Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #163878 > unrolled thread
| Started by | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-05-23 16:40 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-05-25 15:07 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 598 — 36 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers
PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-23 16:40 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-24 14:06 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-05-24 14:22 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-24 16:39 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-25 07:47 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-25 15:00 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-25 13:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-25 13:30 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-25 16:12 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-25 15:13 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-25 16:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-25 16:33 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-26 12:07 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-26 16:22 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-28 13:17 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:29 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising mausg@mail.com - 2016-05-29 10:03 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-29 07:26 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-29 15:16 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-31 17:44 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-31 19:22 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-01 07:41 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-01 10:49 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 06:36 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-05-29 15:30 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-29 23:56 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-29 07:26 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 14:24 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 06:54 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 06:50 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Larry <lelmore76@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 15:29 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 08:45 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-05-25 17:58 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-05-25 22:04 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-26 00:31 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-26 10:07 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-29 17:55 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-05-26 15:57 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-05-26 20:00 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-27 11:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-05-27 15:49 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-27 20:28 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-28 13:18 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-28 17:53 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-29 13:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-29 16:33 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-31 18:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Michael LeVine <mlevinespmfltr@redshift.com> - 2016-05-31 14:10 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-01 12:57 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 22:19 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-01 07:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-01 12:08 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-01 11:10 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-01 10:22 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 13:51 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-05 14:22 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:14 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-06 16:15 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 14:11 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-07 02:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-01 17:03 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 11:31 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-02 15:09 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-03 16:41 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-03 15:49 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-03 10:06 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:18 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-05 23:26 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 18:16 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:28 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:43 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-04 11:08 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-05 23:14 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:59 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-05 16:39 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:12 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 17:18 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 08:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:36 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-17 12:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-05 10:20 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-06 09:04 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-06 10:23 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-07 08:59 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-08 15:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-08 15:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-08 10:34 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-08 11:13 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-09 16:01 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-09 10:39 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-09 10:00 -0700
Dynamic adaptive resource management (was: PL/I advertising "Jack Myers" <jmyers@n6wuz.net> - 2016-06-09 08:45 -0700
Re: Dynamic adaptive resource management (was: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-09 10:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-07 08:36 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 18:17 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-06 15:06 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 23:39 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-07 10:05 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-07 10:14 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-07 10:18 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-07 12:24 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:32 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-07 22:41 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-08 11:54 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:23 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-07 02:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-04 07:23 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:36 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 09:58 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 10:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 12:25 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-06 09:21 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 09:40 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 10:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 10:20 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 13:09 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-06 21:40 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 21:03 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 21:00 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-08 06:08 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 08:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-09 09:39 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:14 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-07 22:33 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 20:14 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 05:50 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-09 07:33 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:36 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 09:39 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-06 12:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 14:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-07 10:02 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-07 12:19 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 14:00 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:54 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-02 09:23 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-02 15:10 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-02 16:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-02 17:58 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-02 22:31 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-02 20:37 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 14:09 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-03 14:32 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:18 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-04 13:57 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-03 06:59 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-03 08:33 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-02 11:00 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-01 12:59 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-01 17:43 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Michael LeVine <mlevinespmfltr@redshift.com> - 2016-06-01 13:35 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-02 08:13 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Michael LeVine <mlevinespmfltr@redshift.com> - 2016-06-02 02:13 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-24 11:30 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-24 17:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-24 20:21 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-24 18:26 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising isw <isw@witzend.com> - 2016-06-24 21:01 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-25 05:42 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-25 07:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-25 13:10 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-25 14:32 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-27 16:07 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-27 21:17 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-28 12:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-28 08:39 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-28 17:23 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-27 19:25 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-27 19:28 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-27 23:16 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-25 07:24 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-25 07:45 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-25 08:02 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-27 16:12 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-28 12:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-28 10:35 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-28 14:27 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-28 12:04 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-28 15:21 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-28 21:13 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-29 12:49 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-29 08:25 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-29 08:33 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-29 17:42 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-25 07:31 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-25 07:02 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-25 12:12 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-25 13:10 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-25 16:28 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-26 13:10 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-27 15:40 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-28 12:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Mike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com> - 2016-06-28 22:40 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-28 22:49 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-28 20:25 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-29 10:08 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Mike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com> - 2016-06-29 19:27 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-29 18:57 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-29 17:52 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-29 23:04 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-30 18:27 +0000
PDP-10 ZORK [was Re: PL/I advertising] Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-27 16:20 -0400
Re: PDP-10 ZORK [was Re: PL/I advertising] sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2016-06-28 00:22 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-01 13:47 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-02 16:46 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-02 16:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-01 17:42 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-01 16:09 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-02 12:57 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:57 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-02 15:17 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-02 20:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-02 13:51 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-02 22:16 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:43 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-02 20:24 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-02 13:48 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-02 20:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-03 13:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-03 07:50 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 10:36 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-03 11:38 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 11:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-03 21:10 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 11:28 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-03 12:59 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-03 05:44 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-03 05:40 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-03 10:16 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-03 07:37 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-03 17:16 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-04 06:16 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 07:12 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-04 08:52 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 14:06 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 14:46 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:03 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 08:25 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-05 17:50 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:39 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-03 13:30 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-03 13:27 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> - 2016-06-05 10:04 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 11:47 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-02 16:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 20:20 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-03 09:40 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 17:40 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-04 10:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-04 15:40 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 16:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-04 17:59 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 19:06 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-04 12:31 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 14:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 14:50 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-05 14:13 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:15 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-07 13:24 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 18:44 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:14 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 23:07 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 22:22 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:15 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-03 16:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-03 17:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 17:37 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 14:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 21:21 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-03 17:04 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-04 10:54 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 15:03 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-04 12:08 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-04 16:28 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-05 10:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 11:47 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 08:51 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 13:06 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 16:05 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 15:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 12:11 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:12 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-05 06:12 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 09:45 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-05 07:42 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 13:24 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-05 10:01 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 18:48 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 14:29 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-05 14:06 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-06 19:47 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-07 07:58 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-06 09:30 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-06 10:13 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 10:14 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-06 12:04 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 11:27 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-06 12:45 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 11:48 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 13:08 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 13:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-06 14:57 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:17 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 18:21 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-06 14:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-06 09:51 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:14 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Robert Swindells <rjs@fdy2.co.uk> - 2016-06-07 20:59 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-08 07:26 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Robert Swindells <rjs@fdy2.co.uk> - 2016-06-08 12:00 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-07 15:33 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-07 18:08 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-08 12:40 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-08 09:45 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-08 19:06 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 18:17 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:50 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-05 09:56 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-05 12:39 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-05 12:28 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 16:02 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-06 09:27 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:28 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 21:02 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-05 03:04 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-04 22:42 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 07:20 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-06 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 17:26 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:07 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-04 16:28 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-04 16:39 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 17:39 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-04 16:51 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 22:10 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 18:21 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 23:02 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-04 23:57 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 07:20 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-05 09:25 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 08:25 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:05 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 20:18 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 11:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-07 22:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 05:49 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-09 07:03 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-05 17:42 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:32 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 08:25 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 13:04 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 12:11 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:08 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-06 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:13 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-06 10:00 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 18:42 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-05 17:53 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-06 12:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:45 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:32 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-08 11:53 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 22:06 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:33 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-04 14:00 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 17:31 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-07 13:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-07 15:34 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-08 00:28 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 20:10 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-04 13:14 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 15:39 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:01 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-03 21:21 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-03 11:14 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-03 16:45 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-03 15:12 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-03 12:56 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:05 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:09 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-09 17:27 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-10 06:58 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-10 11:42 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-16 17:07 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-17 12:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-29 16:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-29 23:44 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-29 23:50 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-31 16:09 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-01 16:15 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-01 13:49 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 17:34 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 12:47 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:23 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-05 23:19 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 18:12 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rob Doyle <radioengr@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 02:15 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-31 18:50 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-02 15:18 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 20:17 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-02 16:54 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-02 16:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-02 22:20 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-04 14:08 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 08:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:36 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 13:56 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-05-31 16:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-02 16:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-02 19:19 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 08:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:37 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-17 16:52 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-09 17:45 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:56 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-02 19:21 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-02 09:41 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Joe Chisolm <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> - 2016-05-31 13:37 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-31 12:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Joe Chisolm <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> - 2016-05-31 16:29 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 07:04 -0400
Re: Penn Central PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-01 13:15 -0700
Re: Penn Central PL/I advertising "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-06-01 15:38 -0500
Re: Penn Central PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 13:44 -0700
Re: Penn Central PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-03 16:40 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-26 16:22 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-05-26 20:32 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-26 18:50 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-27 11:01 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-27 13:36 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-05-27 15:33 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-27 16:07 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-05-27 19:20 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-27 19:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-27 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-28 20:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-31 14:39 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-31 14:37 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-04 22:28 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-27 10:51 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-27 06:56 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-05-27 15:51 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-27 20:25 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-27 05:43 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-29 05:28 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-29 15:26 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-29 11:50 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-04 22:39 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-26 12:23 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-26 15:56 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-04 22:21 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-05 05:38 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-29 17:53 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-29 18:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-30 07:20 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-30 14:27 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-30 22:29 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-30 22:22 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-25 15:03 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-25 15:07 -0700
Page 7 of 30 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 30 Next page →
| From | Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-08 10:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87porrinzn.fsf@garlic.com> |
| In reply to | #164795 |
jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: > What a way to kill the fun. Could the OS have been written so that > adding a CPU was similar to adding another disk drive on a channel? > That's how JMF approached our head-in-the-sand problems. re: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#59 PL/I advertising one of the things I did in dynamic adaptive resource management, was time a series of execution patterns to determine the CPU resources available ... there were a couple customers were running decade old versions of the system ... that had been moved to newer and faster processors over the period ... and it would dynamically adapt. http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#fairshare the 16-way processor system was higher end machine, field upgrade required significant work by customer engineers (to add/remove processor). the earlier 5-way SMP work was behalf of the Boeblingen 125 group. Corporate had slapped Boeblingen hands over the 115/125 implementation. They had done 9-position memory bus that could plug in up to nine microprocessors (a little like adapter cards). The 115 had all microprocessors the same, one with 370 instruction microcode (and channel simulation), and 2-8 microprocessors that were loaded with i/o controller microcode (disks, communication devices, etc). ALl these microprocessors were the same ... about 800KIP machines (370 simulation running at 10:1 or about 80KIP 370). 125 was identical to 115 but the microprocessor running 370 microcode was 1.2mips native, getting about 120kips 370. 5-way SMP was to allow 2-5 of the memory bus positions having 1.2MIP microprocessor plugged in. I had enormous latitude in defining microcode features .... much more than I had for ECPS microcode performance assist for Endicott's 134/148 machines. I did microcode queued interface for disk controller ... allowing disk controller to do real-time reorder for execution ... and real-time redrive queued requests (some superset what would be defined later for 370/xa SSCH). I also did something similar with queued task microcode interface for CPU execution (this was 1975) ... something like would be seen later for i432 ... aka number of processors was transparent to the low level operating system software (effectively processor software went to finish/wait, and microcode would pull off any pending work and dispatch it) ... however higher level scheduling was aware of processor cycles in the configuration for dynamic resource management (would have to power off the machine to add/remove microprocessors). Corporate didn't allow this machine (feature) to be announced ... somewhat similar to Corporate didn't allow Endicott to ship all 138/148 (and later 4331/4341) machines with virtual machine feature pre-installed at the factory (sort of like all mainframes are shipped today with LPAR support). some past 5-way SMP posts http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#bounce and SMP and/or compare-and-swap posts http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#smp -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-08 11:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87inxjim6q.fsf@garlic.com> |
| In reply to | #164822 |
Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> writes: > I did microcode queued interface for disk controller ... allowing disk > controller to do real-time reorder for execution ... and real-time > redrive queued requests (some superset what would be defined later for > 370/xa SSCH). I also did something similar with queued task microcode > interface for CPU execution (this was 1975) ... something like would be > seen later for i432 ... aka number of processors was transparent to the > low level operating system software (effectively processor software went > to finish/wait, and microcode would pull off any pending work and > dispatch it) ... however higher level scheduling was aware of processor > cycles in the configuration for dynamic resource management (would have > to power off the machine to add/remove microprocessors). re: http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#59 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#62 PL/I advertising as in ECPS, lots of kernel 370 code (in ECPS case 70% of pathlength) on nearly 1:1 basis for 10:1 speedup. However, got more stuff into the 5-way ... but also higher-level function ... like queued interfaces ... not only faster operatoin, but also improved the throughput of the operation (since eliminated a lot of the synchronized interrupt delays to redrive disk i/o or CPU tasks.) later, the i432 guys gave a presentation at Asilomar SIGOPS meeting where they said that putting high level, advanced function (like multiprocessor dispatching) into the machine was big problem. For them everything went directly into silicon (not microcode) ... any fixes/enhancements required replacement with new silicon chip ... not simple matter of updating silicon some past 5-way SMP posts http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#bounce and SMP and/or compare-and-swap posts http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#smp -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM000534D71B8D14A3@aca40f3b.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #164822 |
Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: >> What a way to kill the fun. Could the OS have been written so that >> adding a CPU was similar to adding another disk drive on a channel? >> That's how JMF approached our head-in-the-sand problems. > > re: > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#59 PL/I advertising > > one of the things I did in dynamic adaptive resource management, was > time a series of execution patterns to determine the CPU resources > available ... there were a couple customers were running decade old > versions of the system ... that had been moved to newer and faster > processors over the period ... and it would dynamically adapt. > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#fairshare > > the 16-way processor system was higher end machine, field upgrade > required significant work by customer engineers (to add/remove > processor). > > the earlier 5-way SMP work was behalf of the Boeblingen 125 group. > Corporate had slapped Boeblingen hands over the 115/125 implementation. > They had done 9-position memory bus that could plug in up to nine > microprocessors (a little like adapter cards). The 115 had all > microprocessors the same, one with 370 instruction microcode (and > channel simulation), and 2-8 microprocessors that were loaded with i/o > controller microcode (disks, communication devices, etc). ALl these > microprocessors were the same ... about 800KIP machines (370 simulation > running at 10:1 or about 80KIP 370). > > 125 was identical to 115 but the microprocessor running 370 microcode > was 1.2mips native, getting about 120kips 370. > > 5-way SMP was to allow 2-5 of the memory bus positions having 1.2MIP > microprocessor plugged in. I had enormous latitude in defining microcode > features .... much more than I had for ECPS microcode performance assist > for Endicott's 134/148 machines. > > I did microcode queued interface for disk controller ... allowing disk > controller to do real-time reorder for execution ... and real-time > redrive queued requests (some superset what would be defined later for > 370/xa SSCH). I also did something similar with queued task microcode > interface for CPU execution (this was 1975) ... something like would be > seen later for i432 ... aka number of processors was transparent to the > low level operating system software (effectively processor software went > to finish/wait, and microcode would pull off any pending work and > dispatch it) ... however higher level scheduling was aware of processor > cycles in the configuration for dynamic resource management (would have > to power off the machine to add/remove microprocessors). You had more complicated hardware configs than we did. We didn't have to power off anything to add/remove. We did have a SUSPEND command so that the current state of the system would be saved and then returned into core if the system had to be reconfigured in a way which caused memory to be replugged. I think we had to do a reload if memory went from 4-way to 2-way interleaved. > > Corporate didn't allow this machine (feature) to be announced > ... somewhat similar to Corporate didn't allow Endicott to ship all > 138/148 (and later 4331/4341) machines with virtual machine feature > pre-installed at the factory (sort of like all mainframes are shipped > today with LPAR support). > > some past 5-way SMP posts > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#bounce > > and SMP and/or compare-and-swap posts > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#smp > Did you ever figure out the reason they didn't want to ship it? /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-09 16:01 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <0e9o2d-kt3.ln1@sambook.reistad.name> |
| In reply to | #164843 |
In article <PM000534D71B8D14A3@aca40f3b.ipt.aol.com>, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: >> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: >>> What a way to kill the fun. Could the OS have been written so that >>> adding a CPU was similar to adding another disk drive on a channel? >>> That's how JMF approached our head-in-the-sand problems. >> >> re: >> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#59 PL/I advertising >> >> one of the things I did in dynamic adaptive resource management, was >> time a series of execution patterns to determine the CPU resources >> available ... there were a couple customers were running decade old >> versions of the system ... that had been moved to newer and faster >> processors over the period ... and it would dynamically adapt. >> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#fairshare >> >> the 16-way processor system was higher end machine, field upgrade >> required significant work by customer engineers (to add/remove >> processor). >> >> the earlier 5-way SMP work was behalf of the Boeblingen 125 group. >> Corporate had slapped Boeblingen hands over the 115/125 implementation. >> They had done 9-position memory bus that could plug in up to nine >> microprocessors (a little like adapter cards). The 115 had all >> microprocessors the same, one with 370 instruction microcode (and >> channel simulation), and 2-8 microprocessors that were loaded with i/o >> controller microcode (disks, communication devices, etc). ALl these >> microprocessors were the same ... about 800KIP machines (370 simulation >> running at 10:1 or about 80KIP 370). >> >> 125 was identical to 115 but the microprocessor running 370 microcode >> was 1.2mips native, getting about 120kips 370. >> >> 5-way SMP was to allow 2-5 of the memory bus positions having 1.2MIP >> microprocessor plugged in. I had enormous latitude in defining microcode >> features .... much more than I had for ECPS microcode performance assist >> for Endicott's 134/148 machines. >> >> I did microcode queued interface for disk controller ... allowing disk >> controller to do real-time reorder for execution ... and real-time >> redrive queued requests (some superset what would be defined later for >> 370/xa SSCH). I also did something similar with queued task microcode >> interface for CPU execution (this was 1975) ... something like would be >> seen later for i432 ... aka number of processors was transparent to the >> low level operating system software (effectively processor software went >> to finish/wait, and microcode would pull off any pending work and >> dispatch it) ... however higher level scheduling was aware of processor >> cycles in the configuration for dynamic resource management (would have >> to power off the machine to add/remove microprocessors). > >You had more complicated hardware configs than we did. We didn't have >to power off anything to add/remove. We did have a SUSPEND command >so that the current state of the system would be saved and then >returned into core if the system had to be reconfigured in a way >which caused memory to be replugged. I think we had to do a reload >if memory went from 4-way to 2-way interleaved. Both yes and no. Yes, the technical implementation of the 360 and 370 series were substantially more complicated than the PDP10s. But IBM had a very good set of interface specifications that had to be stable, to the point of supporting third party products. (and we all know that those are never 100% compatible. You just have to make do). So the design could be broken up a lot more, and be done by different teams. And to a point, other development coild be reused and reused again; in different pacakging. And because of the much higher volume, both in units sold and number of models; this "LEGO design" was a lot more feasible. >> Corporate didn't allow this machine (feature) to be announced >> ... somewhat similar to Corporate didn't allow Endicott to ship all >> 138/148 (and later 4331/4341) machines with virtual machine feature >> pre-installed at the factory (sort of like all mainframes are shipped >> today with LPAR support). >> >> some past 5-way SMP posts >> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#bounce >> >> and SMP and/or compare-and-swap posts >> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#smp >> > >Did you ever figure out the reason they didn't want to ship it? Probably because it would crowd out existing products. IBM only came on to the GM idea that your best competiotion is yourself sometime in the 1990s. I would assume the most selling mainframe is still the 4341 ? -- mrr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-09 10:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87wply8don.fsf@garlic.com> |
| In reply to | #164852 |
Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> writes: > Both yes and no. Yes, the technical implementation of the 360 and 370 > series were substantially more complicated than the PDP10s. But IBM > had a very good set of interface specifications that had to be > stable, to the point of supporting third party products. (and we > all know that those are never 100% compatible. You just have to > make do). > > So the design could be broken up a lot more, and be done by different > teams. And to a point, other development coild be reused and reused > again; in different pacakging. And because of the much higher volume, > both in units sold and number of models; this "LEGO design" was a > lot more feasible. the other part of the robust technical specification was that totally different computers had to meet the same compatible operation. 115/125, 135, 145, 155, and 165 were five totally different hardware implementations that had to support same compatible software operation. there was folklore about the gov. legal action and the BUNCH testimony. Claim is that all five testified in the late 50s, the computer industry realized that the single most important requirement for future commercial success was a line of completely compatible computers (the computer industry was rapidly growing and customers were having to frequently upgrade the computers to keep abreast of the growing computer demand, having to completely rewrite software was barrier to upgrades and market growth). The testimony was that only Watson @IBM was able to force the different plant managers to toe the compatible requirement. In the early 70s, Amdahl gave a talk at large, full MIT auditorium. Some of the audience was giving him a hard time about being front for the Japanese (half the funding and all the manufacturing was Japanese). He was also asked what argument did he use to convince venture capital to invest/fund his operation. He said that with a couple hundred billion in customer developed 360 software, even if IBM were to totally walk away from 360 (possibly veiled reference to Future System), the customer software base would keep him in business through the end of the century. posts in this thread ttp://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#35 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#41 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#43 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#44 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#45 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#46 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#47 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#48 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#50 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#52 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#53 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#54 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#55 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#56 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#57 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#58 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#59 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#62 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#63 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#64 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#65 PL/I advertising h -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-09 10:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8760ti9u1c.fsf@garlic.com> |
| In reply to | #164843 |
jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: > Did you ever figure out the reason they didn't want to ship it? re: http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#59 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#62 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#63 PL/I advertising ibm tried to have carefully positioned low, mid, high range systems. besides 115/125 being hardware implementation that could easily add/drop microprocessors ... which violated some corporate strategy, a 5-way 125 started to heavily overlap mid-range processor throughput. Also, at the time, the other IBM operating systems only supported single processor operation ... or at base, barely supported 2-processor SMP ... the idea of shipping VM370-based system that was significantly more advanced than all the others ... brought a lot of complaints ... this was also in the period that the POK/MVS group was actively advocating that VM370 product be killed. http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#bounce In fact, the 5-way 125 SMP overlapped the processing power of the 148 ECPS ... there were escalation meetings by the two groups on opposite side of table ... and since I was doing both, I had to alternate opposites of the table arguing both positions. As I've mentioned in the past, 12-18 months later, POK did manage to convince corporate to kill vm370 product, shutdown the group and tried to move all the people to POK MVS/XA group, except some that managed to escape to DEC VMS group. Endicott managed to save the vm370 product mission ... but had to rebuild a development organization from scratch. Endicott then tried to have VM370 built into every system shipped from the factory ... which was (also) overruled by Corporate. Later Endicott came out with 4341 mid-range ... which was starting to impact high-end systems. datacenter 4341 clusters had more aggregate processor power, memory, i/o capacity, lower environmental and floor space at lower cost than high-end POK mainframe. Also large numbers of distributed 4341s (leading edge of distributed computing tsunami) was starting to siphon processing for high-end datacenters. At one point, POK was so threatened that it managed to convince corporate to cut the allocation of critical 4341 manufacturing component in half. Before the 3033 shipped, still under development ... was the 16-way effort ... after the 5-way SMP got killed, and we had some of the 3033 processor engineers working on it in their spare time ... it was going great guns ... until somebody told the head of POK that it could be decades before the POK favorite son (batch) operating system had 16-way SMP support. Going further back, while working on fine-grain multiprocessor locking for CP67 (precursor to vm370) at the science center, http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#545tech Charlie invented compare&swap instruction (the instruction name taken from Charlie's CAS initials) ... initial attempts to get it added to 370 was rebuffed because the POK favorite son operating system people rebuffed it ... claiming that test&set was more than sufficient for multiprocessor operation ... aka they were still running (2-way) multiprocessor support with global kernel spin-lock (a single spin-lock used for system call entry into the kernel would execute test&set spin-lock ... aka only single processor executing kernel code at a time, if the other processor required kernel execution, it would spin on test&set instruction waiting for the other processor to exit kernel mode). http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#smp -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Jack Myers" <jmyers@n6wuz.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-09 08:45 -0700 |
| Subject | Dynamic adaptive resource management (was: PL/I advertising |
| Message-ID | <khfo2d-btr.ln1@n6wuz.net> |
| In reply to | #164822 |
Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> wrote: > one of the things I did in dynamic adaptive resource management, ----------------<drift>--------------------- Back in 'ought seventy nine' I was brought onboard to ease an engineering planning systems model into production. The director explained that the model was 'complete' so it was just a matter of 'establishing processes and procedures.' The second day on the job it came out that the model developer got into a shouting match with the planning manager and the disagreement had culminated in them throwing large, multi-inch-thick binders full of printouts at each other. During the next week I sat and watched the planners busily go about their assigned tasks and receiving thick printous via interoffice mail. "What are you doing?" sez I? "We are running the Network Evaluator!" It would be disingenuous to claim to have never seen a core dump, but the closest I ever came to Abend S122--cancelled by operator-- was the time the operator called my boss and asked why the new guy was trying to punch a deck of cards with Chinese names. [The card punch was reserved for sending accounting data to a government office. My boss had the choice of OKing the Sx22, reprimanding me, or simply ignoring the fact that my landlord's wife was an international librarian on campus.] It was time to buddy up to the MIS operations manager, go ooh and aah over the equipment, and try to figure out what was up. The MIS guy was a competent manager who had lots of problems with time-critical production COBOL jobs. I needed to stay our of his hair. During the machine room tour I silently observed a yellow stickie on the VM/VS1 operators console. "If CPU exceeds 90% 'K ... NETEVAL' multiple times" I proposed that we limit the planners to one job at a time and that it was ok to lower the job priority, but please don't cancel these jobs because they were critical to Engineering and Operations. The job cancellations continued (and I guess I could have escallated the problem through "channels".) Instead I wrote a simple exec to change the job name to NETEnnn where nnn came from the last three digits in the time-or-day clock; but I knew it was only a matter of time until the operators learned to identify and kill the job. There was nothing to prevent migrating the Network Evaluator from VS1 to CMS, so I did that. The planners were already using VM/CMS to prepare their batch jobs. A week or two later I received two pages of the VS1 operators log via anonymous interoffice mail. Interspersed with the batch job control there was a text exchange which boiled down to: "They are taking over the machine again, we are up to 95%" "Well, lower the priority to 99, you have to do it at the VM console." It was not my job to explain that the priority scale is inverted between VS1 and VM, so 99 is the highest possible priority! -- Always make new mistakes. --Esther Dyson
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-09 10:19 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Dynamic adaptive resource management (was: PL/I advertising |
| Message-ID | <871t469t54.fsf@garlic.com> |
| In reply to | #164850 |
"Jack Myers" <jmyers@n6wuz.net> writes: > There was nothing to prevent migrating the Network Evaluator from > VS1 to CMS, so I did that. The planners were already using VM/CMS > to prepare their batch jobs. re: http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#56 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#62 PL/I advertising trivia: I had done dynamic adaptive resource management as undergraduate in the 60 for cp67. It took into account resource useage ... but with some coding tricks that resulted in significantly shorter pathlength. In the morph from cp67 to vm370 ... there was a lot of "simplification" ... and all of the dynamic adaptive resource management was dropped, the priority API was the same ... but it resulted in very simplified queue ordering ... not based on resource utilization ... and there were enormous number of situations where it failed to achieve the desired objectives. I eventually ported all the stuff from CP67 to VM370 with additional enhancements and one of my hobbies was making enhanced operating systems available to internal datacenters. Finally in 1976, it was decided to ship a subset as the "resource manager" ... however the decision was made to also make it guinea pig for starting to charge for kernel code ... as a separate add-on kernel component. At approx. $900/month, it was pretty much limited to customers with high-end systems. http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#fairshare aka ... legal actions was somewhat behind the 23jun1969 "unbundling" announcement, including starting to charge for (application) software, however IBM managed to win the argument that kernel software should still be free. http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#unbundle then during the early-mid 70s, company had future system effort that was completely different and was to completely replace 370 ... and internal politics was killing off 370 efforts http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#futuresys the lack of new 370 offerings during the FS period is credited with giving clone system makers a market foothold. With the failure of FS, there was mad rush to get new 370 offerings into product pipeline. The rise of clone system makers also contributed to decision to start transition to charging for kernel software. -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-07 08:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <878tyhui2p.fsf@garlic.com> |
| In reply to | #164682 |
Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> writes: > for other trivia .... more recently, before he disappeared, Jim Gray > con'ed me into inviewing for chief security architect in redmond, the > interview dragged on for a few weeks, but we couldn't agree on what > needed to be done. Jim said I couldn't report directly to him because he > already had this guy that use to be at DEC reporting to him. re: http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#54 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#55 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#56 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#57 PL/I advertising aka https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Bell some trivia from above: During the 1980s he became involved with public policy, becoming the first and founding Assistant Director of the CISE Directorate of the NSF, and led the cross-agency group that specified the NREN. ... snip ... other trivia, for some of presentations to director of NSF, he would sit in on. old email about working with director of NSF initially on interconnecting the NSF supercomputer centers. http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/lhwemail.html#nsfnet I've mentioned before, initially we were suppose to get $20M, but then congress cuts the budget, some other things happen, and finally NSF releases RFP. Internal politics prevents us from bidding, director of NSF tries to help, writing the company a letter (copying the CEO), but that just makes the internal politics worse. past posts http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#nsfnet -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-06 18:17 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <o9kg2d-sh3.ln1@sambook.reistad.name> |
| In reply to | #164664 |
In article <PM0005349BAE9A5DF7@aca407c0.ipt.aol.com>, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: >> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes: >>> Your claim is that DEC hastened the arrival of the PC business which is >>> utter nonsense. You are completely ignoring the fact that DEC was >>> demonstrably way behind in the PC business. >>> >>> Timesharing was available on many other computers besides those from DEC. >>> And it can very easily be argued that people whose only experience was >using >>> batch would be even more motivated to have their own machine than people >who >>> had used timesharing. And lots of people, like myself, wanted their own >>> computer before they ever used one, timesharing or otherwise. >> >> (cp67 & vm370) CMS effectively provided a (time-sharing) personal >> computer environment. mid-range computer technology met some >> price/performance threshold and saw large corporations deploying >> hundreds&thousands of 4300 (vm370) systems out in departmental areas >> ... leading edge of the distributed computing tsunami. some old 4300 >> email http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/lhwemail.html#43xx > ><snip> > >Could any user mount/dismount media and have their own private >disk packs? Sure. You are talking about mainframes here, right? -- mrr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-06 15:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b0e24ad4-46d4-4449-bcf3-60e023287e5b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #164701 |
On Monday, June 6, 2016 at 2:13:34 PM UTC-6, Morten Reistad wrote: > In article <PM0005349BAE9A5DF7@aca407c0.ipt.aol.com>, > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: > >Could any user mount/dismount media and have their own private > >disk packs? > > Sure. You are talking about mainframes here, right? On the mainframe I used, we could hand in a 2400' tape and have it mounted for one of our jobs. But I am not aware of any of its users having their own disk packs; as far as I knew, the OS treated the file system like the hard drive of a modern PC... the disks were all just permanently mounted so that your files would be on the system whenever you would log in; there was just one pool of disk space. Of course, the disk packs were removable from the drives... and so some nights, the system was booted up in OS/360 instead of MTS for some special jobs. It could be that there were some big users who had their own disk packs that got put in only when needed, but it wasn't visible to us lowly grad students outside computing science. John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-06 23:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <drmfstFc6elU9@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #164714 |
On Mon, 06 Jun 2016 15:06:02 -0700, Quadibloc wrote: > On Monday, June 6, 2016 at 2:13:34 PM UTC-6, Morten Reistad wrote: >> In article <PM0005349BAE9A5DF7@aca407c0.ipt.aol.com>, >> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: > >> >Could any user mount/dismount media and have their own private disk >> >packs? >> >> Sure. You are talking about mainframes here, right? > > On the mainframe I used, we could hand in a 2400' tape and have it > mounted for one of our jobs. But I am not aware of any of its users > having their own disk packs; as far as I knew, the OS treated the file > system like the hard drive of a modern PC... the disks were all just > permanently mounted so that your files would be on the system whenever > you would log in; there was just one pool of disk space. > > Of course, the disk packs were removable from the drives... and so some > nights, > the system was booted up in OS/360 instead of MTS for some special jobs. > > It could be that there were some big users who had their own disk packs > that got put in only when needed, but it wasn't visible to us lowly grad > students outside computing science. There's a lovely story (possibly apocryphal) about a student who reckoned that the operators at his university were robotic enough that they would do whatever they were told - probably because that was how they had been trained and managed (he blamed management, not the operators). He salvaged a discarded disk pack and dismantled it, replacing the platters with old vinyl albums. He got it back into the computer room, then ran a job asking for it to be mounted. Needless to say it disintegrated. He got in a LOT of trouble, but (I can't remember the details) he was given a fitting punishement - something like a year unpaid on the support desk. I don't know why they didn't throw him out. There was another story about him at an IBM conference, but I don't remember enough of that. -- Using UNIX since v6 (1975)... Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-07 10:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <drnkimFptbrU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #164715 |
On 2016-06-06, Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Jun 2016 15:06:02 -0700, Quadibloc wrote:
[20 lines snipped]
>> It could be that there were some big users who had their own disk packs
>> that got put in only when needed, but it wasn't visible to us lowly grad
>> students outside computing science.
>
> There's a lovely story (possibly apocryphal) about a student who reckoned
> that the operators at his university were robotic enough that they would
> do whatever they were told
When you and I shared an educational establishment, someone (not me) found
out that the operators there would mount any magtape requested, including
ones to which undergraduates really shouldn't have had access ...
--
Today is Pungenday, the 12th day of Confusion in the YOLD 3182
I don't have an attitude problem.
If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-07 10:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <drnl48Fc6elU14@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #164722 |
On Tue, 07 Jun 2016 10:05:10 +0000, Huge wrote: > On 2016-06-06, Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote: >> On Mon, 06 Jun 2016 15:06:02 -0700, Quadibloc wrote: > > [20 lines snipped] > >>> It could be that there were some big users who had their own disk >>> packs that got put in only when needed, but it wasn't visible to us >>> lowly grad students outside computing science. >> >> There's a lovely story (possibly apocryphal) about a student who >> reckoned that the operators at his university were robotic enough that >> they would do whatever they were told > > When you and I shared an educational establishment, someone (not me) > found out that the operators there would mount any magtape requested, > including ones to which undergraduates really shouldn't have had access > ... How do you think I stole the entire KOS source code? I really wish I still had it - someone asked me for it last month. -- Using UNIX since v6 (1975)... Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-07 10:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <drnlbqFptbrU5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #164723 |
On 2016-06-07, Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Jun 2016 10:05:10 +0000, Huge wrote:
>
>> On 2016-06-06, Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 06 Jun 2016 15:06:02 -0700, Quadibloc wrote:
>>
>> [20 lines snipped]
>>
>>>> It could be that there were some big users who had their own disk
>>>> packs that got put in only when needed, but it wasn't visible to us
>>>> lowly grad students outside computing science.
>>>
>>> There's a lovely story (possibly apocryphal) about a student who
>>> reckoned that the operators at his university were robotic enough that
>>> they would do whatever they were told
>>
>> When you and I shared an educational establishment, someone (not me)
>> found out that the operators there would mount any magtape requested,
>> including ones to which undergraduates really shouldn't have had access
>> ...
>
> How do you think I stole the entire KOS source code?
Tee-hee.
> I really wish I still had it - someone asked me for it last month.
T'was ever thus.
--
Today is Pungenday, the 12th day of Confusion in the YOLD 3182
I don't have an attitude problem.
If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-07 12:24 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q0ki2d-2j1.ln1@sambook.reistad.name> |
| In reply to | #164714 |
In article <b0e24ad4-46d4-4449-bcf3-60e023287e5b@googlegroups.com>, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote: >On Monday, June 6, 2016 at 2:13:34 PM UTC-6, Morten Reistad wrote: >> In article <PM0005349BAE9A5DF7@aca407c0.ipt.aol.com>, >> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: > >> >Could any user mount/dismount media and have their own private >> >disk packs? >> >> Sure. You are talking about mainframes here, right? > >On the mainframe I used, we could hand in a 2400' tape and have it mounted for >one of our jobs. But I am not aware of any of its users having their own disk >packs; as far as I knew, the OS treated the file system like the hard drive of >a modern PC... the disks were all just permanently mounted so that your files >would be on the system whenever you would log in; there was just one pool of >disk space. > >Of course, the disk packs were removable from the drives... and so some nights, >the system was booted up in OS/360 instead of MTS for some special jobs. > >It could be that there were some big users who had their own disk packs that >got put in only when needed, but it wasn't visible to us lowly grad students >outside computing science. I ran my own mainframe when I was assigned to crypto (Strict Secret) work, Norway's Navy. This was a 4341 with two tapes, three disks; two of them were mountable. Extensive crypto and blanking gear between disk/memory and cpu. Extensive Faraday's cage. And, yes, we had disk packs. LOTS of disk packs, with even more assigned paperwork. The 'light' blanking took around 20 minutes, and was required between two non-cooperating agencies jobs. Then we got to boot the OS of the day from scratch. We must have booted that 4341 from utter cold more times than anyone in the commercial business did during a lifetime. -- mrr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-07 16:32 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <1902001603.487023529.315293.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #164714 |
Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote: > On Monday, June 6, 2016 at 2:13:34 PM UTC-6, Morten Reistad wrote: >> In article <PM0005349BAE9A5DF7@aca407c0.ipt.aol.com>, >> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: > >>> Could any user mount/dismount media and have their own private >>> disk packs? >> >> Sure. You are talking about mainframes here, right? > > On the mainframe I used, we could hand in a 2400' tape and have it mounted for > one of our jobs. But I am not aware of any of its users having their own disk > packs; as far as I knew, the OS treated the file system like the hard drive of > a modern PC... the disks were all just permanently mounted so that your files > would be on the system whenever you would log in; there was just one pool of > disk space. > DOS systems I'm familiar with did a lot of disk swapping. They might have a pack or so per application. Pugh mentions as a surprise to IBM that many shops found it better to use disk rather than tape for backup, so they had to scramble to manufacture enough disks, and packs were rationed to early customers. > Of course, the disk packs were removable from the drives... and so some nights, > the system was booted up in OS/360 instead of MTS for some special jobs. > > It could be that there were some big users who had their own disk packs that > got put in only when needed, but it wasn't visible to us lowly grad students > outside computing science. > > John Savard > -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-07 22:41 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nj7ij609bs@news6.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #164750 |
On 2016-06-07, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: > DOS systems I'm familiar with did a lot of disk swapping. They might have > a pack or so per application. Pugh mentions as a surprise to IBM that many > shops found it better to use disk rather than tape for backup, so they had > to scramble to manufacture enough disks, and packs were rationed to early > customers. There was a similar situation with the Univac 90/30 in the late '70s. On the one hand, Univac warned customers of a life of woe if they used foreign packs, but on the other hand they couldn't supply enough themselves. CDC sold a lot of 8418 packs to 90/30 shops. If they worked the first time, they'd work forever. I had one pack that didn't work the first time - but since the drive I mounted it on to prep it had a noisy spindle bearing, I didn't notice anything awry until halfway through the prep, when the noises started getting louder. By the time I got the pack off the drive (and quarantined both, of course), the oxide was chewed up so badly you could see bare aluminum through it. And then the fingerpointing (Univac vs. CDC) began... -- /~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-08 11:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <11f0de1a-fc62-43ec-a234-7735c6459036@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #164750 |
On Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 4:32:53 PM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote: > DOS systems I'm familiar with did a lot of disk swapping. They might have > a pack or so per application. Pugh mentions as a surprise to IBM that many > shops found it better to use disk rather than tape for backup, so they had > to scramble to manufacture enough disks, and packs were rationed to early > customers. Heck, we were MVS and frequently swapped out 3330 disk packs.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-06 13:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5240a51f-84ff-4a84-8ea3-150f00e3b475@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #164542 |
On Sunday, June 5, 2016 at 3:27:18 AM UTC-4, Questor wrote: > Timesharing was available on many other computers besides those from DEC. > And it can very easily be argued that people whose only experience was using > batch would be even more motivated to have their own machine than people who > had used timesharing. And lots of people, like myself, wanted their own > computer before they ever used one, timesharing or otherwise. The issue of "having their own machine" is actually distinct from the issue of machine performance. Years ago, we wanted _access_ to a machine that ran _fast_. In the end, we didn't care _why_ the machine was fast or who "owned" it. (That is, it could be a slow machine but having only one user, or a fast machine with many users, but not overloaded). Machine speed was also dependent on peripherals and the problem program. Timesharing was generally liked due to the interactive instant experience. However, certain applications required high volume input and output for which the typical Teletype or Selectric was very inadequate. Some applications had high data volumes and needed magnetic tape. All of that ran better in batch mode. As to having one's "own" machine, that was more of an issue of "control" than performance. If you had your machine--and years ago that would be a mini-computer in your department-- you determined who got to use it and what they could do on it. You probably also had a hand in determining what features and peripherals were on it, optimized for your personal needs. In addition, for comp-sci people, having their own machine allowed them to play with it as they wished, without running into obstacles created by data center managers and security. You could tinker with the operating system in any way you wished, and execute privileged instructions and processes. Years ago, one of the frustrations of comp-sci students was being blocked from experimentation at the operating system or other low level.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 30 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 30 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web