From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 12:29:08 -0600CBFalconer writes:
I did something similar in about the same time frame ... but using up
to eight history bits:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#wsclock
one of the things that clock and a lot of the simulation work at the science center turned up was that there was different use/past characteristics and able to predict future behavior; aka there were various past behavior thresholds that wouldn't correlate with future behavior over various periods (invalidating assumption behind least recently used replacement strategy)
random past posts mentioning saltzer (mostly nothing to do with this
subject).
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#0 What good and old text formatter are there ?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#13 Multics on emulated systems?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#18 cost of crossing kernel/user boundary
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003o.html#32 who invented the "popup" ?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004g.html#46 PL/? History
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004l.html#56 project athena & compare and swap
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004l.html#73 Specifying all biz rules in relational data
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005b.html#29 M.I.T. SNA study team
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005u.html#42 Mainframe Applications and Records Keeping?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#31 MCTS
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006h.html#46 blast from the past, tcp/ip, project athena and kerberos
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006h.html#55 History of first use of all-computerized typesetting?
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 17:46:33 -0600Bill Todd writes:
the referenced acm article describes the grenoble implementation
J. Rodriquez-Rosell, The design, implementation, and evaluation of a
working set dispatcher, cacm16, apr73
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 20:07:38 -0600CBFalconer writes:
the working set and page replacement strategies of the 60s and early were focused on real storage being frequently a highly constrained resource. however, by the second half of the 70s, disk arms were much more frequently the constrained resources .... although you could have second order effects involving paging operations putting heaving contention on disk resource, possibly creating long queues and long service times. the page thrashing with huge system page wait of the 60s could be replaced with disk arm contention with huge system page waits ... but not particularly because of excessive over commitment of real storage.
this was the late 70s shift from attempting heavy optimization of real
storage use ... to attempting to trade-off real storage resources in
attempt to compensate and mitigate the disk arm bottlenecks. some
exploration of this subject in previous post in this thread
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#28 virtual memory
some of the references in the above references a comparison between a
typical 360/67 cp67 configuration supporting 80 some users comfortably
(on the cambridge system) to a decade plus later with a 3081 vm370
configuration supporting 300 some users with similar workload
operation. the processor mips and the available "pageable pages" had
increased on the order of fifty times while the numbers of supported
concurrent users increased around four times. as shown in the repeated
comparison the increase in number of users was relatively consistent
in the increase in disk arm performance (which had contributed to my
comment that relative system disk thruput had declined by a factor of
10 times during the period). one of the old references mentioned in
the post referenced above:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#31 Big I/O or Kicking the Mainframe out the Door
the issue became is it possible to develop strategies that better optimized the use of disk arms ... possibly at the sacrifice of either processor and/or real storage optimization.
one such strategy was "big pages" for paging in the early 80s for both vm370 and mvs. part of this was 3380 disk arm thruput was maybe 3-4 times that of the earlier 2314 disk arm ... however the data transfer was ten times as much. "big pages" went to creating "on-the-fly" full-track clusters of 4k pages. paging area on disk was layed out possibly ten to twenty times larger than actually needed and managed by a "moving cursor" algorithm ... somewhat similar to some of the log structured filesystem work that would appear a decade later (which were done for similar objectives to try and drastically improve the disk arm use efficiency).
for page-out ... a full-tracks worth of pages from an address space would be collected together (whether the pages had been changed or not during their current residency in storage) and written as one operation. later when there was a page fault for any 4k page in a "big page" ... the whole track would be read into real storage. This profligate movement of pages might increase the total real storage required by an application by 20-30percent (and similar increase in number of bytes moved) ... but was traded off by redcuing the disk arm resource for moving each page by 90 percent. this also could play fast and loose with the accuracy of tracking what virtual pages were actually the least recently used ... but the trade-off of drastically improving the efficiency of disk arm resource for moving pages showed a net win (as something that represented the primary bottleneck in the infrastructure).
with such a big increase in the amount of real storage ... and the shifting of major system bottleneck to disk arm ... there could be significant system thruput trade-offs that might result in much less efficient use of real storage if it might drastically improve the overall system thruput situation dealing with disk arm bottleneck.
i had also done analogous efficiency with the page mapped filesystem
i had developed
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#mmap
improving the probability of contiguous allocation for many filesystem objects and being able to dynamically adjusting how large a block transfer could be done when accessing the object (based on configuration, load) ... again trading off the efficiency of real-storage utilization for improved diak arm efficiency.
misc. past posts discussing the "big page" strategy from a couple
decades ago.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001k.html#60 Defrag in linux? - Newbie question
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002b.html#20 index searching
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#29 Page size (was: VAX, M68K complex instructions)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#48 Swapper was Re: History of Login Names
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002e.html#8 What are some impressive page rates?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002e.html#11 What are some impressive page rates?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002f.html#20 Blade architectures
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#36 Do any architectures use instruction count instead of timer
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002m.html#4 Handling variable page sizes?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#69 Disk drives as commodities. Was Re: Yamhill
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003d.html#21 PDP10 and RISC
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#5 Alpha performance, why?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#9 Alpha performance, why?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#48 Alpha performance, why?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#12 Page Table - per OS/Process
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003o.html#61 1teraflops cell processor possible?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003o.html#62 1teraflops cell processor possible?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004.html#13 Holee shit! 30 years ago!
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004e.html#16 Paging query - progress
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004n.html#22 Shipwrecks
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004p.html#39 100% CPU is not always bad
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005h.html#15 Exceptions at basic block boundaries
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005j.html#51 Q ALLOC PAGE vs. CP Q ALLOC vs ESAMAP
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005l.html#41 25% Pageds utilization on 3390-09?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005n.html#18 Code density and performance?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005n.html#19 Code density and performance?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005n.html#21 Code density and performance?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005n.html#22 Code density and performance?
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 20:22:33 -0600Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
note that one of the advantages that "big pages" moving cursor had over log structure filesystem ... was that the filesystem data on disk was typically treated as persistant and periodically it had to execute a garbage collection and coalescing process. paging areas were treated as much more ephemeral ... whenever a "big page" had a fault and was brought back into real storage, the disk location was discarded and became available (a nature of paging operation tended to provide the garbage collection and coalescing operation as a side-effect which was an explicit periodic overhead operation in the log-structure paradimg).
for total topic drift ... during our ha/cmp product effort
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#hacmp
there was work started on filesystem for geographic survivability
(replicated at multiple physical sites), one of the consultants
brought in, had done a lot of the work on a unix log structured
filesystem ... cited in one of the following posts mentioning
log structure filesystems:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#28 Log Structured filesystems -- think twice
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#29 Log Structured filesystems -- think twice
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#93 Predictions and reality: the I/O Bottleneck
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#24 Hard disks, one year ago today
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000g.html#38 4M pages are a bad idea (was Re: AMD 64bit Hammer CPU and VM)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001c.html#28 The Foolish Dozen or so in This News Group
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001f.html#59 JFSes: are they really needed?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001f.html#60 JFSes: are they really needed?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001m.html#56 Contiguous file system
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002b.html#20 index searching
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#36 Do any architectures use instruction count instead of timer
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002m.html#4 Handling variable page sizes?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002n.html#9 Asynch I/O
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#69 Disk drives as commodities. Was Re: Yamhill
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#5 Alpha performance, why?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#9 Alpha performance, why?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003k.html#0 VSPC
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004g.html#22 Infiniband - practicalities for small clusters
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005l.html#41 25% Pageds utilization on 3390-09?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005n.html#22 Code density and performance?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005n.html#36 Code density and performance?
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 21:01:50 -0600Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
the replacement strategies and page thrashing from the 60s and early 70s was much more oriented towards having only just the right pages in real memory.
by the late 70s, with the increase in many real storage size configurations ... real storage contention because there was too many concurrent tasks (and resulting page thrashing) was much less of an issue ... the small size of the disk arm spigot resource was becoming so (relatively) limited that any major movement of pages to/from disk could represent paging bottlenecks.
the "big page" strategy could get away fetching as much as 70-80 percent wrong pages ... resulting in equal amount of 70-80 percent of real storage being occupied by the "wrong" pages ... it could still come out a winner, if it could cut in half the number of disk arm uses getting the right pages into real storage.
the correllary is that there were drastistically fewer situations where any judgement about the aggregate, concurrent working set sizes (of active tasks) would force a scheduling reduction in the number of concurrent tasks that were allowed to simultaneously compete for real storage.
past incarnation of this thread:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004i.html#0 Hard disk architecture: are outer cylinders still faster than inner cylinders?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004i.html#1 Hard disk architecture: are outer cylinders still faster than inner cylinders?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004i.html#8 Hard disk architecture: are outer cylinders still faster than inner cylinders?
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers,bit.listserv.vmesa-l Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 08:35:29 -0600jmfbahciv writes:
• one was the initial morph from cp67 to vm370 where they had actual lists of pages for the scanning/reset/replacement selection and "shared" pages were treated specially ... not based on reference bits
• the other was the initial morph from mvt to os/vs2 where they would bias the replacement selection for non-changed pages before changed pages
post including description of the above two scenarios
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#43 virtual memory
i had arguments with both groups over the details and they went ahead and did it anyway (which, in both cases, got corrected much later ... the os/vs2 they had to do the correction themselves, the vm370 shared pages, i was able to correct in the release of the resource manager).
i had also done a paging, non-virtual memory thing originally as an undergraduate in the 60s for cp67 ... but it was never picked up in the product until the morph of cp67 to vm370 where it was used. the issue was the kernel code ran real mode, w/o hardware translate turned on. all its addressing was based on real addresses. when dealing with addresses from virtual address space ... it used the LRA (load real address) instruction that translated from virtual to real.
the issue was that the real kernel size was continuing to grow as more
and more features were being added. this was starting to impact the
number of pages left over for virtual address paging. recent post
in this thread making mention of measure of "pageable pages"
(after fixed kernel requirements):
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#36 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#2 virtual memory
so i created a dummy set of tables for the "kernel" address space
... and partitioned some low-usage kernel routines (various kinds of
commands, etc) into real, 4k "chunks". I positioned all these real
chunks at the high end of the kernel. When there were calls to
addresses above the "pageable" line ... the call processing
... instead of directly transfering would run the address thru the
dummy table to see if the chunk was actually resident. if it was
resident, then the call would be made to the translated address
location ... running w/o virtual memory turned on. if the 4k chunk
was indicated as not resident, the paging routine was called to bring
it into storage before transferring to the "real" address. during the
call, the page fixing and lock ... that CCWTRANS for performing
virtual i/o ... was used for preventing the page for be selected from
removal from real storage. the count was decremented at the
return. otherwise these "pageable" kernel pages could be selected for
replacement just like any other page. some recent mentions of CCWTRANS
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006.html#31 Is VIO mandatory?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006.html#38 Is VIO mandatory?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006b.html#25 Multiple address spaces
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006f.html#5 3380-3390 Conversion - DISAPPOINTMENT
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#33 virtual memory
this feature never shipped as part of the cp67 kernel, but was picked up as part of the initial morph of cp67 to vm370.
Later for the resource manager, i also created a (2nd) small dummy set
of tables for every virtual address space that was used for
administrative writing of tables to disk. tables were collected into
page-aligned 4k real chunks and the page I/O infrastructure was used
for moving the tables to/from disk (in a manner similar to how i had
done the original pageable kernel implementation) previous description
of "paging" SWAPTABLEs.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#24 Virtual memory implementation in S/370
in the initial morph of cp67->vm370, some of cms was reorged to take
advantage of the 370 shared segment protection. however, before 370
virtual memory was announced and shipped, the feature was dropped from
the product line (because the engineers doing the hardwareretrofit of
virtual memory to 370/165 said that shared segment protect and a
couple other features would cause an extra six month delay). a few
past posts mentioning virtual memory retrofit to 370/165:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#4 Mainframe vs. xSeries
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#9 Hadware Support for Protection Bits: what does it really mean?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#23 Virtual memory implementation in S/370
as a result, the shared page protection had to redone as a hack to
utilize the storage protect keys that had been carried over from 360.
this required behind the scenes fiddling of the virtual machine
architecture ... which prevented running cms with the virtual machine
assist microcode activated (hardware directly implemented virtual
machine execution of privilege instructions). later, in order to run
cms virtual machines with the VMA microcode assist, protection was
turned off. instead a scan of all shared pages was substituted that
occurred on every task switch. an application running in virtual
address space could modify shared pages ... but the effect would be
caught and discarded before task switch occurred (so any modification
wouldn't be apparent in other address spaces). this sort of worked
running single processor configurations ... but got much worse in
multi-processor configurations. now you had to have a unique set of
shared pages specific to each real processor. past post mentioning
the changed protection hack for cms
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#9 Hadware Support for Protection Bits: what does it really mean?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#23 Virtual memory implementation in S/370
past posts mention pageable kernel work:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001b.html#23 Linux IA-64 interrupts [was Re: Itanium benchmarks ...]
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001l.html#32 mainframe question
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002b.html#44 PDP-10 Archive migration plan
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002n.html#71 bps loader, was PLX
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#56 cost of crossing kernel/user boundary
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#64 cost of crossing kernel/user boundary
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#12 Alpha performance, why?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#14 Alpha performance, why?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#20 Alpha performance, why?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#23 Alpha performance, why?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#26 Alpha performance, why?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#30 Alpha performance, why?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003n.html#45 hung/zombie users ... long boring, wandering story
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004b.html#26 determining memory size
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004g.html#45 command line switches [Re: [REALLY OT!] Overuse of symbolic constants]
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004o.html#9 Integer types for 128-bit addressing
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005f.html#10 Where should the type information be: in tags and descriptors
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005f.html#16 Where should the type information be: in tags and descriptors
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006.html#35 Charging Time
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006.html#40 All Good Things
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: The Pankian Metaphor Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 12:17:16 -0600jmfbahciv writes:
i went away and a couple months later came back with an implementation that solved all ten impossible things. that was when they started wringing their hands ... and eventually let slip that they actually didn't want us to solve the problems ... they just wanted to be able to tell the board that we were consulting on the problems for the next decade.
the issue was that many of the impossible things were a result of there being a large staff manually performing many of the steps. if all the manual steps were automated, then much of the difficulty went away and things got much simpler. some of this had all been layed down based on the technology of the 60s and never really revisited (technology may have been looked at over the years for some straight-forward, linear scaling but never from the standpoint of enabling fundamental paradigm change).
to some extent, the status of the executive in-charge was related to the size of the organization. if the size of the organization was cut by three orders of magnitude, then the executive's status was also impacted.
various past posts mentioning airline res systems (only some
referring to this particular incident):
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#17 Old Computers
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#100 Why won't the AS/400 die? Or, It's 1999 why do I have to learn how to use
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#103 IBM 9020 computers used by FAA (was Re: EPO stories (was: HELP IT'S HOT!!!!!))
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#136a checks (was S/390 on PowerPC?)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#20 Competitors to SABRE?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#26 Disk caching and file systems. Disk history...people forget
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001d.html#69 Block oriented I/O over IP
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001g.html#45 Did AT&T offer Unix to Digital Equipment in the 70s?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001g.html#49 Did AT&T offer Unix to Digital Equipment in the 70s?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001j.html#17 I hate Compaq
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001n.html#0 TSS/360
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001n.html#3 News IBM loses supercomputer crown
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002g.html#2 Computers in Science Fiction
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002g.html#3 Why are Mainframe Computers really still in use at all?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#12 Why did OSI fail compared with TCP-IP?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#43 IBM doing anything for 50th Anniv?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002i.html#83 HONE
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002j.html#83 Summary: Robots of Doom
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002m.html#67 Tweaking old computers?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#48 InfiniBand Group Sharply, Evenly Divided
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003c.html#30 difference between itanium and alpha
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003d.html#67 unix
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003k.html#3 Ping: Anne & Lynn Wheeler
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003n.html#47 What makes a mainframe a mainframe?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004b.html#6 Mainframe not a good architecture for interactive workloads
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004e.html#44 Infiniband - practicalities for small clusters
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004f.html#58 Infiniband - practicalities for small clusters
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004g.html#14 Infiniband - practicalities for small clusters
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004l.html#6 Xah Lee's Unixism
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004o.html#23 Demo: Things in Hierarchies (w/o RM/SQL)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004o.html#29 Integer types for 128-bit addressing
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004p.html#26 IBM 3614 and 3624 ATM's
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004q.html#85 The TransRelational Model: Performance Concerns
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005.html#22 The Soul of Barb's New Machine (was Re: creat)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005.html#41 something like a CTC on a PC
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005c.html#67 intel's Vanderpool and virtualization in general
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005e.html#47 Using the Cache to Change the Width of Memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005f.html#22 System/360; Hardwired vs. Microcoded
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005n.html#44 What was new&important in computer architecture 10 years ago ?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005o.html#44 Intel engineer discusses their dual-core design
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005q.html#7 HASP/ASP JES/JES2/JES3
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006d.html#5 IBM 610 workstation computer
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 13:04:45 -0600Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
the disk technology was referred to count-key-data ... it was possible to format disk space with specified record sizes and tag each record with various flags and attributes (not the fixed record size and sequential numbered records that you find in much of today's much more familiar disk technology). os/360 made a decision about conserving real storage requirements by leaving the disk layout information resident on disk. the "VTOC" (volume table of contents, somewhat akin to a MFD/master file directory) had the individual records labled. When there was a request to open some file, an I/O request was built by the system to "search" the VTOC for the required information.
a similar design trade-off was created for file libraries that had a special file format called PDS (partitioned data set) that included a on-disk directory of all the members in the file. when there was a request to retrieve a specific library member, there was an I/O request built by the system to do ("multi-track") search of the PDS directory for the required information.
these two design trade-offs required exorbitant amounts of disk I/O resources ... however, the savings in scarce real memory resource was deemed to be a reasonable trade-off.
roll-forward to mid-70s ... when the amounts of available real memory was starting to dramatically increase ... and the improvement in disk throughput was dramatically falling behind the thruput improvement of other system components. as a result, major system bottleneck was shifting from real storage to disk activity.
a widely deployed disk drive was the 3330 (a lots of other vendors produced clones of the 3330 that made their way into a variety of systems). it had 20 surfaces and 20 heads per (cylinder) arm position ... only 19 of the heads were addressable (the 20th head was used for something called rotational position sensing). the device spun at 3600 rpm ... or 60 revolutions per second. a multi-track search of a multi-cylinder PDS directory took approx. 1/3 of a second elapsed time ... per cylinder (arm position). The avg. elapsed time to find a member in a large program library could take 1/2 second or more elapsed time.
in the late 70s, a very large national retailer was starting to experience severe performance degradation of its in-store, online applications. the retailer had its stores organizied into regions ... and the datacenter had dedicated processor complex per region. however, all the processor complexes had shared access to a large common pool of disks. there was a single large application library for the online, in-store operations that was shared across all the dedicated regional processor complexes.
over period of several months, numerous people had been brought in attempting to diagnose the problem. finally i was brought into a class room that was had a dozen or so long class tables. all the tables were nearly covered with high stacks of paper performance reports from all the operating systems.
people were expected to scan the performance reports looking for resource activity that corresponded with periods of extremely poor performance. the problem was that most people were accustomed to looking at extremely high activity counts as an indication of bottlenecked resources. all the periodic disk i/o counts failed to indicated any specific disk in the large pool (disk drives in the large score of drives) with high i/o count activity.
one problem was that the performance reports gave interval i/o activity counts by disk for specific processor complex. to get the total i/o activity for a disk ... you had to manually sum the i/o count activity per processor complex across all the processor complexes. the other problem was that there was no actual service time numbers or queuing delay numbers ... just raw activity counts.
I started quickly scanning the piles of paper and after maybe 20-30 minutes started to realize that a specific disk drive had an aggregate activity count consistently of approx. 6-7 operations per second during the periods of bad performance and thruput. it wasn't normally considered a high i/o rate ... but it started to appear to be the only value that consistently correlated with periods of poor performance. all the other values reported in the reams of paper performance data appeared to pretty much randomly varying all over the place.
zero'ing in on that particular disk ... closer examination showed that it was typically doing a full-cylinder multi-track search of the PDS directory (to find a library member to load) taking nearly 1/3rd second elapsed time ... followed by reading the library memory (taking a couple tens of millisecond). basically the whole national datacenter complex was reduced to loading an aggregate of three application library programs per second.
all the system configuration easily had sufficient real memory for caching the PDS directory of library members ... and the in-store application load would be reduced to possibly 10-15milliseconds rather than 340milliseconds. however, the system implementation structure had been cast in concret from the mid-60s ... so they had to find other compensating procedures to speed up in-store application load.
furthermore, within a few years, typical system configurations would not only be able to cache the directory of members but also all the members themselves.
misc. past posts about the 60s ckd-disk/storage performance trade-off
and its lingering effects long after it was no longer valid
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#dasd
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: ALternatives to EMail Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 13:24:44 -0600"Sam Alexander" writes:
the proliferation of the internet pretty much turned the VANs of the 70s and 80s into dinosaurs.
however, there are issues with social engineering and hostile intent when there is relatively free any-to-any connectivity across the whole world.
note that the internal network
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#internalnet
was larger than the internet
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/internet.htm
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#internet
from just about the beginning until sometime mid-85.
there was also bitnet and earn which was larger than "internet" (more
nodes) during a period in the early 80s. note that while bitnet/earn
used similar technology to that used in the internal network ... they
were considered totally separate networks (the count of nodes in the
two networks were total different).
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#bitnet
the internal network also evolved its own information distribution ala usenet ... a portion of that appeared in bitnet/earn as "listserv" and somewhat exists today in the usenet bit.listserv.* group hierarchy.
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Value of an old IBM PS/2 CL57 SX Laptop Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 13:53:23 -0600greymaus writes:
3 of the big 4 - all doing payment systems
https://www.financialcryptography.com/mt/archives/000715.html
and various comments along the way:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm23.htm#35 3 of the big 4 - all doing payment systems
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm23.htm#36 3 of the big 4 - all doing payment systems
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm23.htm#37 3 of the big 4 - all doing payment systems
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: The Chant of the Trolloc Hordes Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 14:04:19 -0600scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
work in ha/cmp
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#hacmp
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: The Pankian Metaphor Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 06:44:49 -0600Charles Shannon Hendrix writes:
however, "no-duplicate" gives up that saved position ... which can optimize use of available space ... especially in hierarchy of cache/swap ... references to mix of fixed-head & non-fixed-head paging devices (2305/3330) or caching controllers (3880-11/ironwood) mentioned in above.
however, the aspect of saving a page write can be taken to the extreme
... as in this post that includes description of original os/vs2
implementation to specifically bias replacement strategy for
non-changed pages (and saving page write)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#43 virtual memory
note, "big pages" went to writing everything ... not for conserving
space allocation ... but to have pages likely to be used together to
be contiguously located on disk ... so later retrieval could be made
in single i/o operation. this happened with realization that primary
system bottleneck shifting away from being real storage constrained to
disk arm access constrained ... and it was possible to trade-off
optimization of real storage utilization against disk arm access
optimization.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#2 virtual memory
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: History of first use of all-computerized typesetting? Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 07:37:29 -0600Charles Shannon Hendrix writes:
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 07:44:19 -0600robert.thorpe writes:
i wasn't prepared to particularly write a lot about stuff about work that other people had done. it wasn't that i was particularly trying to bias against work that other people had done ... but i wasn't as qualified to write about other peoples' work as i was able to write about the work that i had done.
i was mostly including bylines about other people's work as an indication that i wasn't the only person that had done work in the area.
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 08:36:03 -0600Jan Vorbrüggen writes:
working set size was mechanism for limiting over commit of real storage and resulting page thrashing ... pathelogical case was that you needed a page that wasn't in real storage, had a page fault, waiting for the page was brought in and by the time that page was ready ... other pages that you required had been stolen; worst case was no progress got made (since all tasks were constantly stealing pages from each other).
working set size was mechanism for managing/limiting concurrent competition for available real storage.
global LRU replacement was mechanism for making sure that the optimal set of all pages were resident and ready for use in real storage.
as real storage got more plentiful ... starting by at least the later part of the 70s ... there were other techniques used to manage amount of paging. one strategy that had been developed in the late 70s ... was tracking per task pagewait time (i.e. bottleneck had shifted from constrained real storage to constrained disk i/o ... from the 60s there was inter-relationship between constrained real storage and the amount of paging involving disk i/o, however, moving into the late 70s ... requests could start queueing against disk, even with relatively little real storage contention).
part of the issue was the characteristic somewhat written up as "strong" and "weak" working sets ... i.e. the set of actual pages required were strongly consistent over a period ... versus somewhat changing. the set "size" over time could be the same in both ... but once "strong" working set had been established, the task would run with no additional paging operation. in weak working set, once the initial set had been established ... there would continue to be paging over time (the size of the set didn't change, but the members of the set changed over time).
to try and handle this situation ... there were implementations that modified global LRU replacement strategy based on task progress (or its inverse, amount of pagewait); a task making little progress (higher pagewait) ... would have some percentage of its pages selected by global LRU ... skipped i.e. global LRU would select pages from the task, but because the task was making less progress than its target, some percentage of its selected pages would be retained ... global LRU would then skip past the selected page and search for another. the percentage of pages initially selected by global LRU replacement strategy ... but then skipped ... would be related to how much progress the task was making vis-a-vis the objective. this tended to lower the pagewait time for tasks that had somewhat weak working sets that were getting behind schedule.
the issue here was that available real storage tended to be much larger than the aggregate of the concurrent working set sizes ... so use of aggregate working set size to limit the number of contending tasks as mechanism for limiting paging was ineffective. global LRU still provided that the optimal set of global pages were resident. however, tasks with strong working sets might have advantage over tasks with weaker working sets. as a result, a mechanism was provided to reduce the rate of pages stolen for those tasks (typically from tasks with weaker working sets) that were getting behind schedule in their targeted resource consumption (because of time spent in pagewait).
for the other scenario ... for tasks with extremely weak working set ... and even all avaiable real storage provided them little or no additional benefit ... there was a strategy for "self-stealing" ... aka a form of local LRU ... but that was only for limiting the effects of extremely pathelogical behavior ... it wasn't used for task operating with normal operational characteristics.
something similar was found in the detailed analysis of disk record
caching designs.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#41 virtual memory
given detailed tracing of all disk record access across a wide range of different live operational environments ... for a given fixed amount of total electronic memory ... and all other things being equal ... using the memory for a single global system cache provided better thruput than dividing/partitioning the memory into sub-components.
this was the case of instead of using all the fixed amount of electronic memory for a single global system cache, the available fixed amount of electronic memory would be divided up and used in either controller-level caches (as in the reference to 3880-11 and 3880-13 controller caches) and/or disk-level caches.
there were two caveats; some amount of electronic store was useful at the disk head level for staging full track of data as rotational delay mitigation and you needed strategy to minimize caching of purely sequential i/o ... where caching provided no benefit; i.e. for sequential i/o ... it basically violated basic assumption behind least recently used replacement strategies ... that records/pages used recently would be used in the near future. for that behavior, a "most recently used" replacement strategy would be more ideal ... which can also be expressed as "self-stealing" ... new request replaces previous request by same task (trying to avoid a purely sequential i/o transfer from wiping out all other existing cache entries).
and in its analogy back to paging as a form of cache and its relationship to least recently used replacement strategy ... past a certain point, extremely weak working sets ... can appear to be very little different from sequential transfer.
posts in this thread:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#22 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#23 Virtual memory implementation in S/370
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#24 Virtual memory implementation in S/370
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#28 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#30 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#31 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#32 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#33 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#36 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#37 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#38 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#39 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#40 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#41 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#42 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#43 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#0 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#1 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#2 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#3 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#4 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#5 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#12 virtual memory
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: 30 hop limit Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 09:46:13 -0600"Albert Manfredi" writes:
we were looking at doing high availability configuration,
in part because we had earlier done the ha/cmp product
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#hacmp
for some trivia drift ... some of the people in this ha/cmp meeting
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/95.html#13
later showed up at a small client/server startup responsible for turning out a payment gateway. this small client/server startup also had this technology called SSL.
in any case during the process of initial deployment ... we were looking at advertising routes for ip-addresses as countermeasure to various kinds of route outages. however, in that period, the internet backbone decided to move to hierachical routing. we had assumed that we could get diverse physical routing to some number of different, carefully selected ISPs. If any of the ISPs were having connectivity problems (like taking down critical components on sunday afternoon prime-time for maintenance) we could advertise routes via other paths.
the transition to hierarchical routing eliminated attention being paid to alternate advertise routes. that primarily left multiple a-records as an alternate path mechanism (i.e. same domain/host name mapping to a list of different ip-addresses).
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Resolver Issue (was Revolver Issue) Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 11:29:52 -0600eric-phmining@ibm-main.lst (Eric N. Bielefeld) writes:
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 14:50:28 -0600"Eric P." writes:
i ran into something like that in the very late 70s. neither tss/360 (which had been implemented before i had done any work on cp67) nor mvs gracefully reclaimed pages that had been selected as having moved out of working set.
the flavor of global LRU and trashing controls that i had done for cp67 as an undergraduate in the 60s ... had very graceful reclaim of any virtual page still in real storage.
i had argument with the initial os/vs2 implementation over 1)
selecting non-changed pages before changed pages as abnormally
peverything the fundamental principles of least recently used
replacement strategy ... previous discussion of the subject
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#43 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#5 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#11 The Pankian Metaphor
and 2) "graceful reclaim" (i.e. recover virtual page if it was still resident in real storage).
Well into the os/vs2 mvs release cycles in the late 70s ... they discovered that #1 was selecting high-used, shared (across multiple address spaces) executables before low-used, private (changed) data pages.
In the very late 70s, I had gotten a call from somebody in POK, they had just gotten a big corporate award for adding graceful reclaim to mvs and was wondering if he could do something similar for vm370.
I commented that I had never not done it that way since as undergraduate more than a decade earlier in the 60s .... and never could figure out why anybody would have ever not done graceful reclaim; aka no, he was not able to get another big corporate award for doing something similar to vm370 ... and furthermore, from my standpoint there should have never been a large corporate award for adding graceful ... instead the people that had done the original implementation, that didn't include graceful reclaim, should have been severely penalized.
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 15:05:41 -0600David Scheidt writes:
we did significant simulation with full instruction traces
some of it was part of the vs/repack technology previously
referenced
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#37 virtual memory
where in detailed simulation with full instruction traces of i-refs, d-refs, and d-stores ... compared lots of global and local lru approximations as well as "true" lru ... where exact ordering of page references were maintained.
the clock approach to lru approximation (that i had come up with as an
undergraduate in the 60s) ... which is also described in Carr's phd
thesis previously mentioned (and can be found online) misc. recent
past posts mentioning Carr's thesis
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#37 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#38 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#42 virtual memory
R. Carr, Virtual Memory Management, Stanford University,
STAN-CS-81-873 (1981)
R. Carr and J. Hennessy, WSClock, A Simple and Effective Algorithm
for Virtual Memory Management, ACM SIGOPS, v15n5, 1981
.... typically operated within 10-15percent of "true" lru with
extremely nominal overhead (based on the detailed simulation). their
was no list manipulation at all, just the cyclic examination ... which
was approx. six instructions per page examined and not taken ... and
the avg. depth of search typically avg. six pages before finding a
page to select (i.e. on the order of 36 instructions to find and
select a page for replacement).
during this period with the work on extensive full instruction traces
and analysis of wide variety of replacement strategies ... both real
implementation in live deployment and the extensive simulation and
modeling work ... I discovered a coding hack that allowed a kind of
clock operation to actual beat "true" LRU ... the instructions and
pathlength was identical to regular clock ... but there was a coding
slight of hand the resulted in being able to beat "true" LRU (based on
the detailed simulation work). post in this thread mentioning the
detailed simulation work, comparing the LRU approximations with "true"
LRU ... and coming up with the slight-of-hand clock that would beat
"true" LRU
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#42 virtual memory
posts in this thread:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#22 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#23 Virtual memory implementation in S/370
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#24 Virtual memory implementation in S/370
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#28 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#30 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#31 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#32 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#33 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#36 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#37 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#38 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#39 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#40 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#41 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#42 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#43 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#0 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#1 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#2 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#3 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#4 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#5 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#12 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#13 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#14 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#17 virtual memory
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 15:22:40 -0600Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
oops, that was six instructions on the 360/67. the changed & reference bits were maintained in the storage keys ... which were for 2k blocks of storage ... and paging was done on 4k blocks. the result was that cp67 had to check two sets of changes&reference bits to get the result for a single 4k page. the bits had to be retrieved and then stored back with value reset. also since cp67 was not only providing virtual memory paging management but also providing virtual machine simulation ... whatever the real hardware changed&reference bits were before the reset, had to be copied/shadowed to the virtual machine values.
this was slightly reduced in the move from 360/67 to 370 ... since the 370 provided a single instruction that would retrieve, interrogate and reset the reference bit in a single instruction (although for correct virtual machine emulation, there still requirement to shadow the reference bit value, prior to reset, for the virtual machine).
some recent posts mentioning various shadowing requirements for correct
virtual machine:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006c.html#36 Secure web page?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#0 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#6 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#7 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#12 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#19 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#20 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#37 The Pankian Metaphor
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006f.html#5 3380-3390 Conversion - DISAPPOINTMENT
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#10 Hadware Support for Protection Bits: what does it really mean?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#24 Virtual memory implementation in S/370
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 15:47:43 -0600David Scheidt writes:
in that situation, where the database cache entries have little or no correspondence to any familiar hardware support for change/reference bits ... then you might find a link-list of database cache entries. the database manager can emulate least recently used of database cache entries by updating a cache line link list whenever a transaction requests a location of a database record (and it is found in the cache) and the cache location is returned (i.e. remove the found cache line from its current location in the linked list and move it to the front of the list).
for some topic drift ... misc. posts mentioning working on
original relational/sql implementation
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#systemr
and in the previous incarnation of this subject
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004i.html#0 Hard disk architecture: are outer cylinders still faster than inner cylinders?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004i.html#1 Hard disk architecture: are outer cylinders still faster than inner cylinders?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004i.html#8 Hard disk architecture: are outer cylinders still faster than inner cylinders?
it strayed into doing cross-cache transfers in conjunction with
the work on distributed lock manager for ha/cmp
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#hacmp
and a little more drift here
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/95.html#13
misc. other past posts mentioning distribute lock manager work
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#64 distributed locking patents
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#40 Disk drive behavior
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001c.html#66 KI-10 vs. IBM at Rutgers
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001e.html#2 Block oriented I/O over IP
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001e.html#4 Block oriented I/O over IP
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001j.html#47 OT - Internet Explorer V6.0
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001k.html#5 OT - Internet Explorer V6.0
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002e.html#67 Blade architectures
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002e.html#71 Blade architectures
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002f.html#1 Blade architectures
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002f.html#4 Blade architectures
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002f.html#6 Blade architectures
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002k.html#8 Avoiding JCL Space Abends
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003i.html#70 A few Z990 Gee-Wiz stats
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004i.html#1 Hard disk architecture: are outer cylinders still faster than inner cylinders?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004i.html#2 New Method for Authenticated Public Key Exchange without Digital Certificates
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004i.html#8 Hard disk architecture: are outer cylinders still faster than inner cylinders?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#0 Specifying all biz rules in relational data
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#5 Tera
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004q.html#10 [Lit.] Buffer overruns
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004q.html#70 CAS and LL/SC
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004q.html#71 will there every be another commerically signficant new ISA?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005.html#40 clusters vs shared-memory (was: Re: CAS and LL/SC (was Re: High Level Assembler for MVS & VM & VSE))
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005.html#55 Foreign key in Oracle Sql
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005b.html#1 Foreign key in Oracle Sql
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005f.html#18 Is Supercomputing Possible?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005f.html#32 the relational model of data objects *and* program objects
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005h.html#26 Crash detection by OS
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005i.html#42 Development as Configuration
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006c.html#8 IBM 610 workstation computer
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006c.html#41 IBM 610 workstation computer
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 17:26:09 -0600Brian Inglis writes:
Lincoln Labs had defined the search list instruction (SLT) which was available on many 360/67 models. Lincoln did a modification of the CP67 kernel to use the SLT instruction for running the free storage blocks. it still required a couple storage references per block ... even if the instruction looping overhead had been minimized (even with the SLT instruction, scanning several hundred blocks still took 3-4 storage references per block or a couple thousand storage references per call).
when i was an undergraduate ... in addition to the virtual memory
stuff
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#wsclock
and dynamic adaptive scheduling
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#fairshare
I had also done a lot of other work on the kernel ... including some significant pathlength reductions. as other kernel pathlengths were significantly improved, the storage allocation routine was becoming a significant fraction of total kernel pathlength ... approaching half of kernel overhead
in the early 70s, there was a lot of work on cp67 subpool strategy. this eventually resulted in an implementation that defined a set of subpools that handled something like 95percent of typical storage requests and satisfied a typical request in something like 14 instructions (half of which were creating trace table entry for each call). this implementation got cp67 internal kernel storage management overhead back down under ten percent.
reference to paper on the work:
B. Margolin, et al, Analysis of Free-Storage Algorithms, IBM System
Journal 10, pgs 283-304, 1971
this subpool design was carried over into vm370. in the mid-70s, when
I was working on the ECPS microcode performance assist for the 138/148
there was extensive kernel pathlength investigation. the following
shows a summary of major internal kernel pathlength sorted by percent
of total ... that was used for selecting portions of the vm370 kernel
to drop into microcode
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#21 370 ECPS VM microcode assist
there was 6k bytes of microcode space available ... and 370 instructions translated into microcode at approximately 1:1 bytes ... so 6k bytes of 370 instructions translated into approx. 6k bytes of microcode ... but ran ten times faster. The top 6k bytes of kernel pathlength instructions represented nearly 80percent of kernel execution ... dropping it into microcode got a 10:1 performance improvement.
in any case, from the above, the typical call to return a block of storage ("FRET") represented 3.77percent of total kernel overhead and typical call to obtain a block of storage ("FREE") represented 3.47percent of total kernel overhead.
misc. past posts mentioning the cp67 subpool work
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#26 MTS & LLMPS?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#19 S/360 operating systems geneaology
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#47 Charging for time-share CPU time
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002.html#14 index searching
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#87 Atomic operations redux
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004g.html#57 Adventure game (was:PL/? History (was Hercules))
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004h.html#0 Adventure game (was:PL/? History (was Hercules))
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#22 Lock-free algorithms
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#40 transputers again was: The demise of Commodore
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 19:09:05 -0600Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
besides the numerous different variations on LRU approximations, "true" LRU implemented in simulators ... there was also belady's "OPT" ... basically with a full trace of all storage accesses ... OPT chose the page to replace that resulted in the fewest future page faults (of course ... you were no longer working on past history ... like LRU or LRU approximation ... you needed a full prediction of the future ... which you could simulate given a complete trace of all storage access to replay).
a few recent posts mentioning other of belady's references
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#37 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#38 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#42 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#17 virtual memory
here is a spring 2005 class assignment
http://www.cs.georgetown.edu/~clay/classes/spring2005/os/paging.html
requiring implementation & comparison of:
• FIFO: First In, First Out
• GC: Global Clock
• LFU: Least Frequently Used
• LRU: Least Recently Used
• MFU: Most Frequently Used
• OPT: Belady's Optimal Algorithm
• RAND: Random
.....
for some drift:
R. L. Mattson, J. Gecsei, D. R. Slutz, and I. L. Traiger. Evaluation
techniques for storage hierarchies. IBM Systems Journal, 9(2):78-117,
1970.
with respect to the cache investigation using simulator that
had full trace of all record accesses for production systems ...
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#41 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#14 virtual memory
I had implemented much of the data collection stuff in 1979 and Mattson had done most of the simulator implementation.
One of the other outcomes of Mattson 1979 simulation work was that he developed a process that could analyse the record access activity in real-time ... looking at being able to do run it as part of normal production operation and do real-time optimal disk data reorganization.
a more recent paper referencing Mattson's 1970 work.
http://csdl2.computer.org/persagen/DLAbsToc.jsp?resourcePath=/dl/trans/tc/&toc=comp/trans/tc/1998/06/t6toc.xml&DOI=10.1109/12.689650
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 07:51:45 -0600jmfbahciv writes:
the technology for the internal network was developed at
the science center. the internal network was larger than
the arpanet/internet from just about the beginning until
possibly mid-85.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#internalnet
the technology used in the internal network was also used
in bitnet & earn
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#bitnet
gml (precursor to sgml, html, xml, etc) was invented at
the science center
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#sgml
the invention of the compare&swap instruction was invented
by charlie at the science center (CAS comes from charlie's
initials and then had to come up with an instruction name
that matched charlie's initials)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#smp
a lot of the work on performance monitoring and workload
profiling leading up to capacity planning was also done
at the science center
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#bench
while the original relational stuff wasn't done at the science center
... i did get to work on some of it after i transferred from the
science center out to research on the west coast. however, all of the
original relational/sql stuff was developed on vm370 ... which was on
outgrowth of the virtual machine cp67 stuff that had originated at the
science center
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#systemr
note that while the virtual machine and interactive install base was considered relatively small compared to the big batch customer base ... there was some numbers that in the early 80s, the 4341 vm370 install base was approximately the same size as the vax install base (even tho the 4341 vm370 install base was considered almost trivially small compared to the company's batch install base).
some old vax install numbers:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002f.html#0 Computers in Science Fiction
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002f.html#5 Blade architectures
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005f.html#37 Where should the type information be: in tags and descriptors
some old 4341 and/or vax postings
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#76 Is a VAX a mainframe?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#83 Is a VAX a mainframe?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#0 Is a VAX a mainframe?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#7 4341 was "Is a VAX a mainframe?"
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#9 4341 was "Is a VAX a mainframe?"
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#10 4341 was "Is a VAX a mainframe?"
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#11 4341 was "Is a VAX a mainframe?"
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#12 4341 was "Is a VAX a mainframe?"
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#13 4341 was "Is a VAX a mainframe?"
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001m.html#15 departmental servers
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#52 Bettman Archive in Trouble
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002i.html#30 CDC6600 - just how powerful a machine was it?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002k.html#1 misc. old benchmarks (4331 & 11/750)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002k.html#3 misc. old benchmarks (4331 & 11/750)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#14 vax6k.openecs.org rebirth
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#15 vax6k.openecs.org rebirth
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003c.html#17 difference between itanium and alpha
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003c.html#19 difference between itanium and alpha
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003d.html#0 big buys was: Tubes in IBM 1620?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003d.html#33 Why only 24 bits on S/360?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003d.html#61 Another light on the map going out
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003d.html#64 IBM was: VAX again: unix
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003e.html#56 Reviving Multics
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#48 Alpha performance, why?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#22 303x, idals, dat, disk head settle, and other rambling folklore
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003i.html#5 Name for this early transistor package?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003p.html#38 Mainframe Emulation Solutions
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004.html#46 DE-skilling was Re: ServerPak Install via QuickLoad Product
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004f.html#39 Who said "The Mainframe is dead"?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004g.html#24 |d|i|g|i|t|a|l| questions
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004j.html#57 Monster(ous) sig (was Re: Vintage computers are better
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004l.html#10 Complex Instructions
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#59 RISCs too close to hardware?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#63 RISCs too close to hardware?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004q.html#71 will there every be another commerically signficant new ISA?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005f.html#30 Where should the type information be: in tags and descriptors
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005f.html#58 Where should the type information be: in tags and descriptors
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005f.html#59 Where should the type information be: in tags and descriptors
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005m.html#8 IBM's mini computers--lack thereof
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005m.html#12 IBM's mini computers--lack thereof
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005m.html#25 IBM's mini computers--lack thereof
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005n.html#10 Code density and performance?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005n.html#11 Code density and performance?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005n.html#12 Code density and performance?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005n.html#16 Code density and performance?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005n.html#47 Anyone know whether VM/370 EDGAR is still available anywhere?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005p.html#1 Intel engineer discusses their dual-core design
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005p.html#19 address space
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005q.html#27 What ever happened to Tandem and NonStop OS ?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005s.html#36 Filemode 7-9?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005s.html#39 Filemode 7-9?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006.html#47 "VAX" Tradename reused !
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006b.html#34 Multiple address spaces
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 08:58:02 -0600Brian Inglis writes:
had ported apl\360 to cms\apl. apl\360 had basicly its own subsystem monitor, terminal handler, swapper, storage manager etc ... running "real memory" under os/360. typical apl\360 workspaces were 16kbytes to 32kbytes.
in the move to cms\apl ... got rid of the subsystem monitor, terminal handler, swapper, etc ... as part of the apl implementation (allowing it to rely on the underlying infrastructure provided by cp67).
one of the things that the move to cms\apl environment was transition from 16kbyte ("real") workspaces to possibly multi-megabyte virtual memory workspaces. this created a big problem for the apl storage manager. it basically started with all unused space as available, then on ever assignment, it allocated the next available unused space (discarding any old location containing a value). when it had exhausted unused space, it did garbage collection, compacting all "used" storage ... and creating a large contiguous area of unused space ... and then started all over again.
in a small, swapped, real-storage implementation, the side-effects of this strategy wasn't particularly bad. however, with very large virtual memory workspaces ... this strategy quickly touched all available virtual pages, then garbage collect/compact, and started all over.
the early vs/repack technology:
D. Hatfield & J. Gerald, Program Restructuring for Virtual Memory,
IBM Systems Journal, v10n3, 1971
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#37 virtual memory
was used to analyze this behavior and perfect a modified garbage collection implementation that was significantly more virtual memory friendly.
misc. past posts mentioning apl &/or hone
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#hone
hone started out was a joint project with the science center and the marketing division to provide online, interactive support for all the sales, marketing, and field people ... initially with cp67 and later moved to vm370 base. a majority of the applications for the sales and marketing people were implemented in apl.
in the mid-70s, the various hone us datacenters were consolidated in northern cal. by the late 70s, the size of the defined US hone users was approaching 40k. in addition there were numerous clones of the US hone datacenter at various locations around the world. in the very early 80s, the high-available, fall-over hone implementation in northern cal. was replicated first with a new datacenter in dallas and then a 3rd datacenter in boulder (providing load balancing and fall-over across the datacenters in case of a natural disaster in cal.).
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 14:00:54 -0600"Eric P." writes:
however, if you are just doing straight page replacement selection, somewhat synchronized with the page fault ... then the latency for servicing a page fault when a changed page has been selected is possibly twice the elapsed time of servicing a page fault when a non-changed page has been selected (since replacing a page that has been changed first requires writing the current contents out before the replaced contents can be read in).
to cut down on this latency, you run the selecting of pages for replacement slightly out of sync and ahead of servicing a page fault. you have a small (fifo) pool of pages selected for replacement. a page fault results in selecting a replacement page from the pool ... probably dropping the pool below threshold, which then requires invoking the replacement algorithm to replenish the pool. changed pages that are selected for replacement are written out as they are added to the replacement pool. by the time, a page fault requires the page, any changed page has completed its write and the real storage location is immediately available to bring in the replacement page ... cutting down on the latency to service a page fault.
you might also check carr's global clock thesis ... i was able to find it online.
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 07:43:20 -0600robert.thorpe writes:
misc. past posts pulling 48hr shift before monday classes.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001b.html#26 HELP
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001f.html#63 First Workstation
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002k.html#63 OT (sort-of) - Does it take math skills to do data processing ?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002o.html#1 Home mainframes
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002o.html#2 Home mainframes
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#38 20th anniversary of the internet (fwd)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003c.html#51 HASP assembly: What the heck is an MVT ABEND 422?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003c.html#57 Easiest possible PASV experiment
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004c.html#19 IT jobs move to India
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004e.html#45 going w/o sleep
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers,bit.listserv.vmesa-l Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 08:39:16 -0600Brian Inglis writes:
there is a reference to Birnbaum starting in early '75 on 801 project
(including split caches), i.e. 801 turned into romp, rios, power,
power/pc, etc. misc. past posts mentioning 801
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#801
and old discussion about SIE (virtual machine assist) from long
ago and far away (couple weeks short of 25years ago):
Date: 6/30/81 15:33:04
To: wheeler
I would like to add a bit more to the discussion of SIE. I seem to
have hit a sensitive area with my original comments. I would have
preferred to contain this to an offline discussion, but I feel that
some of the things that have appeared in the memos require a reply.
First, let me say that all of the comments I have made have been
accurate to the best of my knowledge. The performance data I quoted
came directly from a presentation I attended given by the VM/811
group. The purpose of the presentation was to justify extensions to
the SIE architecture. Since I my last writing, I have been told by
XXXXX that the numbers quoted were for MVS running under VMTOOL on the
3081. XXXXXX mentioned that VMTOOL has some significant software
problems which are partially responsible for the poor performance.
Presumably, VM/811 would not have these problems. This was not
pointed out at the meeting.
For many years the software and hardware groups have misunderstood
each other. Engineers who knew nothing about software could not
understand why it was necessary to make their hardware do certain
things. Likewise, programmers who knew nothing about software could
not understand why the engineers could not make the hardware do the
things they wanted. Traditionally, microcode has been done by
engineers because a thorough understanding of the hardware is
necessary in order to write microcode. In recent years, this has
become a problem as more complex software functions have been placed
into microcode. In my department, we have tried to remedy this
problem by hiring people with programming experience as
microprogrammers.
The statement that millions of dollars have been spent writing
microcode in order to avoid putting a few ten cent latches into the
hardware is completely false. The truth is that changes have often
been made to the microcode to AVOID SPENDING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS by
putting a change in hardware. In the world of LSI and VLSI, there
is no longer such a thing as a "ten cent latch." Once a chip has
been designed, it is very expensive to make even the smallest
change to it.
Microcode offers a high degree of flexibility in an environment that
is subject to change, especially if one has a writable control store.
When a change is necessary, it can often be had for "free" by making a
change to the microcode and sending out a new floppy disk, whereas it
might cost millions of dollars to make an equivalent change to the
hardware. While the performance of the microcode may not be as good
as the hardware implementation, the overall cost/performance has
dictated that it is the method of choice.
As I pointed out in a previous writing, what works well or does not
work well on one machine says absolutely nothing about the performance
of that item on another machine. XXXXX seems to have completely
missed this critical point, since he expects a 158-like performance
boost from SIE on machines which are nothing like the 158 in their
design.
SIE is a poor performer on the 3081 for several reasons. One reason
is that the 3081 pages its microcode. Each time it is necessary to
enter or exit SIE, a large piece of microcode must be paged in to
carry out this function. This is rather costly in terms of
performance. A performance gain could be realized if the number of
exit/entry trips could be reduced. One way of doing this would be to
emulate more instructions on the assumption that it takes less to
emulate them than it does to exit and re-enter emulation mode. This
thinking is completely valid for the 3081, but is not necessarily
relevent when it comes to other machines, such as TROUT.
TROUT does not page its microcode, and therefore the cost of exiting
and re-entering emulation mode is less. The thinking behind the
changes to the SIE architecture should be re-examined when it comes to
TROUT because the data upon which the changes were based is not
necessarily valid. This is why I have asked that the extensions to
SIE be made optional. This would allow machines that do have
performance problems to implement the extensions, while machines that
do not have problems could leave them out and use their control store
for more valuable functions.
The extensions that are being proposed are not at all trivial. It may
seem like a simple matter to emulate an I/O instruction, but such is
not the case. To appreciate what is involved, one must have a
detailed understanding of just how the CPU, SCE and Channels work.
Other machines do indeed have an easier time when it comes to
implementing some of these assists. That is because they are rather
simple machines internally, not because their designers had more
foresight when they designed the machines. The cycle time of TROUT is
only slightly faster than the 3081, yet TROUT is much faster in terms
of MIPS. This performance comes from the highly overlapped design of
the processor. This makes for a much more complex design. Sometimes
you pay dearly for this, like when it comes to putting in complex
microcode functions.
TROUT has never treated SIE as "just another assist." SIE has been a
basic part of our machine's design since the beginning. In fact, we
have chosen to put many functions into hardware instead of microcode
to pick up significant performance gains. For example, the 3081 takes
a significant amount of time to do certain types of guest-to-host
address translation because it does them in microcode, while TROUT
does them completely in hardware.
... snip ... top of post, old email index
nomenclature in the above with "guest" refers to an operating system running in a virtual machine.
...
with regard to the above comment about virtual machines and I/O instruction ... part of the issue is translating the I/O channel program and fixing the related virtual pages in real memory .. since the real channels run using real addresses from the channel programs. the channel programs from the virtual address space have all been created using the addresses of the virtual address space. this wasn't just an issue for virtual machine emulation ... but OS/VS2 also has the issue with channel programs created by applications running in virtual address space.
...
3090 responded to Amdahl's hypervisor support with PR/SM, misc. past
posts mentioning PR/SM (and LPARs)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#76 Is a VAX a mainframe?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002o.html#15 Home mainframes
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002o.html#18 Everything you wanted to know about z900 from IBM
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#44 Linux paging
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#46 Linux paging
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#48 Linux paging
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#56 Wild hardware idea
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003n.html#13 CPUs with microcode ?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003o.html#52 Virtual Machine Concept
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004c.html#4 OS Partitioning and security
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004c.html#5 PSW Sampling
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#41 EAL5
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#49 EAL5
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004n.html#10 RISCs too close to hardware?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004o.html#13 Integer types for 128-bit addressing
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004p.html#37 IBM 3614 and 3624 ATM's
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004q.html#18 PR/SM Dynamic Time Slice calculation
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004q.html#76 Athlon cache question
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005.html#6 [Lit.] Buffer overruns
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005b.html#5 Relocating application architecture and compiler support
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005c.html#56 intel's Vanderpool and virtualization in general
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#59 Misuse of word "microcode"
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#74 [Lit.] Buffer overruns
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005h.html#13 Today's mainframe--anything to new?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005h.html#19 Blowing My Own Horn
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005k.html#43 Determining processor status without IPIs
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005m.html#16 CPU time and system load
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005p.html#29 Documentation for the New Instructions for the z9 Processor
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#15 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006h.html#30 The Pankian Metaphor
...
misc. past posts mentioning CCWTRANS (cp/67 routine that created
"shadow" channel program copies of what was in the virtual address
space, replacing all virtual addresses with "real" addresses, for
example initial prototype of OS/VS2 was built by crafting hardware
translation into mvt and hacking a copy of CP67's CCWTRANS into mvt):
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#68 Mainframe operating systems
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#34 What level of computer is needed for a computer to Love?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001b.html#18 Linux IA-64 interrupts [was Re: Itanium benchmarks ...]
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#37 IBM OS Timeline?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#38 IBM OS Timeline?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001l.html#36 History
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#39 VAX, M68K complex instructions (was Re: Did Intel Bite Off More Than It Can Chew?)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002g.html#61 GE 625/635 Reference + Smart Hardware
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002j.html#70 hone acronym (cross post)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#65 The problem with installable operating systems
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#67 The problem with installable operating systems
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002n.html#62 PLX
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#0 Disk drives as commodities. Was Re: Yamhill
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#13 Page Table - per OS/Process
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003k.html#27 Microkernels are not "all or nothing". Re: Multics Concepts For
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004.html#18 virtual-machine theory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004c.html#59 real multi-tasking, multi-programming
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004d.html#0 IBM 360 memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004g.html#50 Chained I/O's
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#16 computer industry scenairo before the invention of the PC?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004n.html#26 PCIe as a chip-to-chip interconnect
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004n.html#54 CKD Disks?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004o.html#57 Integer types for 128-bit addressing
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005b.html#23 360 DIAGNOSE
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005b.html#49 The mid-seventies SHARE survey
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005b.html#50 [Lit.] Buffer overruns
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005f.html#45 Moving assembler programs above the line
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005f.html#47 Moving assembler programs above the line
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005p.html#18 address space
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005q.html#41 Instruction Set Enhancement Idea
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005s.html#25 MVCIN instruction
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005t.html#7 2nd level install - duplicate volsers
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006.html#31 Is VIO mandatory?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006.html#38 Is VIO mandatory?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006b.html#25 Multiple address spaces
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006f.html#5 3380-3390 Conversion - DISAPPOINTMENT
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#33 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#5 virtual memory
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Password Complexity Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 09:37:01 -0600gilmap@ibm-main.lst wrote:
the problem with design totally in a vacuum resulted in people having scores of impossible to remember passwords (a side-effect of them being hard to guess) that changed monthly. all the password rules done in a vacuum w/o regard to the overall infrastructure ... introduced serious vulnerabilities because people were forced to record/archive these impossible to remember and frequently changing values (ignored fundamental human factors)
story about password rules that were published on 1/4/84 on corporate
letterhead and placed in corporate bulletin boards ... long ago and far away
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#52 Enter fonts
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001d.html#51 OT Re: A beautiful morning in AFM.
copy of the corporate directive
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001d.html#52 OT Re: A beautiful morning in AFM.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001d.html#53 April Fools Day
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: How to implement Lpars within Linux Newsgroups: linux.redhat,alt.folklore.computers Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 10:05:14 -0600Greg Hackney writes:
SIE was the "hardware" virtual machine assist that came out with the 3081.
Amdahl then introduced "hypervisor", which was as a means of partitioning a machine in two parts w/o requiring a virtual machine operating system (i.e. was basically configuration settings to the hardware ... somewhat akin to bios configuration).
the response was PR/SM for the 3090 ... which eventually evolved into lpars ... i.e. multiple Logical PARtionS ... much more than two ... again configuration in the hardware w/o requiring virtual machine operating system.
for some configurations talking about 40,000 linux virtual machines ... they have had the real hardware partitioned into a few LPARs with a virtual machine operating system running in one of the LPARs ... which, in turn, is supporting the 40,000 linux virtual machines
a couple old posts referencing the creation of 40k-some linux virtual
machines in a single LPAR:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#33 D
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002b.html#36 windows XP and HAL: The CP/M way still works in 2002
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002n.html#6 Tweaking old computers?
LPAR has been the capability in the hardware to create partitions (basically a small subset of a virtual machine operating system has been moved into the hardware) w/o requiring a software virtual machine operating system running to support the capability.
the original virtual machine operating system was cp67 built in the 60s for the 360/67 (there was an earlier prototype cp40 that was ran on a hardware modified 360/40). this was back when most all software was open source and free.
various litigation by the federal gov. and others forced the unbundling
announcement on 23/6/69 ... and starting to charge for software
... which then evolved over the next decade until "object-code-only"
in the early 80s (i.e. not only charging for software, but no longer
shipping source as part of the products). misc. past postings about
unbundling
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#unbundle
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 12:47:50 -0600Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
i.e. my real undergraduate job was supporting and maintaining the univ. datacenter production (real memory) os/360 batch system.
the stuff about inventing, implementing, and shipping production code
for things like replacement dynamic adaptive scheduling
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#fairshare
and replacement/paging algorithms
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#wsclock
as well as misc. other things like the hardware clone controller
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#360pcm
was much more of a hobby for entertainment.
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers,bit.listserv.vmesa-l Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 13:18:38 -0600Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
"811" (named after 11/78 publication date on the architecture documents) or 3081 was considered somewhat of a 155/158 follow-on machine ... being much more of a m'coded machine.
"TROUT" or 3090 was considered somewhat of a 165/168 follow-on machine ... being much more of a hardwired machine.
these were the days of processors getting bigger and bigger with much more effort being put into more processors in SMP configuration.
they had created two positions, one in charge of "tightly-coupled" architecuture (SMP) and one in charge of "loosely-coupled" architecture (clusters). my wife got con'ed into taking the job in pok in charge of loosed-coupled architecture.
she didn't last long ... while there, she did do done peer-coupled
shared data architecture
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#shareddata
which didn't see much uptake until sysplex ... except for the ims group doing ims hot-standby.
part of the problem was she was fighting frequently with the communication's group, who wanted SNA/VTAM to be in charge of any signals leaving a processor complex (even those directly to another processor).
one example was trouter/3088 ... she fought hard for hardware enhancements for full-duplex operation. there had been a previous "channel-to-channel" hardware which was half-duplex direct channel/bus communication between two processor complexes. 3088 enhanced this to provide connectivity to up to eight different processor complexes.
sna was essentially a dumb terminal controller infrastructure. their reference to it as a "network" required other people in the organization to migrate to using the term "peer-to-peer network" to differentiate from the sna variety.
of course, earlier, in the time-frame that sna was just starting out
... she had also co-authored a peer-to-peer networking architecture
with Burt Moldow ... which was somewhat viewed as threatening to sna
... misc. past posts mentioning AWP39:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004n.html#38 RS/6000 in Sysplex Environment
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004p.html#31 IBM 3705 and UC.5
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005p.html#8 EBCDIC to 6-bit and back
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005p.html#15 DUMP Datasets and SMS
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005p.html#17 DUMP Datasets and SMS
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005q.html#27 What ever happened to Tandem and NonStop OS ?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005u.html#23 Channel Distances
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006h.html#52 Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe
anyway, in the trotter/3088 time-frame ... san jose had done a prototype vm/cluster implementation using a modified trotter/3088 with full-duplex protocols. however, before it was allowed to ship, they had to convert it to san operation. one of the cluster example was to fully "resynch" cluster operation of all the processors ... with took under a second using full-duplex protocols on the 3088 ... but the same operation took on the order of a minute using sna protocols and a half-duplex paradigm.
we ran afoul again later with 3-tier architecture
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#3tier
this was in the time-frame that the communications group was
out pushing SAA ... a lot of which was an attempt to revert back
to terminal emulation paradigm
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#emulation
from that of client/server. we had come up with 3-tier architecture and was out pitching it to customer executives ... and the same time they were trying to revert 2-tier architecture back to dumb terminal emulation.
then we did ha/cmp product
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#hacmp
minor reference
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/95.html#13
which didn't make a lot of them happy either.
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Code density and performance? Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 13:42:33 -0600Eric P. wrote:
misc. past posts mentioning Amdahl's "macrocode"
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#44 Linux paging
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#48 Linux paging
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#9 Mainframe System Programmer/Administrator market demand?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#56 Wild hardware idea
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#59 Misuse of word "microcode"
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#60 Misuse of word "microcode"
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005h.html#24 Description of a new old-fashioned programming language
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005p.html#14 Multicores
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005p.html#29 Documentation for the New Instructions for the z9 Processor
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005u.html#40 POWER6 on zSeries?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005u.html#43 POWER6 on zSeries?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005u.html#48 POWER6 on zSeries?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006b.html#38 blast from the past ... macrocode
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006c.html#9 Mainframe Jobs Going Away
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: How to implement Lpars within Linux Newsgroups: linux.redhat,alt.folklore.computers Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 14:09:41 -0600Greg Hackney writes:
yes, well, originally they claimed that only application code needed to be unbundled and charged for ... and that the operating system code needed to still be free (23jun69).
i had done a bunch of stuff as an undergraduate that got shipped in the cp67 virtual machine operating system. in the morph of cp67 to vm370, a lot of that code was dropped from the product.
i was then given an opportunity to re-introduce a lot of the code back into the vm370 virtual machine operating system calling it the "resource manager" (which included a whole bunch of stuff besides resource management)
however, they decided to use it as guinea pig for starting to charge for operating system software ... and i got to spend time with the business people working out the policy for charging for operating system software. the resource manager was released 11may76.
then over a few years, more and more of operating system software was changed from free to priced/charged ... although it continued to ship with full source ... until the OCO (object-code-only) wars in the early 80s.
a few recent posts mentiong 11may76
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006h.html#25 The Pankian Metaphor
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#24 Virtual memory implementation in S/370
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#26 11may76, 30 years, (re-)release of resource manager
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#28 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#41 virtual memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#43 virtual memory
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Arpa address Newsgroups: alt.computer.security,alt.folklore.computers Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 14:32:11 -0600ibuprofin@painkiller.example.tld (Moe Trin) writes:
the infrastructure cut-over to internetworking protocol was on 1/1/83 ... with gateways, internetworking ... etc.
I've frequently asserted that the internal network was larger than the
whole arpanet/internet from just about the beginning until
approx. summer 85 ... because the internal network had a kind of
gatewaying capability from nearly the beginning (i.e. the 1/1/83
cut-over to internetworking had approx. 250 nodes while the internal
network was nearing 1000 nodes).
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#internalnet
NSF and other organizations were started to fund educational
networking connectivity ... first csnet ... minor reference
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/internet.htm#0
then NSF released the NSFNET backbone RFP ... which should be
considered the "operational" precursor to the internet (as opposed to
the technology/protocol). as i've mentioned before ... my wife
and I had an operational high-speed backbone at the time
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#hsdt
but we were told we weren't allowed to bid on the NSFNET backbone RFP
... although we eventually got a technical audit by NSF ... that said
something about what we had operational was at least five years ahead
of all the NSFNET bid submissions. minor ref:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/internet.htm#nsfnet
it was also starting in this time-frame that arpa and various other
parts of the federal gov. were starting to mandate that
internetworking protocol, internet, etc, was to be eliminated and
every thing converted to ISO OSI protocol ... along with the various
GOSIP documents ... recent reference about OSI mandate and GOSIP
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#19 blast from the past on reliable communication
the NSFNET backbone had acceptable use guidelines about not being used for commercial purposes. the transition to today's internet somewhat involved providing provisions for commercial traffic (much of the backbone involved commercial companies loosely under NSFNET contract to provide networking for educational and non-commercial purposes).
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Code density and performance? Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers,bit.listserv.vmesa-l Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 19:19:05 -0600Peter Flass writes:
the above journal artcile reference mentions 1997 for millicode. it mentions millicode being needed for (at least) sie and pr/sm. pr/sm was done about a decade earlier on 3090 (and was significantly more difficult in native microcode).
this is a recent posting including email from jun81 mentioning
sie effort for 3090
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#27 virtual memory
this mention of macrocode
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006b.html#38 blast from the past ... macrocode
has piece of email from
mar81
that mentions the (then) announced
Amdahl 5880 with macrocode (and used for hypervisor implementation).
i had first started running into references regarding Amdahl's work on macrocode the previous year (mar80).
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: The Pankian Metaphor Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 22:16:08 -0600"Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" writes:
this was also true of cms ... which did simulated real i/o reading complete program image into virtual memory and then having it paged. on smaller real memories some application program images were nearly as large or even larger than available real storage.
in the early 70s, i did a paged mapped filesystem for cp67/cms
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#mmap
which addressed most of those issues. after the product morph
from cp67 to vm370 ... i moved the cms memory mapped filesystem
support to vm370/cms. a trivially small subset of some of this
dealing with application images in a virtual memory was released
as something called DCSS (discontiguous shared segments) ...
recent posting mentioning the subject:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#22 virtual memory
a flavor of the paged mapped support was finally released as part of washington ... xt/370. this was a personal computer based 370 with a very limited virtual 370 support necessary to run cms and had extremely limited real storage for paging ... and simple program loading of typical 370 applications represented a significant operation.
misc. past posts mentioning washington and/or xt/at/370:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#42 bloat
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/96.html#23 Old IBM's
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#5 IBM XT/370 and AT/370 (was Re: Computer of the century)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#29 Operating systems, guest and actual
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#52 Why not an IBM zSeries workstation?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#55 Why not an IBM zSeries workstation?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001c.html#89 database (or b-tree) page sizes
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001f.html#28 IBM's "VM for the PC" c.1984??
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#19 Very CISC Instuctions (Was: why the machine word size ...)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#20 Very CISC Instuctions (Was: why the machine word size ...)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001k.html#24 HP Compaq merger, here we go again.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002b.html#43 IBM 5100 [Was: First DESKTOP Unix Box?]
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002b.html#45 IBM 5100 [Was: First DESKTOP Unix Box?]
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002d.html#4 IBM Mainframe at home
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002i.html#76 HONE was .. Hercules and System/390 - do we need it?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#8 Alpha performance, why?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003h.html#40 IBM system 370
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004h.html#29 BLKSIZE question
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#7 Whatever happened to IBM's VM PC software?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#10 Whatever happened to IBM's VM PC software?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#11 Whatever happened to IBM's VM PC software?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#13 Whatever happened to IBM's VM PC software?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005f.html#6 Where should the type information be: in tags and descriptors
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005f.html#10 Where should the type information be: in tags and descriptors
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006.html#10 How to restore VMFPLC dumped files on z/VM V5.1
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006f.html#2 using 3390 mod-9s
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 07:31:37 -0600jmfbahciv writes:
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: The Pankian Metaphor Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 07:59:54 -0600Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
the other part of the os real memory heritage was that applications and program data was assumed to be loading at any arbitrary adddress in real memory along with the fact that code generation convention arbitrarily intermixed instructions and data and that there was extensive use of absolute address constants for all sorts of addressing operations.
for the program image on disk, this address constants (which could be liberally found through out the program image) were stored in relative displacement form ... with a "relocatable address constant" directory appended to the file.
after the loader had read the program completely into memory (in later years, virtual memory), the loader then had to read the relocatable address constant directory ... which gave the location in the program image of each one of the address constants ... and access each one, changing it from its relative location value to its absolute location value.
after that the loader could transfer control to the starting application address.
cp67/cms eventually borrowed many applications from the os/360 software base (assemblers, compilers, and various other applications). cms having started from a virtual memory base where potentially every application could be loaded at the same (virtual) address ... added a new program image type called "MODULE". After the program loader had pulled everything into memory and did is address constant swizzling bit ... it was possible to write to disk an application program image file ... which then could be subsequently reloaded ... w/o the loader having to run through the image fixing up all the address constants in the program image.
i was somewhat able to take advantage of this when i did paged
mapped filesystem for cp67/cms
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#mmap
however, i also wanted to support library program images that could be
simulataneously (read-only) shared simultaneously in multiple
different virtual address spaces). the issue with library images is
that they are loaded at arbitrary different address (in a virtual
address space) in conjunction with arbitrary different applications.
one possibility is to assign each possible library program a fixed,
unique virtual address. however, with only 16mbytes of virtual address
space to work with, there quickly were more possible library programs
than there were available unique virtual addressess. any specific
application, run at any specific moment, would require more than
16mbytes of library programs .... but across all possible applications
and all possible library programs ... there were more than could fit
in 16mbytes. this is somewhat akin to the mvs "common segment" scenario
mentioned here (even tho it had multiple different virtual
address spaces)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006b.html#32 Multiple address spaces
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#33 virtual memory
and the single virtual address space of s/38 going with 48bit
virtual address (which later morphed into as/400)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#33 virtual memory
various other systems designed from the ground up for virtual memory (like tss/360, multics), defined program image formats were location dependent things like address constants were managed separately from basic program image. while cms had been define as virtual memory operation ... it borrowed a lot of applications, assemblers, compilers, coding conventions, etc ... from (real memory) os/360.
in doing the memory mapped filesystem work for cms ... attempting to
create some number of (address) location independent program images
that could be directly memory mapped as (read-only) shared objects at
arbitrarily different address in different virtual address spaces
... i spent a lot of time fiddling with address constants in
various applications. numerous past postings describing the
address constant fiddling activity
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#adcon
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 08:17:06 -0600Brian Boutel writes:
it worked ok, in small real-memory workspaces ... but porting apl\360 to cms\apl large virtual memory was disasterous. the issue is that some number of applications can have transient execution patterns that resumble such cyclic behavior.
the problem with LRU degenerating to FIFO is that even if the virtual memory pages, that are being cycled, are only one larger than the available real memory ... every virtual page in the cycle will be faulted on every pass thru the cycle (aka the first/FIFO page in such a cycle is also the least recently used). Say there are N available real pages (for the cycle) and there are N+1 pages in the cycle. Page fault for page N+1 will replace page 1 (since it is both LRU and FIFO) ... but the next page to be accessed will be page 1 ... the page just replaced. In the N+1 scenario, this replacing the very next page that is going to be needed will continue throughout the cycle.
global clock is a very good and efficient approximation to global LRU
replacement strategy ... including degenerating to FIFO under various
conditions. as i mentioned before
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#42 virtual memory
in the early 70s, i came up with a coding slight of hand that resulted in global clock (LRU approximation) that degenerating to RANDOM rather than FIFO. in the N+1 case where FIFO replacement was constantly selecting the very next page that was about to be used ... a RANDOM page would be selected for replacement instead. This significantly reduced the overall fault rate ... since you were constantly replacing the very page that you were about to use.
misc. past posts on page replacement algorithms, virtual memory,
etc
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#wsclock
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 09:26:06 -0600"Eric P." writes:
administrative code had explicit checking to see whether the objects were present ... as opposed to the kernel taking a page fault. part of this was based on the LRA (load-real address) instruction ... where the instruction set a condition code based on whether the page &/or tables were actually present.
at least one of the vm370-based time-sharing service bureaus
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#timeshare
enhanced that support to support process migration in a loosely-coupled environment ... i.e. a collection of independent processor complexes (non-shared memory) that all had access to the same physical disks (a process and all its support data structures could be paged out from one processor complex to disk ... and then paged into a different processor complex.
this was useful for some of these operations that had gone 7x24 with customers world-wide ... and the processor complexes had to be taken down periodically for standard hardware maintenance purposes.
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 09:44:53 -0600"Eric P." writes:
a virtual address space was represented by a "segment" table. segment table entries pointed to page tables. page tables had PTE entries that indicated real address. segment table entries in different segment tables (i.e. virtual address spaces) could point at the same page table. such a page table (associated with a specific segment or range of virtual addresses) could then be "shared" accross multiple different address spaces. however, real, shared pages would only have a single, unique PTE in a single page table ... even tho multiple different segment tables could point at the same shared page.
as previous mentioned, the original 370 architecture allowed for read-only shared segment protection. basically a spare bit was defined in the segment table entry (which included pointer to a potentially shared page table entry) that precluded instructions executing in that virtual address space from storing/altering locations in that address range. this allowed for storage protection property to be virtual address space specific for the same shared pages i.e. a shared page table is "store" protected for virtual address spaces with the segment protect bit set in their segment table entry ... however the same shared page table may not be "store" protect for virtual address spaces w/o the segment protect bit set.
in the morph from cp67 to vm370, cms was reorganized to take advantage of the 370 shared segment architecture and the segment protection (allowing different address spaces to share the same information but preventing one cms from affecting other cms'es).
as previously mentioned, when the retrofit of virtual memory hardware
to 370/165 fell behind schedule, the segment protect feature was
dropped from the architecture (as well as some number of other
features in the original 370 virtual memory architecture). this
forced vm370/cms to revert to the storage protection mechanism
that had been used in cp67.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#4 Mainframe vs. xSeries
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#9 Hadware Support for Protection Bits: what does it really mean?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#23 Virtual memory implementation in S/370
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#5 virtual memory
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Passwords for bank sites - change or not? Newsgroups: alt.computer.security Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 10:36:25 -0600Sheik Yurbhuti writes:
shared-secrets based authentication paradigm require unique password
for every unique security domain ... as countermeasure to cross-domain
replay/impersonation attacks. lots of past posts about shared-secret
based authentication
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subintegrity.html#secret
references to an old april 1st, password corporate directive from
1984
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001d.html#52 A beautiful morning in ARM
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 10:40:40 -0600jmfbahciv writes:
an older post also mentioning the subject
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/internet.htm#0
the technology used in the internal network
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#internalnet
was re-released the same year the resource manager was released (1976) (a version with subset of the function had been released earlier)
it was also deployed for bitnet ... for a period in the early
80s, the number of bitnet nodes (independent of the internal
network nodes) was also as large or larger than the number
of arpanet/internet nodes.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#bitnet
this was also then propagated to europe for earn ... old earn
email by the person got the job to head it up
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#65
and also mentioned in this recent posting
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#31 virtual memory
some amount of the success of tcp/ip was having peer-to-peer (in addition to gateways and internetworking) that extended down to workstations and PCs.
as i've mentioned before there was significant internal corporate
politics by the communication group ... trying to maintain the
terminal emulation paradigm for workstations and PCs (in the mid-80s
there were huge number of PCs connected to internal networking nodes
... but they were mostly forced to be treated as emulated terminals
... as opposed to networking nodes):
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#emulation
a few recent postings also discussing the subject
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006h.html#52 Need Help defining an AS400 with an IP address to the mainframe
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006i.html#2 The Pankian Metaphor
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#8 ALternatives to EMail
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#31 virtual memory
for a little drift ... i've been periodically made somewhat
facetious statements about the installed customer base
of products that originated from the science center work
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#545tech
was as large or larger than some other vendors whole product line; however because the corporation's mainstream batch offerings so dominated the market ... many people's impression of what products were in the market place was obscured.
i've joked about some rivalry between the science center on the 4th floor and the work that went on at the 5th floor at 545tech sq. however, it was difficult to compare the two efforts in terms of installed customers ... since there was so much of the corporation behind the science center's effort.
i've periodically tried to put in into perspective by pointing out that there was a really humongous installed batch customer based ... and that the installed customer base for the science center technology was much smaller (that the batch customer base) ... and the number of internal installed customers for the science center technology was much smaller than the external customers.
now, one of my hobbies at the science center was producing my own internal production system product and distributing and supporting it directly for a limited number of internal customers. this was a small subset of the total number of internal customers (which was in turn smaller than the number of external customers, which in turn was much smaller than the number of the batch external customers) ... however at one point, the number of internal places running the heavily customized system that I directly distributed was about the same as the total number of systems (internal, external, over its complete lifetime) that ever ran the system produced on the 5th floor.
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: virtual memory Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 11:13:35 -0600jmfbahciv writes:
misc. past posts mentioning the evoluation of the cp67 (and then
vm370) product group
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#2 Schedulers
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#7 DOS is Stolen!
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#179 S/360 history
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#54 Multics dual-page-size scheme
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#55 Multics dual-page-size scheme
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001m.html#47 TSS/360
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001m.html#49 TSS/360
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001n.html#67 Hercules etc. IBM not just missing a great opportunity...
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002e.html#27 moving on
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#34 Computers in Science Fiction
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#59 history of CMS
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002j.html#17 CDC6600 - just how powerful a machine was it?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002m.html#9 DOS history question
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002o.html#78 Newsgroup cliques?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#14 Multics on emulated systems?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003c.html#0 Wanted: Weird Programming Language
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003d.html#8 IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#53 Alpha performance, why?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#22 303x, idals, dat, disk head settle, and other rambling folklore
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003h.html#34 chad... the unknown story
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003k.html#0 VSPC
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003k.html#55 S/360 IPL from 7 track tape
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004.html#20 BASIC Language History?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004.html#32 BASIC Language History?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004c.html#47 IBM 360 memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004d.html#42 REXX still going strong after 25 years
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004e.html#37 command line switches [Re: [REALLY OT!] Overuse of symbolic
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004g.html#24 |d|i|g|i|t|a|l| questions
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004g.html#35 network history (repeat, google may have gotten confused?)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004g.html#38 Infiniband - practicalities for small clusters
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004k.html#23 US fiscal policy (Was: Bob Bemer, Computer Pioneer,Father of
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#6 a history question
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#54 Shipwrecks
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004n.html#7 RISCs too close to hardware?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004q.html#72 IUCV in VM/CMS
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005f.html#58 Where should the type information be: in tags and descriptors
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005h.html#37 Software for IBM 360/30
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005j.html#25 IBM Plugs Big Iron to the College Crowd
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005j.html#54 Q ALLOC PAGE vs. CP Q ALLOC vs ESAMAP
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005p.html#0 Article: The True Value of Mainframe Security
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005q.html#12 What ever happened to Tandem and NonStop OS ?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005q.html#14 What ever happened to Tandem and NonStop OS ?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005s.html#35 Filemode 7-9?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005s.html#36 Filemode 7-9?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006b.html#18 {SPAM?} Re: Expanded Storage
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Arpa address Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 12:57:43 -0600eugene@cse.ucsc.edu (Eugene Miya) writes:
while the internal network appeared to single corporation ... the
individual plant sites and individual countries had their own profit
responsibilities, cost centers and administrtive control (i.e the
internal network didn't evolve with any sort of corporate hdqtrs
cooperation and/or funding).
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#internalnet
in fact, several times internal network connectivity went on in spite of corporate hdqtrs ... many times you get into corporate hdqtrs and you encounter people that believe that they must be in control of something. there was a different inhibitor to the growth of the internal network. there was a strong corporate and business requirement that all links leaving company premises had to be encrypted. at various time, there was the comment that the internal network had over half of all link encryptors installed in the world. talking different countries into allowing encrypted links between two different company facilities in two different countries ... where the links cross country boundaries ... could be a real pain.
the gateway capability greatly simplified being able to deploy in environments where there was different networking protocols (even if they tended to be platformed many times on a variety of different OSes that happened to operated on the same hardware architecture) ... as well as totally different administrative and responsibility boundaries.
my claim has been that the cut-over of the arpanet/internet on 1/1/83
... removed a significant inhibitors to interconnecting a large number
of different nodes across various protocol, processor as well as
administrative domains
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#internet
... something that had been found in the 70s with growing the internal network.
in the late 70s, i was told a number of times that the reason that the inter-IMP links had to be 56kbits ... was because of the significant inter-IMP protocol chatter trying to maintain a real-time globally consistent network-wide view of all detailed IMP operation (i.e. somewhat implying globally consistent administrative and policy operation).
the acceptable use policy (AUP, non-commercial) stuff with the NSF backbone did introduce some inhibitor to growth ... until enough of the commercial ISPs deployed their independent stuff. actually much of the NSF backbone was done by corporate entities under the umbrella of the NSF contract.
however there is a lot of folklore that the commerical entities providing resources under the NSF backbone contract umbrella ... actually contributed resources many times what was actually paid for by NSF. the scenario at the time was that there was significant unused bandwidth in the form of dark-fiber deployed and nobody had been able to come up with a transition strategy i.e. extensive existing fixed cost infrastructure was being paid for mostly by the existing voice tariffs. If you cut the tariffs to encourage the next generation of bandwidth hungry applications ... there would be a long stretch before the tariff*bandwidth product was again able to cover the fixed costs (bandwidth use increased to offset the cut in the tariff). the transition strategy then required a isolated incubator environment where the new generation of bandwidth hungrey applications could evolve ... w/o significant impact on the existing income infrastructure.
one of the old AUPs:
NYSERNet, Inc.
ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY
(Revised 12/14/89)
NYSERNet, Inc. recognizes as acceptable all forms of data
communications across its network, except where federal subsidy of
connections may require limitations. In such cases use of the network
should adhere to the general principle of advancing research and
education through interexchange of information among research and
educational institutions in New York State.
In cases where data communications are addressed to recipients outside
of the NYSERNet regional network and are carried across other regional
networks or the Internet, NYSERNet users are advised that
acceptable use policies of those other networks apply and may, in
fact, limit use.
The President of NYSERNet, Inc. and his designees may at any time make
determinations that particular uses are or are not consistent with the
purposes of NYSERNet, Inc. which determinations will be binding on
NYSERNet users.
NYSERNET - ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY
(Adopted July 16, 1987)
This statement represents a guide to the acceptable use of NYSERNet
facilities.
1. All use must be consistent with the purposes of NYSERNet.
2. The intent of the use policy is to make clear certain cases which
are consistent with the purposes of NYSERNet, not to exhaustively
enumerate all such possible uses.
3. The President of NYSERNet Inc. and his designees, may at any time
make determinations that particular uses are or are not consistent
with the purposes of NYSERNet. Such determinations will be reported
in writing to the Board of NYSERNet Inc. for consideration and
possible revision at the next meeting of the board.
4. If a use is consistent with the purposes of NYSERNet, then
activities necessary to that use will be considered consistent with
the purposes of NYSERNet. For example, administrative communications
which are part of the support infrastructure needed for research and
instruction are acceptable.
5. Use for scientific research or instruction at not-for-profit
institutions of research or instruction in New York State is
acceptable.
6. Use for a project which is part of or supports a scientific
research instruction activity for the benefit of a not-for-profit
institution of research or instruction in New York State is
acceptable, even if any or all parties to the use are located or
employed elsewhere. For example, communications directly between
industrial affiliates engaged in support of a project for such an
institution is acceptable.
7. Use for scientific research or instruction at for-profit
institutions may or may not be consistent with the purposes of
NYSERNet, and will be reviewed by the President or his designees on a
case-by-case basis.
.. snip ...
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Arpa address Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 13:12:34 -0600ref:
what the heck ... here is another aup
Interim 3 July 1990
NSFNET
Acceptable Use Policy
The purpose of NSFNET is to support research and education in and
among academic institutions in the U.S. by providing access to unique
resources and the opportunity for collaborative work.
This statement represents a guide to the acceptable use of the NSFNET
backbone. It is only intended to address the issue of use of the
backbone. It is expected that the various middle level networks will
formulate their own use policies for traffic that will not traverse
the backbone.
(1) All use must be consistent with the purposes of NSFNET.
(2) The intent of the use policy is to make clear certain cases which
are consistent with the purposes of NSFNET, not to exhaustively
enumerate all such possible uses.
(3) The NSF NSFNET Project Office may at any time make determinations
that particular uses are or are not consistent with the purposes of
NSFNET. Such determinations will be reported to the NSFNET Policy
Advisory Committee and to the user community.
(4) If a use is consistent with the purposes of NSFNET, then
activities in direct support of that use will be considered consistent
with the purposes of NSFNET. For example, administrative
communications for the support infrastructure needed for research and
instruction are acceptable.
(5) Use in support of research or instruction at not-for-profit
institutions of research or instruction in the United States is
acceptable.
(6) Use for a project which is part of or supports a research or
instruction activity for a not-for-profit institution of research or
instruction in the United States is acceptable, even if any or all
parties to the use are located or employed elsewhere. For example,
communications directly between industrial affiliates engaged in
support of a project for such an institution is acceptable.
(7) Use for commercial activities by for-profit institutions is
generally not acceptable unless it can be justified under (4)
above. These should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis by the NSF
Project Office.
(8) Use for research or instruction at for-profit institutions may or
may not be consistent with the purposes of NSFNET, and will be
reviewed by the NSF Project Office on a case-by-case basis.
... snip ...
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: where do I buy a SSL certificate? Newsgroups: alt.security,alt.computer.security Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 13:31:04 -0600Ask Josephsen <ask_rem@rem_minreklame.dk> writes:
i regularly access some number of https sites with self-signed certificates ... where my browser initially complains it is signed by an unknown certification authority (itself) and gives me an opportunity to view it, accept it for the current session, and/or load it for long term acceptance (basically into the same repository that contains the certification authority self-signed digital certificates that were loaded as part of building the browsers).
if you really want to buy one ... go to the security menu in the browsers (that will be typically used by your clients) and do a list of the currently loaded self-signed digital certificates ... this will give you an indication of which certification authorities that the browsers are currntly configured to automatically accept.
numerous collected past postings mentioning ssl and ssl digital
certificates
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subpubkey.html#sslcert
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: where do I buy a SSL certificate? Newsgroups: alt.security,alt.computer.security Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 13:38:02 -0600Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
however, it is straight-forward operation for clients to do post-install administrative operations on their browser's digital certificate repository (adding and/or deleting digital certificates).
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Arpa address Newsgroups: alt.computer.security,alt.folklore.computers Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 14:39:43 -0600ibuprofin@painkiller.example.tld (Moe Trin) writes:
finger slip
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#internalnet
the internal network passed 1000 nodes here 10jun83 (and was already
rapidly approaching that on 1jan83)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/internet.htm#22
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#112
this has note regarding CSNET from 22oct82
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/internet.htm#0
here is status note from CSNET dated 30dec82 getting
prepared for switch-over
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#18
short extract from note included above:
The transition requires a major change in each of the more than 250
hosts on the ARPANET; as might be expected, not all hosts will be
ready on 1 January 1983. For CSNET, this means that disruption of
mail communication will likely result between Phonenet users and some
ARPANET users. Mail to/from some ARPANET hosts may be delayed; some
host mail service may be unreliable; some hosts may be completely
unreachable. Furthermore, for some ARPANET hosts this disruption may
last a long time, until their TCP-IP implementations are up and
working smoothly. While we cannot control the actions of ARPANET
hosts, please let us know if we can assist with problems, particularly
by clearing up any confusion. As always, we are <cic@csnet-sh>
or (617)497-2777.
... snip ...
slight reference from my rfc index
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
various archeological references, including pointers to 801, 832, 833,
834, 835, 836, 836, 838, 339, 842, 843, 845, 846, 847, 848, 876
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietf.htm#history
in the normal frame version of rfc index, the rfc summaries are brought up in the bottom frame. In the RFC summary field, clicking on the author name brings up all RFCs by that author. Clicking on the RFC number for the summary brings up all keywords assocated with that RFC. Clicking on the ".txt=nnn" field, retrieves the actual RFC. Clicking on other RFC numbers, will bring up the respective summary for that RFC.
as an aside ... this information from my rfc index use to be
included as section 6.10 in older STD1s
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietf.htm#obsol
sample of rfc summaries from
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcidx2.htm
846 -
Who talks TCP? - survey of 22 February 1983, Smallberg D.,
1983/02/23 (14pp) (.txt=45597) (Obsoleted by 847) (Obsoletes 845)
845 -
Who talks TCP? - survey of 15 February 1983, Smallberg D.,
1983/02/17 (14pp) (.txt=45983) (Obsoleted by 846) (Obsoletes 843)
844
Who talks ICMP, too? - Survey of 18 February 1983, Clements R.,
1983/02/18 (5pp) (.txt=9078) (Updates 843)
843 -
Who talks TCP? - survey of 8 February 83, Smallberg D., 1983/02/09
(14pp) (.txt=46193) (Obsoleted by 845) (Updated by 844) (Obsoletes
842)
842 -
Who talks TCP? - survey of 1 February 83, Smallberg D., 1983/02/03
(14pp) (.txt=45962) (Obsoleted by 843) (Obsoletes 839)
839 -
Who talks TCP?, Smallberg D., 1983/01/26 (14pp) (.txt=45175)
(Obsoleted by 842) (Obsoletes 838)
838 -
Who talks TCP?, Smallberg D., 1983/01/20 (14pp) (.txt=45033)
(Obsoleted by 839) (Obsoletes 837)
837 -
Who talks TCP?, Smallberg D., 1983/01/12 (14pp) (.txt=44864)
(Obsoleted by 838) (Obsoletes 836)
836 -
Who talks TCP?, Smallberg D., 1983/01/05 (13pp) (.txt=43643)
(Obsoleted by 837) (Obsoletes 835)
835 -
Who talks TCP?, Smallberg D., 1982/12/29 (13pp) (.txt=42959)
(Obsoleted by 836) (Obsoletes 834)
834 -
Who talks TCP?, Smallberg D., 1982/12/22 (13pp) (.txt=42764)
(Obsoleted by 835) (Obsoletes 833)
833 -
Who talks TCP?, Smallberg D., 1982/12/14 (13pp) (.txt=42973)
(Obsoleted by 834) (Obsoletes 832)
832 -
Who talks TCP?, Smallberg D., 1982/12/07 (13pp) (.txt=42751)
(Obsoleted by 833)
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Arpa address Newsgroups: alt.computer.security,alt.folklore.computers Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 14:54:09 -0600ibuprofin@painkiller.example.tld (Moe Trin) writes:
trivia ... guess who asked for and obtained class-A subnet address 9??
hint, the location is referenced in the email dated 22oct82
email included in this post
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/internet.htm#0
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Hey! Keep Your Hands Out Of My Abstraction Layer! Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,comp.dcom.lans.ethernet,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,alt.cellular.bluetooth,alt.internet.wireless,alt.folklore.computers Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 15:07:55 -0600Keith writes:
the frequent response to claiming that you weren't suppose to be subject to some bureaucratic process ... was that those rules only applied to other bureaucratic processes ... IT DID NOT apply to THEIR bureaucratic processes. when nearly all of the bureaucrats made such assertions ... you found that you weren't funded and/or staffed to handle such bureaucratic processes.
on a smaller scale in the 70s, most labs were supposed to set aside some portion of their budget for advanced technology projects ... and you found various labs sponsoring "adtech" conferences. however, going into the late 70s, you found some number of sites heavily using their "adtech" resources for fire fights in normal day-to-day product operation. as a result there was a derth of internal adtech conferences during the late 70s and early 80s.
i managed to run one in mar82 out of SJR ... but it had been the first
in a number of years. minor post mentioning the event and listing the
CFP
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/96.html#4a
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Passwords for bank sites - change or not? Newsgroups: alt.computer.security Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 15:29:53 -0600Borked Pseudo Mailed writes:
one of the reasons that banking community is looking at moving to biometrics is that something like 30percent of the population are reported to write their pin number on their debit card. the knee-jerk reaction frequently has been that biometrics like fingerprints aren't very secure.
the counter argument is ... not very secure compared to what? giving a person the choice of registering one of their fingers that is least likely to handle the card ... which becomes more difficult for a crook,
1) to copy a pin written on a lost/stolen card and replay it
or
2) to lift a fingerprint (that isn't very likely to be there) off a lost/stolen card and replay it
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Arpa address Newsgroups: alt.computer.security,alt.folklore.computers Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 16:05:02 -0600ArarghMail605NOSPAM writes:
ref:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#50 Arpa address
old email that had been sent to 3-4 people
Date: 16 December 1988, 16:40:09 PST
From: somebody
Subject: Class A Network number
As a welcomed gift from the Internet, my request for a Class A
network number for IBM has been approved. Initially we decided to go
with multiple class B numbers because it would allow us to have
multiple connections to the Internet. However, as time passed, and IP
envy increased, I found it necessary to re-evaluate our requirements
for a Class A number. My main concern was still the issue of
connectivity to the rest of the Internet and the technical constraints
that a Class A address would present. At Interop 88 I discussed my
concerns with Jon Postel and Len Bosak. Len indicated that although a
Class A number would still restrict us to 1 entry point for all of IBM
from the Internet, it would not preclude multiple exit points for
packets. At that point it seemed as if Class A would be ok and I
approached Jon Postel and the network number guru at SRI to see if my
request would be reconsidered. It turns out that the decision to deny
us in the past was due to the numbers I projected for the number of
hosts on our IBM Internet in 5 years. Based on that number, they
couldn't justify giving us a full Class A. Can't blame them. So
after Interop, I sent in a new request and increased our projected
needs above a threshold which would warrant a Class A. Although I
doubt we will ever use the full address space in 20 years let alone 5,
I did what was necessary to get the number. However, the application
went in quite some time ago and I still hadn't received a response.
Yesterday I found out that it was because I had put down an incorrect
U.S. Mail address for our sponsor!!! These people are tough. Anyway,
after Postel informed me about my error, I corrected it and sent in
the updated application again. The result was the issuance today of a
Class A network number for IBM. Being an old Beatles fan, I asked for
Number 9. Cute huh? Whatever. Anyway, that's what we got.
Consider it a Christmas present from the Internet.
As many of you know, I will be leaving IBM at the end of this
year. Obtaining this number was the last thing I wanted to do for IBM
and the IBM Internet project. The hard part lies ahead. We still
have 10 class B numbers. A lot of engineering of the network remains
to be done. I will leave that up to you folks. xxxxx will be
assuming responsibility for the project after I leave. I wish you all
the best. It's been fun working with you on this!! My only regret is
that I didn't have more time for it.
... snip ... top of post, old email index, HSDT email
for other drift, misc. past posts mentioning interop 88
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#interop88
-- Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/