Re: Would anyone like ....
|
I have been thinking about this and why VM lacked some of the basic? subsystems needed for production work. Me and my company worked for many separate organisations over 30 years. We saw the same functionality but different versions of the VM software "stack".? I think the issue was that sharing was not enabled by companies for "not core business" reasons. We are a xxxx company not a software developer.
Practically, we would probably just have raced to the current unix situation if sharing could have been enabled; multiple software choices, many of which solve the same underlying problem, each supported by an army of elite fanatics who are certain theirs is the best way forward.?
At least we all agree that xedit was the best editor, except of course for Edgar :-)
On Mon, 24 Oct 2022, 15:42 Bob Bolch, < Bob@...> wrote: VM customers started sharing modifications and utilities decades before?there was any Internet. VM's ease of use, and the availability of?VM source code with a set of build tools, meant that? VM user code sharing and distribution of features written by customers was the order of the day. Bob Bolch ?
On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 10:22 AM Anthony Smith < anthony@...> wrote: I am sure there are many here that worked on many similar problems. A pity that Share wasn't as popular as GitHub seems to be and that everyone seemed more concerned about sharing IP.
OH!
Your story remnided me of a second change I did to VMFPLC2.? It was an important part of determining the differences / changes. I forget what I changed, but know I did change something.
Are the Share presentations from 1981 and 1982 still available?
I can appreciate the work you did for your company.
On Mon, Oct 24, 2022, 05:08 Anthony Smith < anthony@...> wrote: Fascinating that I built much the same thing. To make it work also built a job? scheduler and something to allow security to handle access, something to issue privileged commands etc etc.
This started off under VPS and then got converted to VM. As far as I remember the lot got replaced by the VMxxxxxxxx products (secure, tape, backup, restore etc). Something about auditability and split responsibilities.
The new stuff never did handle the database backups, that continued to need custom code to create static files that could then be backed up.
It used file modify dates to do it's delta processing. We did build something that did delta processing a la "diff" but the storage requirements got large real quick. Our code storage repository? (disconnected user) did use update for diff processing (which save loads of space) when file type allowed.
I guess I am just one of the many programmers that built such things.?
Hi,
The software included a very basic form of tape management.? It would tell the operator to mount a new tape and how to label the one just taken down.? The software would keep track of the contents of each reel.? This way one could do a restore of an individual file or entire mini-disk.
The base delta concept helped reduce the number of tapes and files proceed each night.? Only once a month did we do an entire system, then weekly (1, 2, 3, 4, or 5), and daily.?
A tape management system might need to be written too. And maybe
a data compression option?
/Tom Kern
On 10/23/2022 3:00 PM, Bertram Moshier
wrote:
Hi,
As it has been awhile and
I'm new to VM/CE, one of the things I need to know is how
much data can I get on a 6250 reel of tape?
What other backup devices
does VM/CE support beside a 6250 drive?
Given there aren't real
tapes, how does changing tapes work for Herc and VM/CE?
How I did this is coming
back, but the details are missing from my memory.? I think I
let VMFPLC2 tell me when the tape was full.? But this time
around, I'd like to do preliminary estimates.
|
Anthony Smith