the 2321, ever had meaningful non-zero
values for the bb part of bbcchh? In other words, if there had never been any
://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#64 FBA rant
for other drift ... if the geometry characteristics were to be ignored then you
could treat
the six byte seek argument as the track number (allowing the device to
interpret the physical
characteristics ... somewhat similar to what FBA does in the locate command
In a message dated 3/8/2007 2:50:24 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
re: _http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#64_
(http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#64) FBA rant
Please be more specific. There are about 100 articles on that web page.
for other drift
Much of this FBA Rant thread that discusses a more better geometry is a
repetition of posts beginning around MAY 2005; e.g. this one:
_http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0507L=ibm-mainP=R61142I=3X=63346820B0
E4003BA4Y=DASDBILL2%40aol.com_
(http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0507L=ibm
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Please be more specific. There are about 100 articles on that web page.
I'm not sure I understand your reference ... with respect to post ... copy here
at
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007f.html#0 FBA rant
there is
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/index.html
what has
In a message dated 3/8/2007 5:59:23 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Now there is another possibility that you may be having. I recently updated
file _http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html_
(http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html)
with most recent posts. If your
never invented the 2321, why would we have ever needed the bb
part of the bbcchh seek address?
Please do not answer this question by pointing me to urls. Please summarize
the answer in a very few words.
reference posts:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#64 FBA rant
http
Anne Lynn Wheeler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
i apologize that i've not done what you have instructed me to do.
maybe you should also try ordering some number of other people to also
answer your questions.
reference:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007f.html#3 FBA rant
part of the reason that i
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 03/03/2007
at 01:16 PM, Anne Lynn Wheeler [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
speed matching attempted to retrofit 3880/3380 to 168 and 303x
machines with channel running at 1.5mbyte max
Not quite; the 370/168 had two type of block multiplexor channel,
single byte and 2 byte.
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 03/03/2007
at 08:27 AM, Shane [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
And yep, we'd probably all like FBA support to have been taken up.
I asked for it three decades ago. I thought that it was a no brainer,
but IBM didn't agree.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 03/05/2007
at 10:47 AM, Andreas F. Geissbuehler [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
The venerable IBM 2321 A.K.A the strip picker,
ITYM noodle picker.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html
We
Shmuel Metz , Seymour J. wrote:
Not quite; the 370/168 had two type of block multiplexor channel,
single byte and 2 byte. The 2 byte channel ran at 3 MB/s. The 3880
only supported the single byte channel, which was less expensive.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#40 FBA rant
about
.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#59 FBA rant
for further drift ... with regard to resource manager and various
strategies supporting paging devices ...
various resource manager posts here ... I had originally done dynamic
adaptive resource manager for cp67 as an undergraduate
The venerable IBM 2321 A.K.A the strip picker, the one responsible for
the mbb in mbbcchhr -- did CP/67 or VM ever support the 2321 ?
Andreas F. Geissbuehler
AFG Consultants Inc.
http://www.afgc-inc.com/
On Sun, 4 Mar 2007 10:25:47 +0100, Birger Heede [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The 2321 was the
Andreas F. Geissbuehler wrote:
The venerable IBM 2321 A.K.A the strip picker, the one responsible for
the mbb in mbbcchhr -- did CP/67 or VM ever support the 2321 ?
at the univ. where i was undergraduate ... and doing a lot of enhancements to
MFT and then MVT (lot of it associated with getting
]
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Anne Lynn Wheeler
Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2007 10:54 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FBA rant
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not enough caffeine...should be VM/XA
vm370 (and CMS) shipped with 3310
-1863
Fax: +1-214-473-1050
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ed Finnell
Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2007 11:49 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FBA rant
In a message dated 3/3/2007 10:44:04 A.M
At 10:47 -0600 on 03/05/2007, Andreas F. Geissbuehler wrote about Re: FBA rant:
The venerable IBM 2321 A.K.A the strip picker, the one responsible for
the mbb in mbbcchhr
As well as having it media used as the ribbons for the SHARE Paddle Project
IIRC, CP/67 - CMS supported the Noodle Picker, but not as a Pseudo-FBA
device.
Andreas F. Geissbuehler wrote:
The venerable IBM 2321 A.K.A the strip picker, the one responsible for
the mbb in mbbcchhr -- did CP/67 or VM ever support the 2321 ?
Andreas F. Geissbuehler
AFG Consultants Inc.
/~lynn/2007e.html#35 FBA rant
for other topic drift:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001l.html#53 mainframe question
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001l.html#63 MVS History (all parts)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002o.html#3 PLX
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#7 Disk drives as commodities
In a recent note, Bruce Black said:
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2007 20:40:42 -0500
My memory on DOS/VS is vague, but I believe they had VTOCs that were
similar to CKD VTOCs but structured to fit in 512 sectors and to
describe datasets in sectors. To do something similar in z/OS would
systems
history
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#35 FBA rant
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#38 FBA rant
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#39 FBA rant
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#40 FBA rant
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#41 IBM S/360 series operating systems
to
programs that were parsing and manipulating the internals of NOTE words
before PDSE support.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Shane
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 8:40 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FBA rant
In a message dated 3/3/2007 12:04:52 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There were FBA Drives under DOS/VS. They were transparent to the
user/programs. If it could be done then, why not now?
Likewise for VM/ESA 3340's, 3370's.
In a message dated 3/3/2007 9:58:40 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Likewise for VM/ESA 3340's, 3370's.
Not enough caffeine...should be VM/XA
BRBRBR**BR AOL now offers free
email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from
://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#32 I/O in Emulated Mainframes
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#33 IBM S/360 series operating systems
history
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#35 FBA rant
for other topic drift:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001l.html#53 mainframe question
http
menu screens implemented in CMS's
IOS3270).
previous posts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#35 FBA rant
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#38 FBA rant
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions
In a message dated 3/3/2007 10:44:04 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
that should be 3310 3370s ... 3330, 3340, 3350 were all ckd. 3340s were
removable packs that were totally enclosed including the arm access mechanism.
There was 3375 which basically was (hardware)
In a message dated 3/3/2007 10:59:23 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't remember for sure whether FBA (3370) was used by the 3090 service
processor or not.
The 3090 service processor started out being a highly customized version of
vm370 release 6 running on
On Mar 3, 2007, at 9:57 AM, Ed Finnell wrote:
In a message dated 3/3/2007 12:04:52 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There were FBA Drives under DOS/VS. They were transparent to the
user/programs. If it could be done then, why not now?
Err semi transparent.. the dos
Anne Lynn Wheeler wrote:
that should be 3310 3370s ... 3330, 3340, 3350 were all ckd. 3340s
were removable packs that were totally enclosed including the arm access
mechanism. There was 3375 which basically was (hardware) emulation of
CKD on 3370 device.
I worked at a service bureau in the
the
typical max. data transfer from 1.5mbyte to 3mbyte and also max channel distance from 200ft to
400ft. speed matching attempted to retrofit 3880/3380 to 168 and 303x machines with channel running at 1.5mbyte max (w/o 3mbyte data streaming support)
part of the FBA rant was the significant pain
In a message dated 3/3/2007 2:31:29 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
on every byte transferred. data streaming relaxed that requirement ...
doubling both the
typical max. data transfer from 1.5mbyte to 3mbyte and also max channel
distance from 200ft to
400ft. speed
!
-11 and -13 were 8mbyte 3880 disk controller caches. -11/ironwood was 4kbyte
record/page
cache and -13/sheriff was full-track cache ... code name table in previous post
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#38 FBA rant
the -21/-23 later increased the -11/-23 8mbyte cache size to 32mbytes.
i
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Finnell
Sent: Saturday 03 March 2007 09:53
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FBA rant
In a message dated 3/3/2007 10:59:23 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED
The 3370s supported by DOS/VS and VM, were FBA disks with a 512-byte
sector size.
My memory on DOS/VS is vague, but I believe they had VTOCs that were
similar to CKD VTOCs but structured to fit in 512 sectors and to
describe datasets in sectors. To do something similar in z/OS would
require
series operating systems
history
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#35 FBA rant
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#38 FBA rant
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#39 FBA rant
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#40 FBA rant
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#41 IBM S/360 series
On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 08:29:28 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you
wrote:
Phil Payne wrote:
They had Memorex Double Density 3350s with IDI - Intelligent Dual
Interface. Was ever
anything so inappropriately named? A status bus parity check - a common
occurence - caused
all IDI-linked
Clark Morris wrote:
So the jackasses will have cost the company far more than the 20
million dollars by their opposition. Does anyone really think that 54
gigabytes per volume is going to be other than totally inadequate in
the next ten years? Laptops now have 100 gigabytes and up on a single
Clark Morris wrote:
So the jackasses will have cost the company far more than the 20
million dollars by their opposition. Does anyone really think that 54
gigabytes per volume is going to be other than totally inadequate in
the next ten years? Laptops now have 100 gigabytes and up on a single
On Fri, 2007-03-02 at 15:00 -0700, Anne Lynn Wheeler wrote:
actually I used similar argument as part of the original
justification ... projecting enormous total life-cycle cost savings by
moving to FBA ... in addition to a whole variety of performance
improvements that would come as part of
02, 2007 4:13 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FBA rant was Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history
I agree with you Clark re: the short-sightedness of not supporting FBA
in MVS. Because of that dumb decision, z/OS is the only mainframe
operating system left in the 21st century
Blaicher, Chris wrote:
The limit for CKD volumes is a little more than 54GB. I come up with a
number closer to 500GB. Past that and IBM will need to go to logical
volumes on a physical volume. The reason is the CCHHR count field.
Max CC is , which give 65536 cylinders (don't forget
Blaicher, Chris wrote:
The limit for CKD volumes is a little more than 54GB. I come up with a
number closer to 500GB. Past that and IBM will need to go to logical
volumes on a physical volume. The reason is the CCHHR count field.
Max CC is , which give 65536 cylinders (don't forget
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 16:35:23 -0600, Blaicher, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The limit for CKD volumes is a little more than 54GB. I come up with a
number closer to 500GB. Past that and IBM will need to go to logical
volumes on a physical volume. The reason is the CCHHR count field.
Max CC is
On Fri, 2007-03-02 at 18:11 -0600, Richard Peurifoy wrote:
This is probably easier than FBA at this point, but I don't
really know.
Introducing a new DASD architecture should be a doddle. New playing
field - the old world doesn't even need to know it exists.
If they can slip media manager
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU wrote on 03/02/2007
04:35:23 PM:
The limit for CKD volumes is a little more than 54GB. I come up with a
number closer to 500GB. Past that and IBM will need to go to logical
volumes on a physical volume. The reason is the CCHHR count field.
Jaffe
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 4:13 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FBA rant was Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history
I agree with you Clark re: the short-sightedness of not supporting FBA
in MVS. Because of that dumb decision, z/OS is the only mainframe
operating system left
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mark L. Wheeler
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 7:46 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FBA rant was Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU wrote on 03/02/2007
04:35:23 PM:
The limit for CKD volumes
At 11:40 +1000 on 03/03/2007, Shane wrote about Re: FBA rant:
Introducing a new DASD architecture should be a doddle. New playing
field - the old world doesn't even need to know it exists.
If they can slip media manager code in under the covers, why can't
they also add new functionality just
58 matches
Mail list logo
