INFO-VAX Sat, 08 Nov 2008 Volume 2008 : Issue 604 Contents: Re: /SYSTEM and /FOREIGN on a disk on the same MOUNT command Re: Basic/FMS consulting opportunity (New York) Re: Basic/FMS consulting opportunity (New York) Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Re: Variable record format but used with fixed lenght data ? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 17:10:04 -0500 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= Subject: Re: /SYSTEM and /FOREIGN on a disk on the same MOUNT command Message-ID: <4914bcaf$0$90272$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> R.A.Omond wrote: > etmsreec@yahoo.co.uk wrote: >> Just had an interesting one... >> >> I'd always taken that /SYSTEM and /FOREIGN were mutually exclusive - >> you wouldn't be allowed to mount a volume system wide if you were >> mounting it foreign as you'd only want one thread/process to be able >> to squirt data at the disk. >> >> A colleague just tried doing the two qualifiers on the same command >> and it worked. Odd in my view! >> >> Is this a bug or have I got it the wrong way round in my head? > > I see no reason whatsoever to even begin to consider this a bug. > > Why should you not be able to do that ? Because for a couple of decades you could not. Arne ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2008 08:33:58 +0800 From: "Richard Maher" Subject: Re: Basic/FMS consulting opportunity (New York) Message-ID: Hi Frank, > They will entertain remote engagements, but would really prefer people > on the east coast. You may be asked to visit the headquarters > facility during the initial week (or two) to become familiar with the > staff and applications. Is Perth Western Australia too "remote"? > I will not discuss this opportunity any further here on c.o.v. Doh! Cheers Richard Maher "FrankS" wrote in message news:19cc4333-95b8-424c-a443-cec78ed26db3@d42g2000prb.googlegroups.com... > One of my clients (the one with the four VAX 7640s) is looking for > additional consultants for some medium-term assignments (6 - 12 > months). It is unlikely there will be any renewals after this > period. I have asked them to post on OpenVMS.org and I'm taking the > liberty of posting here as well. > > Anyone interested must have a strong background in Basic using RMS > files, FMS screens, and DCL procedures. The more current the > experience the better. The projects being staffed primarily involve > modifications to existing applications which run on VAX and Alpha > systems. > > They will entertain remote engagements, but would really prefer people > on the east coast. You may be asked to visit the headquarters > facility during the initial week (or two) to become familiar with the > staff and applications. > > You will contract with my client directly -- I am not an agency and > despite how lucrative it might be I really don't need the paperwork. > I will be interviewing the candidates, and as both a consulting > systems administrator and developer you'll be working with me as well. > > Please send resume, availability, and rate requirements to me > directly. If you have any questions you can ask me by private e- > mail. I will not discuss this opportunity any further here on c.o.v. > > The e-mail in my profile is correct. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 17:16:46 -0800 (PST) From: FrankS Subject: Re: Basic/FMS consulting opportunity (New York) Message-ID: <468c44f2-6e5d-4c04-b95f-586a5b0bc0a4@a17g2000prm.googlegroups.com> On Nov 7, 12:45=A0pm, "Bob Eager" wrote: > It means he's posting from Google, and hasn't munged his email address. > Probably doesn't know what newsgroups are. I know them quite well. Never have had a problem with spam, but it could just be a nice filtering job by GoDaddy. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 16:19:01 -0500 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Message-ID: <0003e74f$0$26284$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com> John Reagan wrote: > I've been staying out of the discussion since I don't even understand them. > That part of the productizing of the compilers is above my pay grade as they > say. But Shirley, you guys could add a couple of IF statements in your compilers to check the status of the licence check call and exit gracefully when it is not good ? And a better thing would be to put the licence check in a loop with a 10 second timer. If the licence is already "in use", wait 10 seconds and try again. This way, as soon as the other compile is done, this one can begin. (this loop could be controlled though some logical name whose value would be the maximum amount of time to wait for licence to become available) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 21:32:31 GMT From: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG Subject: Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Message-ID: <00A8247E.E4E037C0@SendSpamHere.ORG> In article <0003e74f$0$26284$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei writes: >John Reagan wrote: > >> I've been staying out of the discussion since I don't even understand them. >> That part of the productizing of the compilers is above my pay grade as they >> say. > >But Shirley, you guys could add a couple of IF statements in your >compilers to check the status of the licence check call and exit >gracefully when it is not good ? > >And a better thing would be to put the licence check in a loop with a 10 >second timer. If the licence is already "in use", wait 10 seconds and >try again. This way, as soon as the other compile is done, this one can >begin. (this loop could be controlled though some logical name whose >value would be the maximum amount of time to wait for licence to become >available) Polling? How unixy. :) -- VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM ... pejorative statements of opinion are entitled to constitutional protection no matter how extreme, vituperous, or vigorously expressed they may be. (NJSC) Copr. 2008 Brian Schenkenberger. Publication of _this_ usenet article outside of usenet _must_ include its contents in its entirety including this copyright notice, disclaimer and quotations. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 16:35:37 -0500 From: norm.raphael@metso.com Subject: Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Message-ID: This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 00769CF1852574FA_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" VAXman-@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote on 11/07/2008 04:32:31 PM: > In article <0003e74f$0$26284$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei > writes: > >John Reagan wrote: > > > >> I've been staying out of the discussion since I don't even > understand them. > >> That part of the productizing of the compilers is above my pay > grade as they > >> say. > > > >But Shirley, you guys could add a couple of IF statements in your > >compilers to check the status of the licence check call and exit > >gracefully when it is not good ? > > > >And a better thing would be to put the licence check in a loop with a 10 > >second timer. If the licence is already "in use", wait 10 seconds and > >try again. This way, as soon as the other compile is done, this one can > >begin. (this loop could be controlled though some logical name whose > >value would be the maximum amount of time to wait for licence to become > >available) > > Polling? How unixy. :) ..and don't call him "Shirley!" ;) > > -- > VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM > > ... pejorative statements of opinion are entitled to constitutional protection > no matter how extreme, vituperous, or vigorously expressed they may be. (NJSC) > > Copr. 2008 Brian Schenkenberger. Publication of _this_ usenet article outside > of usenet _must_ include its contents in its entirety including thiscopyright > notice, disclaimer and quotations. --=_alternative 00769CF1852574FA_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
VAXman-@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote on 11/07/2008 04:32:31 PM:

> In article <0003e74f$0$26284$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei
> <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> writes:
> >John Reagan wrote:
> >
> >> I've been staying out of the discussion since I don't even
> understand them.
> >> That part of the productizing of the compilers is above my pay
> grade as they
> >> say.
> >
> >But Shirley, you guys could add a couple of IF statements in your
> >compilers to check the status of the licence check call and exit
> >gracefully when it is not good ?
> >
> >And a better thing would be to put the licence check in a loop with a 10
> >second timer. If the licence is already "in use", wait 10 seconds and
> >try again. This way, as soon as the other compile is done, this one can
> >begin.  (this loop could be controlled though some logical name whose
> >value would be the maximum amount of time to wait for licence to become
> >available)
>
> Polling?  How unixy. :)

...and don't call him "Shirley!"  ;)

>
> --
> VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker      VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM
>
> ... pejorative statements of opinion are entitled to constitutional protection
> no matter how extreme, vituperous, or vigorously expressed they may be. (NJSC)
>
> Copr. 2008 Brian Schenkenberger.  Publication of _this_ usenet article outside
> of usenet _must_ include its contents in its entirety including thiscopyright
> notice, disclaimer and quotations.
 --=_alternative 00769CF1852574FA_=-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 21:53:41 GMT From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan-Erik_S=F6derholm?= Subject: Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Message-ID: JF Mezei wrote: > John Reagan wrote: > >> I've been staying out of the discussion since I don't even understand them. >> That part of the productizing of the compilers is above my pay grade as they >> say. > > But Shirley, you guys could add a couple of IF statements in your > compilers to check the status of the licence check call and exit > gracefully when it is not good ? > > And a better thing would be to put the licence check in a loop with a 10 > second timer. If the licence is already "in use", wait 10 seconds and > try again. Submitting on a compile-batch-queue is much better, you can set /JOB_LIMIT to the same number as the number of concurrent licenses available. Or (if you prefer polling for some reason) write a short COM file that runs the compiler and checks the status code and re-runs the compile if it tripped on the licens... It's far better for the compiler folks to focus on more important issues. Jan-Erik. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 17:58:02 -0800 (PST) From: Hein RMS van den Heuvel Subject: Re: Variable record format but used with fixed lenght data ? Message-ID: <9efe90f9-5a4a-4c2e-9d18-3945f3925e4e@o40g2000prn.googlegroups.com> On Nov 7, 2:02=A0pm, koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote: > In article , =3D?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan-Er= ik_S=3DF6derholm?=3D writes: > > Hi. > > While analyzing some old indexed RMS datafiles > > that I *know* always are used with fixed size > > records (from COBOL apps), I've noticed that > > they are created with : > > > RECORD > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0CARRIAGE_CONTROL =A0 =A0 carriage_return > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0FORMAT =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 variable > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0SIZE =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 280 > > > Question is, why not use "fixed" when all records > > are fixed size anyway ? My best guess is that it is > > like this just becuse "variable" is the default, and > > noone has ever thought about changing it to "fixed"... > > > Is there any drawback having the files beeing set to > > variable record format when one is always using fixed > > sized records anyway ? > > =A0 =A0There's a tiny overhead for entering the record length > =A0 =A0at the begining of each record. =A0I suspect no one ever > =A0 =A0bothered to "fix" it. =A0You might actually see a performance > =A0 =A0improvement if you change it, but you might also find > =A0 =A0that you need a way to maintain upward compatability with > =A0 =A0at least reading archived data.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Guys guys... why speculate and guess? Jan wrote INDEXED files. Ther eare no alllignment bytes for indexed files. And more often then not indexed file records have date or key compression in which case RMS will have to have a record length word no matter what. So the overhead is zero. For fixed length record, with no compression there is the 2 byte overhead... but that only makes a difference if the you can store fewer records in a bucket... Given a particular bucket size that's a matter of math, not speculation. IN any case this will be totally minor compared to the typical Indexed file usage errors sutch as lack of compression or inadequet bucket sizes. Cheers, Hein. ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2008.604 ************************