INFO-VAX Tue, 11 Mar 2008 Volume 2008 : Issue 142 Contents: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: DLT-4 cassetes are slower than DLT-3 on the same drive? Re: DLT-4 cassetes are slower than DLT-3 on the same drive? DST BUG!? Re: Time changing after reboot Re: from TheDailyWTF FS: VAXServer 3100, VT1300, MicroServer-SP, and storage expansion units OpenVMS Oracle v7.3.3 to Oracle 10GR2 migration and application development deve Re: OpenVMS Oracle v7.3.3 to Oracle 10GR2 migration and application development Re: OpenVMS Oracle v7.3.3 to Oracle 10GR2 migration and application development Re: OT: Universal healthcare in England failing - boy dies ! Re: OT: Universal healthcare in England failing - boy dies ! Re: OT: Universal healthcare in England failing - boy dies ! Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Re: SYS$EXAMPLES:DAYLIGHT_SAVINGS.COM bug on VAX Time changing after reboot Re: Time changing after reboot Re: Time changing after reboot Re: Time changing after reboot Re: Time changing after reboot Re: Time changing after reboot Re: Time changing after reboot Re: Time changing after reboot Re: Time changing after reboot VMS Backup reverse date order restore Re: VMS Backup reverse date order restore Re: VMS Backup reverse date order restore Re: VMS Backup reverse date order restore Re: VMS Backup reverse date order restore ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 04:57:12 -0700 (PDT) From: tadamsmar Subject: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: Well, I had this file lock problem again today. I tried what VAXMAN suggested below, but it showed no process associated with the file. Anyway, since I did not have time to wait for a reply to this post, I rebooted to clear up the problem (I know I will get flamed for rebooting VMS to solve a problem.) Here's the old message, to old to reply to: In article <8edb351d-9031-443e- b6b6-8be91c419...@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com>, tadamsmar writes: >I sometimes get this message when I don't think there is another user. >When I try to unlock the file with "UNLOCK" is says its not locked. >I end up rebooting. >What this all about? Is there a way to avoid rebooting? What file? Perhaps it is opened by the system? $ PIPE SHOW DEVICE/FILES {ddcu:} | SEARCH SYS$PIPE {filename} There {ddcu} is the device/volume on which the file resides and {filename} is the file name of the file you are accessing to get the error. -- VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?" http://tmesis.com/drat.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 05:10:35 -0700 (PDT) From: tadamsmar Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: On Mar 11, 7:57=A0am, tadamsmar wrote: > Well, I had this file lock problem again today. =A0I tried what VAXMAN > suggested > below, but it showed no process associated with the file. > > Anyway, since I did not have time to wait for a reply to this post, I > rebooted to clear up the problem (I know I will get flamed for > rebooting VMS to solve a problem.) > > Here's the old message, to old to reply to: > > In article <8edb351d-9031-443e- > b6b6-8be91c419...@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com>, tadamsmar > > writes: > >I sometimes get this message when I don't think there is another user. > >When I try to unlock the file with "UNLOCK" =A0is says its not locked. > >I end up rebooting. > >What this all about? Is there a way to avoid rebooting? > > What file? =A0Perhaps it is opened by the system? > > $ PIPE SHOW DEVICE/FILES {ddcu:} | SEARCH SYS$PIPE {filename} > > There {ddcu} is the device/volume on which the file resides and > {filename} > is the file name of the file you are accessing to get the error. > > -- > VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker > VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM > > =A0 "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?" > > http://tmesis.com/drat.html The three files that remain locked with not "another user" process are all global sectons. Maybe this has something to do with it. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 12:11:33 +0000 (UTC) From: gartmann@nonsense.immunbio.mpg.de (Christoph Gartmann) Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: In article , tadamsmar writes: >Well, I had this file lock problem again today. I tried what VAXMAN >suggested >below, but it showed no process associated with the file. Is your system part of a cluster? Then you need to run the command on every node of the cluster where the disk in question is mounted. Regards, Christoph Gartmann -- Max-Planck-Institut fuer Phone : +49-761-5108-464 Fax: -452 Immunbiologie Postfach 1169 Internet: gartmann@immunbio dot mpg dot de D-79011 Freiburg, Germany http://www.immunbio.mpg.de/home/menue.html ------------------------------ Date: 11 Mar 2008 12:31:59 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: <63ncduF27jnrhU1@mid.individual.net> In article , tadamsmar writes: > Well, I had this file lock problem again today. I tried what VAXMAN > suggested > below, but it showed no process associated with the file. > > Anyway, since I did not have time to wait for a reply to this post, I > rebooted to clear up the problem (I know I will get flamed for > rebooting VMS to solve a problem.) Why? For being yet another datapoint that disproves this myth? bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 05:36:46 -0700 (PDT) From: tadamsmar Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: On Mar 11, 8:11=A0am, gartm...@nonsense.immunbio.mpg.de (Christoph Gartmann) wrote: > In article , tadamsmar writes: > > >Well, I had this file lock problem again today. =A0I tried what VAXMAN > >suggested > >below, but it showed no process associated with the file. > > Is your system part of a cluster? Then you need to run the command on ever= y > node of the cluster where the disk in question is mounted. No. Not part of cluster. > > Regards, > =A0 =A0Christoph Gartmann > > -- > =A0Max-Planck-Institut fuer =A0 =A0 =A0Phone =A0 : +49-761-5108-464 =A0 Fa= x: -452 > =A0Immunbiologie > =A0Postfach 1169 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Internet: gartmann@immunb= io dot mpg dot de > =A0D-79011 =A0Freiburg, Germany > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0http://www.immunbio.mpg.de/home/menue.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:35:57 -0400 From: "Ken Robinson" Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: <7dd80f60803110535v270a0727icbf5111673a92041@mail.gmail.com> ------=_Part_1573_19192755.1205238959247 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 7:57 AM, tadamsmar wrote: > Well, I had this file lock problem again today. I tried what VAXMAN > suggested > below, but it showed no process associated with the file. > > Anyway, since I did not have time to wait for a reply to this post, I > rebooted to clear up the problem (I know I will get flamed for > rebooting VMS to solve a problem.) > Did you, at least, cause a crash dump, so it could be analyzed? Ken ------=_Part_1573_19192755.1205238959247 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline

On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 7:57 AM, tadamsmar <tadamsmar@yahoo.com> wrote:
Well, I had this file lock problem again today.  I tried what VAXMAN
suggested
below, but it showed no process associated with the file.

Anyway, since I did not have time to wait for a reply to this post, I
rebooted to clear up the problem (I know I will get flamed for
rebooting VMS to solve a problem.)

Did you, at least, cause a crash dump, so it could be analyzed?

Ken

------=_Part_1573_19192755.1205238959247-- ------------------------------ Date: 11 Mar 2008 08:38:02 -0600 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: In article , tadamsmar writes: > > The three files that remain locked with not "another user" process are > all global sectons. Maybe this has something to do with it. Global sections are often INSTALLed (made known to the OS via the INSTALL utility). That keeps them open until they are removed via the INSTALL utility. Also, they will remain open until all processes using them exit, whether they were created via INSTALL or via $CRMPSC(). You don't have to have multiple users to have multiple processes. "SHOW SYSTEM" shows you all the processes. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 05:43:58 -0700 (PDT) From: tadamsmar Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: On Mar 11, 10:38=A0am, koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote: > In article , tadamsmar writes: > > > > > The three files that remain locked with not "another user" process are > > all global sectons. =A0Maybe this has something to do with it. > > =A0 =A0Global sections are often INSTALLed (made known to the OS via the > =A0 =A0INSTALL utility). =A0That keeps them open until they are removed vi= a > =A0 =A0the INSTALL utility. > > =A0 =A0Also, they will remain open until all processes using them exit, > =A0 =A0whether they were created via INSTALL or via $CRMPSC(). > > =A0 =A0You don't have to have multiple users to have multiple processes. > =A0 =A0"SHOW SYSTEM" shows you all the processes. Are you suggesting some solution? As I said, I tried: $ PIPE SHOW DEVICE/FILES {ddcu:} | SEARCH SYS$PIPE {filename} And no process name or id was listed for the file. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 05:47:01 -0700 (PDT) From: tadamsmar Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: <86bc40e1-e04d-49b4-be8f-8fb69571b7f3@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com> On Mar 11, 8:35=A0am, "Ken Robinson" wrote: > On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 7:57 AM, tadamsmar wrote: > > Well, I had this file lock problem again today. =A0I tried what VAXMAN > > suggested > > below, but it showed no process associated with the file. > > > Anyway, since I did not have time to wait for a reply to this post, I > > rebooted to clear up the problem (I know I will get flamed for > > rebooting VMS to solve a problem.) > > Did you, at least, cause a crash dump, so it could be analyzed? > > Ken I did not. What could I learn from that? Remember, I ran: $ PIPE SHOW DEVICE/FILES {ddcu:} | SEARCH SYS$PIPE {filename} And no process is listed for the file. I checked all three files that were reported as opened by another user. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 05:52:08 -0700 (PDT) From: tadamsmar Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: <789d3a16-a2a1-4b70-aa59-652cfcca7972@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com> On Mar 11, 7:57=A0am, tadamsmar wrote: > Well, I had this file lock problem again today. =A0I tried what VAXMAN > suggested > below, but it showed no process associated with the file. > > Anyway, since I did not have time to wait for a reply to this post, I > rebooted to clear up the problem (I know I will get flamed for > rebooting VMS to solve a problem.) > > Here's the old message, to old to reply to: > > In article <8edb351d-9031-443e- > b6b6-8be91c419...@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com>, tadamsmar > > writes: > >I sometimes get this message when I don't think there is another user. > >When I try to unlock the file with "UNLOCK" =A0is says its not locked. > >I end up rebooting. > >What this all about? Is there a way to avoid rebooting? > > What file? =A0Perhaps it is opened by the system? > > $ PIPE SHOW DEVICE/FILES {ddcu:} | SEARCH SYS$PIPE {filename} > > There {ddcu} is the device/volume on which the file resides and > {filename} > is the file name of the file you are accessing to get the error. > > -- > VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker > VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM > > =A0 "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?" > > http://tmesis.com/drat.html One other thing, it seems to be random. This happens sometimes when I shutdown this large app (that I wrote) for an upgrade. But, the VMS reboot starts the app automatically. Then, when I shut it down I don't have any files reported as locked by another user. Of course, the only "users" of these file are detached processes that exit during the app shutdown. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:09:57 GMT From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan-Erik_S=F6derholm?= Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: tadamsmar wrote: > On Mar 11, 8:35 am, "Ken Robinson" wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 7:57 AM, tadamsmar wrote: >>> Well, I had this file lock problem again today. I tried what VAXMAN >>> suggested >>> below, but it showed no process associated with the file. >>> Anyway, since I did not have time to wait for a reply to this post, I >>> rebooted to clear up the problem (I know I will get flamed for >>> rebooting VMS to solve a problem.) >> Did you, at least, cause a crash dump, so it could be analyzed? >> >> Ken > > I did not. > > What could I learn from that? Remember, I ran: > > $ PIPE SHOW DEVICE/FILES {ddcu:} | SEARCH SYS$PIPE {filename} > > And no process is listed for the file. I checked all three files that > were reported as opened by another user. I hope that you *at least* made a copy of all errors, show dev/file and any other stuff showing the problem before rebooting, right ? And what did F$FILE_ATTRIBUTES("","KNOWN") say about it ? I think you have to provide hard evidence that things realy are like you're saying. Regards, Jan-Erik. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 14:48:50 +0100 From: "Gorazd Kikelj" Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: "tadamsmar" wrote in message news:f1f3eada-5426-42f6-b22d-2a911eefaeaf@34g2000hsz.googlegroups.com... On Mar 11, 10:38 am, koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote: > In article > , > tadamsmar writes: > > > > > The three files that remain locked with not "another user" process are > > all global sectons. Maybe this has something to do with it. > > Global sections are often INSTALLed (made known to the OS via the > INSTALL utility). That keeps them open until they are removed via > the INSTALL utility. > > Also, they will remain open until all processes using them exit, > whether they were created via INSTALL or via $CRMPSC(). > :Are you suggesting some solution? : :As I said, I tried: : :$ PIPE SHOW DEVICE/FILES {ddcu:} | SEARCH SYS$PIPE {filename} : :And no process name or id was listed for the file. Did you try with $pipe inst list | sear sys$pipe Best, Gorazd ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 14:12:41 GMT From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan-Erik_S=F6derholm?= Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: Gorazd Kikelj wrote: > "tadamsmar" wrote in message > news:f1f3eada-5426-42f6-b22d-2a911eefaeaf@34g2000hsz.googlegroups.com... > On Mar 11, 10:38 am, koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob > Koehler) wrote: >> In article >> , >> tadamsmar writes: >> >> >> >>> The three files that remain locked with not "another user" process are >>> all global sectons. Maybe this has something to do with it. >> Global sections are often INSTALLed (made known to the OS via the >> INSTALL utility). That keeps them open until they are removed via >> the INSTALL utility. >> >> Also, they will remain open until all processes using them exit, >> whether they were created via INSTALL or via $CRMPSC(). >> > :Are you suggesting some solution? > : > :As I said, I tried: > : > :$ PIPE SHOW DEVICE/FILES {ddcu:} | SEARCH SYS$PIPE {filename} > : > :And no process name or id was listed for the file. > > > Did you try with > $pipe inst list | sear sys$pipe > > Best, Gorazd > > > Also note that INSTALL can use a logical name (as filename). Make sure that that isn't fooling you. Jan-Erik. ------------------------------ Date: 11 Mar 2008 10:27:05 -0600 From: briggs@encompasserve.org Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: <5FMTYoPATgaq@eisner.encompasserve.org> In article , tadamsmar writes: > On Mar 11, 10:38=A0am, koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob > Koehler) wrote: >> In article com>, tadamsmar writes: >> >> >> >> > The three files that remain locked with not "another user" process are >> > all global sectons. =A0Maybe this has something to do with it. >> >> =A0 =A0Global sections are often INSTALLed (made known to the OS via the >> =A0 =A0INSTALL utility). =A0That keeps them open until they are removed vi= > a >> =A0 =A0the INSTALL utility. >> >> =A0 =A0Also, they will remain open until all processes using them exit, >> =A0 =A0whether they were created via INSTALL or via $CRMPSC(). >> >> =A0 =A0You don't have to have multiple users to have multiple processes. >> =A0 =A0"SHOW SYSTEM" shows you all the processes. > > Are you suggesting some solution? > > As I said, I tried: > > $ PIPE SHOW DEVICE/FILES {ddcu:} | SEARCH SYS$PIPE {filename} > > And no process name or id was listed for the file. Was the file listed? Was the PID listed as 00000000? It's one thing to say that the file was not listed. It's a different thing to say that it's listed but with no associated process. Not meaning to yell at you, but you didn't say either. One assumes that the file in question is open as a global section. As a result, no specific process is indicated as the owner of the open file. It's held open by the system until the global section goes away. The global section has a reference count that prevents it from going away until no processes have it mapped. If it's a permanent global section, it also has to be explicitly deleted before it will go away. Off hand, I don't know how to track surviving processes that are mapped to a temporary global section that has a non-zero reference count or to a permanent global section for which a delete has been requested but a non-zero reference count still remains. I'd probably try to use $ ANALYZE /SYSTEM and look at the section table for each running process in turn. If you start now, with the system up and not yet into the problematic scenario, you may be able to narrow down which processes have the section mapped. Then when the problem hits again, you'll know which processes to look at. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 07:50:18 -0700 (PDT) From: tadamsmar Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: <2c123c7b-bec2-4064-911b-b5acbfc55bb8@q78g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> On Mar 11, 9:09=A0am, Jan-Erik S=F6derholm wrote: > tadamsmar wrote: > > On Mar 11, 8:35 am, "Ken Robinson" wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 7:57 AM, tadamsmar wrote:= > >>> Well, I had this file lock problem again today. =A0I tried what VAXMAN= > >>> suggested > >>> below, but it showed no process associated with the file. > >>> Anyway, since I did not have time to wait for a reply to this post, I > >>> rebooted to clear up the problem (I know I will get flamed for > >>> rebooting VMS to solve a problem.) > >> Did you, at least, cause a crash dump, so it could be analyzed? > > >> Ken > > > I did not. > > > What could I learn from that? =A0Remember, =A0I ran: > > > $ PIPE SHOW DEVICE/FILES {ddcu:} | SEARCH SYS$PIPE {filename} > > > And no process is listed for the file. =A0I checked all three files that= > > were reported as opened by another user. > > I hope that you *at least* made a copy of all errors, show dev/file > and any other stuff showing the problem before rebooting, right =A0? > > And what did F$FILE_ATTRIBUTES("","KNOWN") > say about it ? I'll try that next time I have the problem. > I think you have to provide hard evidence that things realy are > like you're saying. Thanks! You helped me solve this problem. I'll just assume I am wrong! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 07:54:21 -0700 (PDT) From: tadamsmar Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: On Mar 11, 12:27=A0pm, bri...@encompasserve.org wrote: > In article , tadamsmar writes: > > > > > > > On Mar 11, 10:38=3DA0am, koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob > > Koehler) wrote: > >> In article > com>, tadamsmar writes: > > >> > The three files that remain locked with not "another user" process ar= e > >> > all global sectons. =3DA0Maybe this has something to do with it. > > >> =3DA0 =3DA0Global sections are often INSTALLed (made known to the OS vi= a the > >> =3DA0 =3DA0INSTALL utility). =3DA0That keeps them open until they are r= emoved vi=3D > > a > >> =3DA0 =3DA0the INSTALL utility. > > >> =3DA0 =3DA0Also, they will remain open until all processes using them e= xit, > >> =3DA0 =3DA0whether they were created via INSTALL or via $CRMPSC(). > > >> =3DA0 =3DA0You don't have to have multiple users to have multiple proce= sses. > >> =3DA0 =3DA0"SHOW SYSTEM" shows you all the processes. > > > Are you suggesting some solution? > > > As I said, I tried: > > > $ PIPE SHOW DEVICE/FILES {ddcu:} | SEARCH SYS$PIPE {filename} > > > And no process name or id was listed for the file. > > Was the file listed? =A0Was the PID listed as 00000000? > > It's one thing to say that the file was not listed. The file was listed. > > It's a different thing to say that it's listed but with no > associated process. > > Not meaning to yell at you, but you didn't say either. the PID is 00000000 the place where the process name would be is blank like this: " " > > One assumes that the file in question is open as a global section. > As a result, no specific process is indicated as the owner of the > open file. =A0It's held open by the system until the global section > goes away. =A0The global section has a reference count that prevents > it from going away until no processes have it mapped. =A0If it's > a permanent global section, it also has to be explicitly deleted > before it will go away. > > Off hand, I don't know how to track surviving processes that are mapped > to a temporary global section that has a non-zero reference count or > to a permanent global section for which a delete has been requested > but a non-zero reference count still remains. > > I'd probably try to use $ ANALYZE /SYSTEM and look at the section > table for each running process in turn. > > If you start now, with the system up and not yet into the problematic > scenario, you may be able to narrow down which processes have the section > mapped. =A0Then when the problem hits again, you'll know which processes > to look at.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 07:58:05 -0700 (PDT) From: tadamsmar Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: <33407887-aaf9-433d-9320-250bd558654a@u72g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> On Mar 11, 12:27=A0pm, bri...@encompasserve.org wrote: > In article , tadamsmar writes: > > > > > > > On Mar 11, 10:38=3DA0am, koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob > > Koehler) wrote: > >> In article > com>, tadamsmar writes: > > >> > The three files that remain locked with not "another user" process ar= e > >> > all global sectons. =3DA0Maybe this has something to do with it. > > >> =3DA0 =3DA0Global sections are often INSTALLed (made known to the OS vi= a the > >> =3DA0 =3DA0INSTALL utility). =3DA0That keeps them open until they are r= emoved vi=3D > > a > >> =3DA0 =3DA0the INSTALL utility. > > >> =3DA0 =3DA0Also, they will remain open until all processes using them e= xit, > >> =3DA0 =3DA0whether they were created via INSTALL or via $CRMPSC(). > > >> =3DA0 =3DA0You don't have to have multiple users to have multiple proce= sses. > >> =3DA0 =3DA0"SHOW SYSTEM" shows you all the processes. > > > Are you suggesting some solution? > > > As I said, I tried: > > > $ PIPE SHOW DEVICE/FILES {ddcu:} | SEARCH SYS$PIPE {filename} > > > And no process name or id was listed for the file. > > Was the file listed? =A0Was the PID listed as 00000000? > > It's one thing to say that the file was not listed. > > It's a different thing to say that it's listed but with no > associated process. > > Not meaning to yell at you, but you didn't say either. > > One assumes that the file in question is open as a global section. > As a result, no specific process is indicated as the owner of the > open file. =A0It's held open by the system until the global section > goes away. =A0The global section has a reference count that prevents > it from going away until no processes have it mapped. =A0If it's > a permanent global section, it also has to be explicitly deleted > before it will go away. > > Off hand, I don't know how to track surviving processes that are mapped > to a temporary global section that has a non-zero reference count or > to a permanent global section for which a delete has been requested > but a non-zero reference count still remains. > > I'd probably try to use $ ANALYZE /SYSTEM and look at the section > table for each running process in turn. > > If you start now, with the system up and not yet into the problematic > scenario, you may be able to narrow down which processes have the section > mapped. =A0Then when the problem hits again, you'll know which processes > to look at.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - You are right, even when the system is running normally, there the PID is all zeros and no process name is shows for show dev/file ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:04:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Volker Halle Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: <3f45a88c-2113-4fbc-95fe-9ac21d5edea2@u72g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> If these are actually shared images, you need to de-install them with INSTALL DELETE filename If these are global sections, you need to run the application image, which deletes those global sections and you need to stop all process, which still have them mapped. I documented an analytic approach using SDA to find out, which processes are still mapped to delete-pending global sections. Please see this article in ITRC: http://forums11.itrc.hp.com/service/forums/questionanswer.do?threadId=1204412 Volker. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 15:20:09 GMT From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan-Erik_S=F6derholm?= Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: tadamsmar wrote: > On Mar 11, 9:09 am, Jan-Erik Söderholm > wrote: >> I think you have to provide hard evidence that things realy are >> like you're saying. > > Thanks! You helped me solve this problem. Fine, I'm gald you did. > > I'll just assume I am wrong! I couldn't care less what *you* assume. But *I* will assume that until you prove your're not. Not by what you say/write/claim, but by presenting hard evidence (error messages, output from commands and so on). It's not enough to say that "I did this and that", *SHOW* that you actualy did it ! Anyway, It seems as you've found that the images/sections are still INSTALL'ed, so that's it, right ? :-) Best Regards, Jan-Erik. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 09:13:21 -0700 (PDT) From: tadamsmar Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: <6360eeaa-a66f-4073-af48-73abb837cc58@60g2000hsy.googlegroups.com> On Mar 11, 11:04=A0am, Volker Halle wrote: > If these are actually shared images, you need to de-install them with > INSTALL DELETE filename > > If these are global sections, you need to run the application image, > which deletes those global sections and you need to stop all process, > which still have them mapped. > > I documented an analytic approach using SDA to find out, which > processes are still mapped to delete-pending global sections. > > Please see this article in ITRC: > > http://forums11.itrc.hp.com/service/forums/questionanswer.do?threadId... > > Volker. Thanks, I will try the ideas in that article the next time it happens. Maybe I can improve my app shutdown command procedure to prevent the problem. ------------------------------ Date: 11 Mar 2008 12:49:26 -0600 From: briggs@encompasserve.org Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: In article <6360eeaa-a66f-4073-af48-73abb837cc58@60g2000hsy.googlegroups.com>, tadamsmar writes: > On Mar 11, 11:04=A0am, Volker Halle wrote: >> If these are actually shared images, you need to de-install them with >> INSTALL DELETE filename >> >> If these are global sections, you need to run the application image, >> which deletes those global sections and you need to stop all process, >> which still have them mapped. >> >> I documented an analytic approach using SDA to find out, which >> processes are still mapped to delete-pending global sections. >> >> Please see this article in ITRC: >> >> http://forums11.itrc.hp.com/service/forums/questionanswer.do?threadId... >> >> Volker. > > Thanks, I will try the ideas in that article the next time it > happens. Maybe I can improve my app shutdown command procedure to > prevent the problem. As I suggested earlier, why not try those ideas _now_? If you wait until the problem occurs, you'll be under the gun and might very well end up rebooting the machine due to time constraints. If you try it now, you'll be able to go slow and work out any difficulties with the procedure ahead of time. You'll have had practice. As a bonus, you can figure out which of your processes do or do not have that section file mapped while the system is running in production. The ones that do will be your obvious targets when the problem recurs. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 09:57:19 -0700 (PDT) From: tadamsmar Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: <3f3fcc5d-594a-4bd3-bf64-c41ee6ec4e14@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> On Mar 11, 2:49=A0pm, bri...@encompasserve.org wrote: > In article <6360eeaa-a66f-4073-af48-73abb837c...@60g2000hsy.googlegroups.c= om>, tadamsmar writes: > > > > > > > On Mar 11, 11:04=3DA0am, Volker Halle wrote: > >> If these are actually shared images, you need to de-install them with > >> INSTALL DELETE filename > > >> If these are global sections, you need to run the application image, > >> which deletes those global sections and you need to stop all process, > >> which still have them mapped. > > >> I documented an analytic approach using SDA to find out, which > >> processes are still mapped to delete-pending global sections. > > >> Please see this article in ITRC: > > >>http://forums11.itrc.hp.com/service/forums/questionanswer.do?threadId...= > > >> Volker. > > > Thanks, =A0I will try the ideas in that article the next time it > > happens. =A0Maybe I can improve my app shutdown command procedure to > > prevent the problem. > > As I suggested earlier, why not try those ideas _now_? > > If you wait until the problem occurs, you'll be under the gun and > might very well end up rebooting the machine due to time constraints. > > If you try it now, you'll be able to go slow and work out any > difficulties with the procedure ahead of time. =A0You'll have had practice= . > > As a bonus, you can figure out which of your processes do or do not > have that section file mapped while the system is running in production. > The ones that do will be your obvious targets when the problem recurs.- Hi= de quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Good idea, I can certainly try to tighten it up. The problem is transient. I don't know how to reproduce it reliably. It does not happen everytime I shutdown the app. In fact, it never happened for 20 years, only started happening recently. ------------------------------ Date: 11 Mar 2008 13:18:08 -0600 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: In article <63ncduF27jnrhU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: > > Why? For being yet another datapoint that disproves this myth? > No, for adding to a myth, since his posts have show sufficient tehcnical information to show that he did not have to reboot. ------------------------------ Date: 11 Mar 2008 13:24:12 -0600 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: In article , tadamsmar writes: > On Mar 11, 12:27=A0pm, bri...@encompasserve.org wrote: >> It's one thing to say that the file was not listed. > > The file was listed. > Then the file is INSTALLed. A privileged user INSTALLed it and a privileged user can INSTALL REMOVE it. At which point it will get closed. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:30:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Volker Halle Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: <487660d5-d06d-4c80-baa7-7be34618bfd0@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com> On 11 Mrz., 20:24, koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote: > In article , tadamsmar writes: > > > On Mar 11, 12:27=3DA0pm, bri...@encompasserve.org wrote: > >> It's one thing to say that the file was not listed. > > > The file was listed. > > =A0 =A0Then the file is INSTALLed. =A0A privileged user INSTALLed it and > =A0 =A0a privileged user can INSTALL REMOVE it. =A0At which point it will > =A0 =A0get closed. INSTALL REMOVE (or DELETE) will mark the global section for deletion. The file will not be closed, until the last process unmaps the global section. Volker. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:00:09 +0100 From: Jur van der Burg <"lddriver at digiater dot nl"> Subject: Re: DLT-4 cassetes are slower than DLT-3 on the same drive? Message-ID: <47d64a16$0$14359$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl> The new drive may be faster, and the current system you have can't keep up with the speed of the new drives while it could with the old ones. So listen to the drives, if they move back- and forward during backup (shoe-shining) that's your problem. You may want to look at the io_limit qualifier in backup to lower the value. You did not mention what kind of system this is. Jur. yehavi@vms.huji.ac.il wrote, On 10-3-2008 17:30: > Hello, > > We have DLT-40/80 tape drives connected to Alpha systems running VMS-8.3; > up to recently we have been using DLT-3 cassetes and now moved to DLT-4. We > noticed that backups take much more time (2 times and more) with the new tapes > compared to the old ones. This happens when we use the same density or use the > higher densities of DLT-4. > > Anyone has an idea what to look for? > > Thanks, __Yehavi: ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 03:57:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Dave Gullen Subject: Re: DLT-4 cassetes are slower than DLT-3 on the same drive? Message-ID: And always worth checking you have /BLOCK_SIZE=65500 (Though keep below 32256 if you want to copy the saveset to disk) Dave On 11 Mar, 09:00, Jur van der Burg <"lddriver at digiater dot nl"> wrote: > The new drive may be faster, and the current system you have can't keep > up with the speed of the new drives while it could with the old ones. > So listen to the drives, if they move back- and forward during backup > (shoe-shining) that's your problem. You may want to look at the > io_limit qualifier in backup to lower the value. You did not mention what > kind of system this is. > > Jur. > > yeh...@vms.huji.ac.il wrote, On 10-3-2008 17:30: > > > Hello, > > > We have DLT-40/80 tape drives connected to Alpha systems running VMS-8.3; > > up to recently we have been using DLT-3 cassetes and now moved to DLT-4. We > > noticed that backups take much more time (2 times and more) with the new tapes > > compared to the old ones. This happens when we use the same density or use the > > higher densities of DLT-4. > > > Anyone has an idea what to look for? > > > Thanks, __Yehavi: ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:04:47 -0700 (PDT) From: tadamsmar Subject: DST BUG!? Re: Time changing after reboot Message-ID: On Mar 11, 9:33=A0am, tadamsmar wrote: > I have some systems set up for automatic time change. =A0 Everything > appeared to work fine on March 9, but... > > I just had to reboot one of them and it jumped forward one hour! > Then I rebooted another one and the same thing happened on that > system. > > I fixed these with: > > $@utc$time_setup "" tdf -240 -60 > > (shutting down sensitive apps before this) > > I tested with another reboot and they worked OK. > > This is VMS 7.3.2. =A0I did not have any problems in the fall. > > I have TZ V0200 installed. > > I still have 2 more systems to test by rebooting. =A0This command: > > $@utc$time_setup show > > Gives this on one of the systems unrebooted: > > AUTO_DLIGHT_SAV is set to "1". > OpenVMS will automatically change to/from Daylight Saving Time. > (in time zones that use Daylight Saving Time) > > =A0 =A0 LOCAL TIME ZONE =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=3D EASTERN / US -- DAYLIGHT TI= ME > =A0 =A0 LOCAL SYSTEM TIME =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=3D 11-MAR-2008 09:31:45.88 (EDT)= > =A0 =A0 TIME DIFFERENTIAL FACTOR =3D -4:00 > =A0 =A0 TIME ZONE RULE =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =3D EST5EDT4,M3.2.0/02,M11.1.0/= 02 > =A0 =A0 Change EST to EDT on the Second Sunday of March (9-Mar-2008) at > 02:00 > =A0 =A0 Change EDT to EST on the First Sunday of November (2-Nov-2008) at > 02:00 I changed the name on this thread because it seemed to be being ignored, but its potentially important to lots of users. The time on these systems is still jumping forward one hour when I reset. It a pretty critical problem I need to get solved today. I have not checked to see if the patch is up to date. But if I have the right patch then lots of people could have this problem. I have turned AUTO_DLIGHT_SAV off on one of the systems in an\ attempt to stop the problem. So far that is working,. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 06:00:47 -0700 From: "Tom Linden" Subject: Re: from TheDailyWTF Message-ID: On Fri, 07 Mar 2008 05:10:28 -0800, VAXman- <@SendSpamHere.ORG> wrote: > In article , "Tom Linden" > writes: >> On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 16:55:42 -0800, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >> >>> My apologies if it has been posted before: >>> >>> http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/Jurassic-Programmers-.aspx >>> >>> Arne >> >> In the 80's General Motors tried to move off VAX PL/I on to Unix/C >> The project was cancelled after several years and $12M later. Ford had >> a similar experience > > ...but sharing their experience... > > Ford is now foisting Micro$oft ladden automobiles upon the hapless > public. > Hey kids, "Where do you want to go today?" Well you can't because the > car > has been hacked and it has the latest 'NoGoNoHow' virus. > > I can't wait for the day you turn the ignition key and get a dash console > popup. > > +----------------------+ > | Engine start failure | > | | > | [Abort][Retry][Fail] | > +----------------------+ > > Good thing the "Geek Squad" is mobile in their Micro$oft free VW bugs. > Bluetooth technology is great. http://www.heise.de/ct/schlagseite/03/01/gross.jpg -- PL/I for OpenVMS www.kednos.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:21:20 -0500 From: Slor Subject: FS: VAXServer 3100, VT1300, MicroServer-SP, and storage expansion units Message-ID: I fairly recently acquired a VAX setup that I believe I've decided I just plain don't have room (going to stick with Alpha hardware for my hobbying), so I wanted to see if anyone in either group has an interest in it. The system includes the following 5 boxes: - 1 VAXServer 3100 - 2 Storage Expansion units - 1 VT1300 terminal - 1 MicroServer-SP unit Except for the MicroServer, these machines are each reasomably weighty, so shipping could be a cost issue. I'm in Indianapolis, IN, USA, so anyone in the area is more than welcome to come pick them up. If you take everything, it's yours for $50, which is what I paid for it. If you just want an item or two, let me know and we'll figure it out. You can email me directly by reversing each segment of my public email address. thanks! -- James http://www.e-host-direct.com Reliable web hosting from $12/year. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 23:34:51 -0700 (PDT) From: andrewr04@gmail.com Subject: OpenVMS Oracle v7.3.3 to Oracle 10GR2 migration and application development deve Message-ID: <8a803e30-bc67-403e-9e77-35167a206f27@q78g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> Hi, HI, We are migrating from Oracle v7.3.3 to Oracle 10gR2 on OpenVMS. The programs are linked to a number of Oracle v7.3.3 libraries. We need to find the equivalent Oracle 10gR2 libraries. The v7.3.3 libaries are:- ORA_SQLOLB:SQLLIB.OLB/LIB ORA_OLB:OCI/LIB/INCLUDE ORA_OLB:KUSR/LIB ORA_OLB:KLIB/LIB/INCLUDE ORA_OLB:LLIB/LIB ORA_OLB:ORACLE.OPT/OPT,- ORA_OLB:SGAPAD.OPT/OPT,- ORA_OLB:CORE.OPT/OPT,- ORA_OLB:UPI/OPT,- SYMBOL=OSNSOI,0 SYMBOL=OSNCOI,0 Any ideas as to where the library/options files are now located with Oracle 10GR2 would be appreciated. Thanks Andrew ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:43:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Hein RMS van den Heuvel Subject: Re: OpenVMS Oracle v7.3.3 to Oracle 10GR2 migration and application development Message-ID: <31750be5-e19c-416a-b726-244cf3ece35e@p73g2000hsd.googlegroups.com> On Mar 11, 2:34=A0am, andrew...@gmail.com wrote: > Hi, > > HI, > > We are migrating from Oracle v7.3.3 to Oracle 10gR2 on OpenVMS. > > The programs are linked to a number of Oracle v7.3.3 libraries. We : > ORA_OLB:ORACLE.OPT/OPT,- > ORA_OLB:SGAPAD.OPT/OPT,- Best catch up on your Oracle release-note, userguides, reading! You have 10+ years to catch up with. The 7.3 link option file shown is using the oracle 1-task environment. The end user program directlly links in all Oracle code and maps to the SGA directly (SGAPAD). I would suggest you edit your main .OPT to remove what is no longer needed, but you can possibly alternatively replace several of those file with empty place-holders. You will need to go 2-task and whiel the link will be drastically more simple, and quicker, it will be different. You probably also will like to read up on TNSNAMES.ORA, LISTENER.ORA and the LISTENER process. Good luck! Hein. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 09:54:39 -0500 From: Michael Austin Subject: Re: OpenVMS Oracle v7.3.3 to Oracle 10GR2 migration and application development Message-ID: <31xBj.579$LV5.448@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net> vancouvercancun@yahoo.ca wrote: > On Mar 11, 2:34 am, andrew...@gmail.com wrote: >> Hi, >> >> HI, >> >> We are migrating from Oracle v7.3.3 to Oracle 10gR2 on OpenVMS. >> >> The programs are linked to a number of Oracle v7.3.3 libraries. We >> need to find the equivalent Oracle 10gR2 libraries. The v7.3.3 >> libaries are:- >> >> ORA_SQLOLB:SQLLIB.OLB/LIB >> ORA_OLB:OCI/LIB/INCLUDE >> ORA_OLB:KUSR/LIB >> ORA_OLB:KLIB/LIB/INCLUDE >> ORA_OLB:LLIB/LIB >> >> ORA_OLB:ORACLE.OPT/OPT,- >> ORA_OLB:SGAPAD.OPT/OPT,- >> ORA_OLB:CORE.OPT/OPT,- >> ORA_OLB:UPI/OPT,- >> >> SYMBOL=OSNSOI,0 >> SYMBOL=OSNCOI,0 >> >> Any ideas as to where the library/options files are now located with >> Oracle 10GR2 would be appreciated. >> >> Thanks >> Andrew > > There should be a symbol created by Oracle named something ln* for > linking your objects into an executable. When using Pro*Fortran, the > symbol is lnprofor. This procedure should take care of specifying the > Oracle libraries. Can you find these symbols? > > By the way, what VMS version are you using? Are you using > precompilers? > > Van Just curious, but, how do you propose to get from 7.3.3 to 10g? min versions that can go directly to 10g are 8.1.7.4 or 9.2.0.4 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 19:02:49 +1030 From: Mark Daniel Subject: Re: OT: Universal healthcare in England failing - boy dies ! Message-ID: <13tch1aluli6h72@corp.supernews.com> ultradwc@gmail.com wrote: > On Mar 7, 11:17 am, davi...@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote: > >>In article , ultra...@gmail.com writes: >> >> >> >> >>>On Mar 7, 9:05=A0am, davi...@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote: >>> >>>>In article >> >>>om>, ultra...@gmail.com writes: >> >>>>>On Mar 6, 8:27=3DA0pm, JF Mezei wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Bob, >> >>>>>>do you realise that people like you who use religious values/reasons to= >> >>>>>>oppose certain topics are exactly the same as muslim extremists who use= >> >>>>>>religious excuses to rebel against stuff they don't like (such as the U= >>> >>>SA)=3D >>> >>>>>? >> >>>>>>It is interesting that the country that should understand religious >>>>>>extremists the most (because of 9-11) should itself have so many >>>>>>extremists and not only no realise it, but give those extremists >>>>>>political voices and power. >> >>>>>I AM TIRED OF YOU EQUATING CHRISTIANS TO >>>>>MUSLIM EXTREMISTS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >> >>>>>Christians do not tie bombs to themselves and kill >>>>>others because they will not believe ... >> >>>>I've never understood why a terrorist who sacrifices themselves when attac= >>> >>>king >>> >>>>their enemies should be considered any different than a terrorist who >>>>just plants a bomb and walks away and therefore lives to plant further bom= >>> >>>bs. >>> >>>>The IRA whose members were supposedly Christians didn't use suicide bombin= >>> >>>g >>> >>>>but they did force others to drive cars filled with explosives at British >>>>Army checkpoints by threatening their families >>>>seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_bomb >>>>( So no they didn't tie bombs to themselves to kill others - they "tied" b= >>> >>>ombs >>> >>>>to other innocent civilians and blew them up to kill others. >>>>I'd regard that tactic as being far more dispicable that suicide bombing) >> >>>>It is also probably worth noting that some of the Japanese Kamikazi pilots= >> >>>>were Christian see >> >>>>http://www.martinrothonline.com/Christians&War/Christian_suicide_bomb... >> >>>>David Webb >>>>Security team leader >>>>CCSS >>>>Middlesex University >> >>>>>the apostles and all other TRUE Christians were put >>>>>to death ... the last time I checked, it was Christians >>>>>who were laying dead in the catacombs in Rome, not >>>>>romans ...- Hide quoted text - >> >>>>- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - >> >>>>- Show quoted text - >> >>>wrong ... they were NOT Christians ... >> >>>true Christians know that only God has the right to >>>kill, and that means suicide too, and if they do it is >>>murder ... and you can add abortion to that too ... >> >>So throughout history most christians haven't really been christian ? >>Catholic church - Inquisition killing heretics, witches etc >>Christian countries fighting wars in the name of religion. >>Most religious denominations fighting and indeed glorying in wars. >> >>The IRA members definitely considered themselves to be Catholic just as the >>Loyalists considered themselves to be protestants. >> >> >> >> >>>just because someone says there are a Christian >>>does not mean they are ... >> >>The same could be said about many who profess to be muslims. >> >>David Webb >>Security team leader >>CCSS >>Middlesex University- Hide quoted text - >> >>- Show quoted text - > > > those who kill in the name of God are NOT Christians ... > God has very rarely given that authority to anyone outside > of Himself, mainly the jews in certain circumstances ... > most of the time, he sends the angel of death to handle > that ... Bob is (substantially) correct - again, see http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.vms/msg/7ff788c55f00b2c6 YHWH (the mountain-dwelling, desert deity of the Israelites, the god of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob [Exodus 3:15 http://bible.cc/exodus/3-15.htm] and hence of all the major Abrahamic religions - Judaism, Christianity [Acts 3:13 http://bible.cc/acts/3-13.htm] and Islam) generally executes his will vicariously and often (though by no means exclusively) using transcendent beings. Of course, while ultimate responsibility resides with the superior deity, there is often some confusion as to who is the actual agent in any particular instance. Sometimes Malach Adonai (or Malach Elohim), sometimes YHYW, sometimes the Elohim themselves. Sometimes all together, representing the divine, as in the following passage: "The angel of the LORD appeared to him in a blazing fire from the midst of a bush... When the LORD saw that he turned aside to look, God called to him from the midst of the bush and said, "Moses, Moses!" ... I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob." [Exodus 3:2-6 http://bible.cc/exodus/3-2.htm] Of course there is no doubt that YHWH is the progenitor. "About midnight I am going out into the midst of Egypt, and all the firstborn in the land of Egypt shall die, from the firstborn of the Pharaoh who sits on his throne, even to the firstborn of the slave girl who is behind the millstones; all the firstborn of the cattle as well." [Exodus 11:4 http://bible.cc/exodus/11-4.htm] Some of the children would have been below the age of consent (knowledge of good and evil), twelve years by tradition (also by recent concession http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.vms/msg/e56644658146b4e7), and in modern milspeak would have been 'collateral damage'. (185,000) "Then the angel of the LORD went forth, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians a hundred and fourscore and five thousand: and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead corpses." [Isaiah 37:36 http://bible.cc/isaiah/37-36.htm] Transcendent beings do not always kill directly. Sometimes they just deliver an effective biological agent (WMD?): (70,000) "So the LORD sent a pestilence upon Israel from the morning until the appointed time, and seventy thousand men of the people from Dan to Beersheba died." Saddam (or Chemical Ali, et al) - are these precedent? [2 Samuel 24:15 http://bible.cc/2_samuel/24-15.htm] YHWH is occasionally dismayed by the carnage and changes his mind: "When the angel stretched out his hand toward Jerusalem to destroy it, the LORD relented from the calamity and said to the angel who destroyed the people, "It is enough! Now relax your hand!"" [2 Samuel 24:16 http://bible.cc/2_samuel/24-16.htm] YHWH is not cogniscent (or at least not appreciative) of good intentions. "...Uzzah reached out toward the ark of God and took hold of it, for the oxen nearly upset it. And the anger of the LORD burned against Uzzah, and God struck him down there for his irreverence; and he died there" [2 Samuel 6:6-7 http://bible.cc/2_samuel/6-6.htm] But back to the primary thesis. "For My angel will go before you and bring you in to the land of the Amorites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Canaanites, the Hivites and the Jebusites; and I will completely destroy them." [Exodus 23:23 http://bible.cc/exodus/23-23.htm] However, far more commonly the human rather than the transcendent have been the instruments of YHWH's designs. Indeed: "Cursed be the one who does the LORD's work negligently, And cursed be the one who restrains his sword from blood." [Jeremiah 48:10 http://bible.cc/jeremiah/48-10.htm] Ancient Judaic lore is replete with precedent. "and when the LORD your God delivers them before you and you defeat them, then you shall utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor show mercy unto them" [Deuteronomy 7:2 http://bible.cc/deuteronomy/7-2.htm] "They utterly destroyed everything in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox and sheep and donkey, with the edge of the sword." [Joshua 6:21 http://bible.cc/joshua/6-21.htm] "Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man intimately." [Numbers 31:17 http://bible.cc/numbers/31-17.htm] "But all the girls who have not known man intimately, spare for yourselves." [Numbers 31:18 http://bible.cc/numbers/31-18.htm] (Not quite in the league of what's currently being offered but ...) "A maiden, two maidens for every warrior;" [Judges 5:30 http://bible.cc/judges/5-30.htm] "And they found among the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead 400 young virgins who had not known a man by lying with him; and they brought them to the camp at Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan." [Judges 21:12 http://bible.cc/judges/21-12.htm] And not only are foreigners (non-Israelites, Arabs) visited by his messengers. Those within the camp were subject to the agents of YHWH too. Forced conversion: "...whoever would not seek the LORD God of Israel should be put to death, whether small or great, man or woman." [2 Chronicles 15:13-http://bible.cc/2_chronicles/15-13.htm] "But to the others He said in my hearing, "Go through the city after him and strike; do not let your eye have pity and do not spare. Utterly slay old men, young men, maidens, little children, and women, ... So they started with the elders who were before the temple. And He said to them, "Defile the temple and fill the courts with the slain. Go out!" Thus they went out and struck down the people in the city." Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome (PTSS) must have been unknown amongst the (better debriefed or more inclined) combatants in these early Israelite armed forces. [Ezekiel 9:5-7 http://bible.cc/ezekiel/9-5.htm] "Then the LORD spoke to Moses saying ... 'Moreover, the one who blasphemes the name of the LORD shall surely be put to death; all the congregation shall certainly stone him. The alien as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death.'" [Leviticus 24:13-16 http://bible.cc/leviticus/24-11.htm] "if there is anyone who curses his father or his mother, he shall surely be put to death" [Exodus 21:15 http://bible.cc/exodus/21-15.htm] (Whence John Edward? ...) "Now a man or a woman who is a medium or a spiritist shall surely be put to death." [Leviticus 20:27 http://bible.cc/leviticus/20-27.htm] (Whence - well, name just about any politician or tele-evangelist ...) "If there is a man who commits adultery with another man's wife, one who commits adultery with his friend's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death." [Leviticus 20:10 http://bible.cc/leviticus/20-10.htm] Of course it's worse if Dad happens to be a clergyman. "Also the daughter of any priest, if she profanes herself by harlotry, she profanes her father; she shall be burned with fire." [Leviticus 21:9 http://bible.cc/leviticus/21-9.htm] "[if] the girl was not found a virgin [on her wedding night] then they shall bring out the girl to the doorway of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death" [Deuteronomy 22:20-21 http://bible.cc/deuteronomy/22-20.htm] "they found a man gathering wood on the sabbath day ... Then the LORD said to Moses, "The man shall surely be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp."" [Numbers 15:32-35 http://bible.cc/numbers/15-32.htm] (And of course this old chestnut:) "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death." [Leviticus 20:13 http://bible.cc/leviticus/20-13.htm] Of course the Judaic (and Christian) scriptures are relatively voluminous and this represents but a small sample of what could be cited. The 'certain circumstances' were fairly wide-ranging. -- In childhood our credulity serves us well. It helps us to pack, with extraordinary rapidity, our skulls full of the wisdom of our parents and our ancestors. But if we don't grow out of it in the fullness of time, our ... nature makes us a sitting target for astrologers, mediums, gurus, evangelists, and quacks. We need to replace the automatic credulity of childhood with the constructive skepticism of adult science. [Richard Dawkins; Unweaving The Rainbow] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:33:45 -0700 (PDT) From: ultradwc@gmail.com Subject: Re: OT: Universal healthcare in England failing - boy dies ! Message-ID: <75ca92d1-c0a7-4d01-bf6c-aa19c30400cd@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> On Mar 11, 4:32=A0am, Mark Daniel wrote: > ultra...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Mar 7, 11:17 am, davi...@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote: > > >>In article , ultra...@gmail.com writes: > > >>>On Mar 7, 9:05=3DA0am, davi...@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote: > > >>>>In article > >>>om>, ultra...@gmail.com writes: > > >>>>>On Mar 6, 8:27=3D3DA0pm, JF Mezei wro= te: > > >>>>>>Bob, > > >>>>>>do you realise that people like you who use religious values/reasons= to=3D > > >>>>>>oppose certain topics are exactly the same as muslim extremists who = use=3D > > >>>>>>religious excuses to rebel against stuff they don't like (such as th= e U=3D > > >>>SA)=3D3D > > >>>>>? > > >>>>>>It is interesting that the country that should understand religious > >>>>>>extremists the most (because of 9-11) should itself have so many > >>>>>>extremists and not only no realise it, but give those extremists > >>>>>>political voices and power. > > >>>>>I AM TIRED OF YOU EQUATING CHRISTIANS TO > >>>>>MUSLIM EXTREMISTS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > >>>>>Christians do not tie bombs to themselves and kill > >>>>>others because they will not believe ... > > >>>>I've never understood why a terrorist who sacrifices themselves when a= ttac=3D > > >>>king > > >>>>their enemies should be considered any different than a terrorist who > >>>>just plants a bomb and walks away and therefore lives to plant further= bom=3D > > >>>bs. > > >>>>The IRA whose members were supposedly Christians didn't use suicide bo= mbin=3D > > >>>g > > >>>>but they did force others to drive cars filled with explosives at Brit= ish > >>>>Army checkpoints by threatening their families > >>>>seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_bomb > >>>>( So no they didn't tie bombs to themselves to kill others - they "tie= d" b=3D > > >>>ombs > > >>>>to other innocent civilians and blew them up to kill others. > >>>>I'd regard that tactic as being far more dispicable that suicide bombi= ng) > > >>>>It is also probably worth noting that some of the Japanese Kamikazi pi= lots=3D > > >>>>were Christian see > > >>>>http://www.martinrothonline.com/Christians&War/Christian_suicide_bomb.= .. > > >>>>David Webb > >>>>Security team leader > >>>>CCSS > >>>>Middlesex University > > >>>>>the apostles and all other TRUE Christians were put > >>>>>to death ... the last time I checked, it was Christians > >>>>>who were laying dead in the catacombs in Rome, not > >>>>>romans ...- Hide quoted text - > > >>>>- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > >>>>- Show quoted text - > > >>>wrong ... they were NOT Christians ... > > >>>true Christians know that only God has the right to > >>>kill, and that means suicide too, and if they do it is > >>>murder ... and you can add abortion to that too ... > > >>So throughout history most christians haven't really been christian ? > >>Catholic church - Inquisition killing heretics, witches etc > >>Christian countries fighting wars in the name of religion. > >>Most religious denominations fighting and indeed glorying in wars. > > >>The IRA members definitely considered themselves to be Catholic just as = the > >>Loyalists considered themselves to be protestants. > > >>>just because someone says there are a Christian > >>>does not mean they are ... > > >>The same could be said about many who profess to be muslims. > > >>David Webb > >>Security team leader > >>CCSS > >>Middlesex University- Hide quoted text - > > >>- Show quoted text - > > > those who kill in the name of God are NOT Christians ... > > God has very rarely given that authority to anyone outside > > of Himself, mainly the jews in certain circumstances ... > > most of the time, he sends the angel of death to handle > > that ... > > Bob is (substantially) correct - again, seehttp://groups.google.com/group/= comp.os.vms/msg/7ff788c55f00b2c6 > > YHWH (the mountain-dwelling, desert deity of the Israelites, the god of > Abraham, Isaac and Jacob [Exodus 3:15http://bible.cc/exodus/3-15.htm] > and hence of all the major Abrahamic religions - Judaism, Christianity > [Acts 3:13http://bible.cc/acts/3-13.htm] and Islam) generally executes > his will vicariously and often (though by no means exclusively) using > transcendent beings. > > Of course, while ultimate responsibility resides with the superior > deity, there is often some confusion as to who is the actual agent in > any particular instance. =A0Sometimes Malach Adonai (or Malach Elohim), > sometimes YHYW, sometimes the Elohim themselves. =A0Sometimes all > together, representing the divine, as in the following passage: > > "The angel of the LORD appeared to him in a blazing fire from the midst > of a bush... When the LORD saw that he turned aside to look, God called > to him from the midst of the bush and said, "Moses, Moses!" ... I am the > God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of > Jacob." > > [Exodus 3:2-6http://bible.cc/exodus/3-2.htm] > > Of course there is no doubt that YHWH is the progenitor. > > "About midnight I am going out into the midst of Egypt, and all the > firstborn in the land of Egypt shall die, from the firstborn of the > Pharaoh who sits on his throne, even to the firstborn of the slave girl > who is behind the millstones; all the firstborn of the cattle as well." > > [Exodus 11:4http://bible.cc/exodus/11-4.htm] > > Some of the children would have been below the age of consent (knowledge > of good and evil), twelve years by tradition (also by recent concessionhtt= p://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.vms/msg/e56644658146b4e7), and in > modern milspeak would have been 'collateral damage'. > > (185,000) "Then the angel of the LORD went forth, and smote in the camp > of the Assyrians a hundred and fourscore and five thousand: and when > they arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead corpses." > > [Isaiah 37:36http://bible.cc/isaiah/37-36.htm] > > Transcendent beings do not always kill directly. =A0Sometimes they just > deliver an effective biological agent (WMD?): > > (70,000) "So the LORD sent a pestilence upon Israel from the morning > until the appointed time, and seventy thousand men of the people from > Dan to Beersheba died." > > Saddam (or Chemical Ali, et al) - are these precedent? > > [2 Samuel 24:15http://bible.cc/2_samuel/24-15.htm] > > YHWH is occasionally dismayed by the carnage and changes his mind: > > "When the angel stretched out his hand toward Jerusalem to destroy it, > the LORD relented from the calamity and said to the angel who destroyed > the people, "It is enough! Now relax your hand!"" > > [2 Samuel 24:16http://bible.cc/2_samuel/24-16.htm] > > YHWH is not cogniscent (or at least not appreciative) of good intentions. > > "...Uzzah reached out toward the ark of God and took hold of it, for the > oxen nearly upset it. And the anger of the LORD burned against Uzzah, > and God struck him down there for his irreverence; and he died there" > > [2 Samuel 6:6-7http://bible.cc/2_samuel/6-6.htm] > > But back to the primary thesis. > > "For My angel will go before you and bring you in to the land of the > Amorites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Canaanites, the Hivites and > the Jebusites; and I will completely destroy them." > > [Exodus 23:23http://bible.cc/exodus/23-23.htm] > > However, far more commonly the human rather than the transcendent have > been the instruments of YHWH's designs. =A0Indeed: > > "Cursed be the one who does the LORD's work negligently, And cursed be > the one who restrains his sword from blood." > > [Jeremiah 48:10http://bible.cc/jeremiah/48-10.htm] > > Ancient Judaic lore is replete with precedent. > > "and when the LORD your God delivers them before you and you defeat > them, then you shall utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant > with them, nor show mercy unto them" > > [Deuteronomy 7:2http://bible.cc/deuteronomy/7-2.htm] > > "They utterly destroyed everything in the city, both man and woman, > young and old, and ox and sheep and donkey, with the edge of the sword." > > [Joshua 6:21http://bible.cc/joshua/6-21.htm] > > "Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every > woman who has known man intimately." > > [Numbers 31:17http://bible.cc/numbers/31-17.htm] > > "But all the girls who have not known man intimately, spare for yourselves= ." > > [Numbers 31:18http://bible.cc/numbers/31-18.htm] > > (Not quite in the league of what's currently being offered but ...) > > "A maiden, two maidens for every warrior;" > > [Judges 5:30http://bible.cc/judges/5-30.htm] > > "And they found among the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead 400 young virgins > who had not known a man by lying with him; and they brought them to the > camp at Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan." > > [Judges 21:12http://bible.cc/judges/21-12.htm] > > And not only are foreigners (non-Israelites, Arabs) visited by his > messengers. =A0Those within the camp were subject to the agents of YHWH > too. =A0Forced conversion: > > "...whoever would not seek the LORD God of Israel should be put to > death, whether small or great, man or woman." > > [2 Chronicles 15:13-http://bible.cc/2_chronicles/15-13.htm] > > "But to the others He said in my hearing, "Go through the city after him > and strike; do not let your eye have pity and do not spare. =A0Utterly > slay old men, young men, maidens, little children, and women, ... So > they started with the elders who were before the temple. And He said to > them, "Defile the temple and fill the courts with the slain. Go out!" > Thus they went out and struck down the people in the city." > > Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome (PTSS) must have been unknown amongst the > (better debriefed or more inclined) combatants in these early Israelite > armed forces. > > [Ezekiel 9:5-7http://bible.cc/ezekiel/9-5.htm] > > "Then the LORD spoke to Moses saying ... 'Moreover, the one who > blasphemes the name of the LORD shall surely be put to death; all the > congregation shall certainly stone him. The alien as well as the native, > when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death.'" > > [Leviticus 24:13-16http://bible.cc/leviticus/24-11.htm] > > "if there is anyone who curses his father or his mother, he shall surely > be put to death" > > [Exodus 21:15http://bible.cc/exodus/21-15.htm] > > (Whence John Edward? ...) > > "Now a man or a woman who is a medium or a spiritist shall surely be put > to death." > > [Leviticus 20:27http://bible.cc/leviticus/20-27.htm] > > (Whence - well, name just about any politician or tele-evangelist ...) > > "If there is a man who commits adultery with another man's wife, one who > commits adultery with his friend's wife, the adulterer and the > adulteress shall surely be put to death." > > [Leviticus 20:10http://bible.cc/leviticus/20-10.htm] > > Of course it's worse if Dad happens to be a clergyman. > > "Also the daughter of any priest, if she profanes herself by harlotry, > she profanes her father; she shall be burned with fire." > > [Leviticus 21:9http://bible.cc/leviticus/21-9.htm] > > "[if] the girl was not found a virgin [on her wedding night] then they > shall bring out the girl to the doorway of her father's house, and the > men of her city shall stone her to death" > > [Deuteronomy 22:20-21http://bible.cc/deuteronomy/22-20.htm] > > "they found a man gathering wood on the sabbath day ... Then the LORD > said to Moses, "The man shall surely be put to death; all the > congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp."" > > [Numbers 15:32-35http://bible.cc/numbers/15-32.htm] > > (And of course this old chestnut:) > > "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, > both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put > to death." > > [Leviticus 20:13http://bible.cc/leviticus/20-13.htm] > > Of course the Judaic (and Christian) scriptures are relatively > voluminous and this represents but a small sample of what could be > cited. =A0The 'certain circumstances' were fairly wide-ranging. > > -- > In childhood our credulity serves us well. It helps us to pack, with > extraordinary rapidity, our skulls full of the wisdom of our parents and > our ancestors. But if we don't grow out of it in the fullness of time, > our ... nature makes us a sitting target for astrologers, mediums, > gurus, evangelists, and quacks. We need to replace the automatic > credulity of childhood with the constructive skepticism of adult science. > [Richard Dawkins; Unweaving The Rainbow] yes, Moses and the Israelites were under the old law ... they had the ten commandments, and God dwelt among them ... sin was purged out of the nation ... if you broke a commandment, you were stoned ... but the old law passed away when Christ died on the cross for those sins ... remember when Mary Magdelene was brought before Jesus to be stoned, He said that let him without sin cast the first stone ... He was changing things ... but the Catholic church I believe carries things too far when they want to do away with the death penalty ... remember the thieves on the cross with Jesus ... the one on the right repented and Christ said today you shall be with me in paradise, but he did not say alright, get this guy down from here because he has repented ... notice when the thief on the left did not repent, the one on the right said before Christ forgave him that they were getting punished because of their sins ... so Christ did not excuse a thief from the death penalty physically, but He did excuse him spiritually ... so if capital punishment was wrong, why didn't Christ stop it ... because He left it still as a determent in society to stop evil ... make sense you capital punishment critics? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:39:58 -0700 (PDT) From: ultradwc@gmail.com Subject: Re: OT: Universal healthcare in England failing - boy dies ! Message-ID: <0aff1f23-d8e5-44bf-8625-3c2acabd630c@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com> On Mar 11, 4:32=A0am, Mark Daniel wrote: > yes, Moses and the Israelites were under the old law ... they had the ten commandments, and God dwelt among them ... sin was purged out of the nation ... if you broke a commandment, you were stoned ... that is because sin is serious to God, and with them sinning while He was right amongst them where they saw all the miracles, but the old law passed away when Christ died on the cross for those sins ... remember when Mary Magdelene was brought before Jesus to be stoned, He said that let him without sin cast the first stone ... He was changing things ... but the Catholic church I believe carries things too far when they want to do away with the death penalty ... remember the thieves on the cross with Jesus ... the one on the right repented and Christ said today you shall be with me in paradise, but he did not say alright, get this guy down from here because he has repented ... notice when the thief on the left did not repent, the one on the right said before Christ forgave him that they were getting punished because of their sins ... so Christ did not excuse a thief from the death penalty physically, but He did excuse him spiritually ... so if capital punishment was wrong, why didn't Christ stop it ... because He left it still as a determent in society to stop evil ... make sense you capital punishment critics? ------------------------------ Date: 11 Mar 2008 08:23:56 -0600 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Message-ID: In article <47d58fcf$0$1443$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei writes: > > However, prior to the draw, even if you knew the full configuration of > the machine, balls and aerodynamic properties of the chamber and the fan > blowing in it, you cannot predict the exact position of the rotating > chamber at time of start, the exact time difference between start of > rotation and the moment they drop the balls into the chamber, and the > exact moment when some human pushes a button to get a ball to come out. > So even if physics, aerodynamics and others sciences can explain the > movement of balls in the machine, no human has sufficient information to > have all the variables and thus, the outcome is random at the human level. The random outcome of quantum mechanical behaviour is not a mere limitation of human capability. ------------------------------ Date: 11 Mar 2008 08:24:48 -0600 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Message-ID: In article <47d5d18f$0$90274$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= writes: > Bob Koehler wrote: >> >> Plank. > > Max Planck ? Yeah, I misspelled it. The "father" of h-bar. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 09:35:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug Phillips Subject: Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Message-ID: <960d254f-6ae7-4334-ab8e-e58e2b1ed88c@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com> On Mar 11, 9:23 am, koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote: > In article <47d58fcf$0$1443$c3e8...@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei writes: > > > > > However, prior to the draw, even if you knew the full configuration of > > the machine, balls and aerodynamic properties of the chamber and the fan > > blowing in it, you cannot predict the exact position of the rotating > > chamber at time of start, the exact time difference between start of > > rotation and the moment they drop the balls into the chamber, and the > > exact moment when some human pushes a button to get a ball to come out. > > So even if physics, aerodynamics and others sciences can explain the > > movement of balls in the machine, no human has sufficient information to > > have all the variables and thus, the outcome is random at the human level. > > The random outcome of quantum mechanical behaviour is not a mere > limitation of human capability. You are confusing quantum mechanics math with reality. If you mean that the mathematics of quantum mechanics is not concerned with resolving apparent randomness, then you are correct. You might want to look into the de Broglie-Bohm theory, more recently called Bohmian Mechanics. ------------------------------ Date: 11 Mar 2008 13:16:58 -0600 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Message-ID: In article <960d254f-6ae7-4334-ab8e-e58e2b1ed88c@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, Doug Phillips writes: > > You are confusing quantum mechanics math with reality. If you mean > that the mathematics of quantum mechanics is not concerned with > resolving apparent randomness, then you are correct. You might want to > look into the de Broglie-Bohm theory, more recently called Bohmian > Mechanics. Quantum mechanics math vs. reality? You think reality differs? ------------------------------ Date: 11 Mar 2008 08:27:53 -0600 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: SYS$EXAMPLES:DAYLIGHT_SAVINGS.COM bug on VAX Message-ID: <8AUs1t$$0C67@eisner.encompasserve.org> In article <47d5e939$0$90264$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= writes: > > Years ago (V5.x and earlier I believe) VMS used localtime internally. Still does (VMS 8.3-1 and earlier). ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 06:33:49 -0700 (PDT) From: tadamsmar Subject: Time changing after reboot Message-ID: <056fcdca-4c33-4a6b-b84f-5a53d09669b4@q78g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> I have some systems set up for automatic time change. Everything appeared to work fine on March 9, but... I just had to reboot one of them and it jumped forward one hour! Then I rebooted another one and the same thing happened on that system. I fixed these with: $@utc$time_setup "" tdf -240 -60 (shutting down sensitive apps before this) I tested with another reboot and they worked OK. This is VMS 7.3.2. I did not have any problems in the fall. I have TZ V0200 installed. I still have 2 more systems to test by rebooting. This command: $@utc$time_setup show Gives this on one of the systems unrebooted: AUTO_DLIGHT_SAV is set to "1". OpenVMS will automatically change to/from Daylight Saving Time. (in time zones that use Daylight Saving Time) LOCAL TIME ZONE = EASTERN / US -- DAYLIGHT TIME LOCAL SYSTEM TIME = 11-MAR-2008 09:31:45.88 (EDT) TIME DIFFERENTIAL FACTOR = -4:00 TIME ZONE RULE = EST5EDT4,M3.2.0/02,M11.1.0/02 Change EST to EDT on the Second Sunday of March (9-Mar-2008) at 02:00 Change EDT to EST on the First Sunday of November (2-Nov-2008) at 02:00 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 06:56:51 -0700 (PDT) From: tadamsmar Subject: Re: Time changing after reboot Message-ID: <91c3f7a7-ad44-405b-9482-b8a925d51693@e60g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> On Mar 11, 9:33=A0am, tadamsmar wrote: > I have some systems set up for automatic time change. =A0 Everything > appeared to work fine on March 9, but... > > I just had to reboot one of them and it jumped forward one hour! > Then I rebooted another one and the same thing happened on that > system. > > I fixed these with: > > $@utc$time_setup "" tdf -240 -60 > > (shutting down sensitive apps before this) > > I tested with another reboot and they worked OK. > > This is VMS 7.3.2. =A0I did not have any problems in the fall. > > I have TZ V0200 installed. > > I still have 2 more systems to test by rebooting. =A0This command: > > $@utc$time_setup show > > Gives this on one of the systems unrebooted: > > AUTO_DLIGHT_SAV is set to "1". > OpenVMS will automatically change to/from Daylight Saving Time. > (in time zones that use Daylight Saving Time) > > =A0 =A0 LOCAL TIME ZONE =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=3D EASTERN / US -- DAYLIGHT TI= ME > =A0 =A0 LOCAL SYSTEM TIME =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=3D 11-MAR-2008 09:31:45.88 (EDT)= > =A0 =A0 TIME DIFFERENTIAL FACTOR =3D -4:00 > =A0 =A0 TIME ZONE RULE =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =3D EST5EDT4,M3.2.0/02,M11.1.0/= 02 > =A0 =A0 Change EST to EDT on the Second Sunday of March (9-Mar-2008) at > 02:00 > =A0 =A0 Change EDT to EST on the First Sunday of November (2-Nov-2008) at > 02:00 BTW, I don't have NTP or anything else running that should adjust the time on these systems. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:13:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Volker Halle Subject: Re: Time changing after reboot Message-ID: Record the console output during startup. Look for TDF messages and provide the output here... Volker. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:34:44 -0700 (PDT) From: tadamsmar Subject: Re: Time changing after reboot Message-ID: <3b541592-3a98-4ec1-a103-df2727014f1d@p73g2000hsd.googlegroups.com> On Mar 11, 11:13=A0am, Volker Halle wrote: > Record the console output during startup. Look for TDF messages and > provide the output here... > > Volker. I am getting this: TDF-I-SETTDF TDF set new timezone differential But after booting, UTC$TIME_SETUP SHOW gives the same differential as before the boot: AUTO_DLIGHT_SAV is set to "1". OpenVMS will automatically change to/from Daylight Saving Time. (in time zones that use Daylight Saving Time) LOCAL TIME ZONE =3D EASTERN / US -- DAYLIGHT TIME LOCAL SYSTEM TIME =3D 11-MAR-2008 12:31:26.90 (EDT) TIME DIFFERENTIAL FACTOR =3D -4:00 TIME ZONE RULE =3D EST5EDT4,M3.2.0/02,M11.1.0/02 Change EST to EDT on the Second Sunday of March (9-Mar-2008) at 02:00 Change EDT to EST on the First Sunday of November (2-Nov-2008) at 02:00 (That's the wrong time BTW, it added an hour via the boot) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 09:05:57 -0700 (PDT) From: tadamsmar Subject: Re: Time changing after reboot Message-ID: On Mar 11, 11:34=A0am, tadamsmar wrote: > On Mar 11, 11:13=A0am, Volker Halle wrote: > > > Record the console output during startup. Look for TDF messages and > > provide the output here... > > > Volker. > > I am getting this: > > TDF-I-SETTDF TDF set new timezone differential > > But after booting, UTC$TIME_SETUP SHOW gives the same > differential as before the boot: > > AUTO_DLIGHT_SAV is set to "1". > OpenVMS will automatically change to/from Daylight Saving Time. > (in time zones that use Daylight Saving Time) > > =A0 =A0 LOCAL TIME ZONE =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=3D EASTERN / US -- DAYLIGHT TI= ME > =A0 =A0 LOCAL SYSTEM TIME =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=3D 11-MAR-2008 12:31:26.90 (EDT)= > =A0 =A0 TIME DIFFERENTIAL FACTOR =3D -4:00 > =A0 =A0 TIME ZONE RULE =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =3D EST5EDT4,M3.2.0/02,M11.1.0/= 02 > =A0 =A0 Change EST to EDT on the Second Sunday of March (9-Mar-2008) at > 02:00 > =A0 =A0 Change EDT to EST on the First Sunday of November (2-Nov-2008) at > 02:00 > > (That's the wrong time BTW, it added an hour via the boot) There is another message TDFSET Summer time or standard time changeover new SYS $TIMEZONE_DIFFERENTIAL -14400 old -18000 the TDFSET and SETTDF messages come out before the site specific startup command file runs. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:02:37 -0700 (PDT) From: tadamsmar Subject: Re: Time changing after reboot Message-ID: On Mar 11, 12:05=A0pm, tadamsmar wrote: > On Mar 11, 11:34=A0am, tadamsmar wrote: > > > > > > > On Mar 11, 11:13=A0am, Volker Halle wrote: > > > > Record the console output during startup. Look for TDF messages and > > > provide the output here... > > > > Volker. > > > I am getting this: > > > TDF-I-SETTDF TDF set new timezone differential > > > But after booting, UTC$TIME_SETUP SHOW gives the same > > differential as before the boot: > > > AUTO_DLIGHT_SAV is set to "1". > > OpenVMS will automatically change to/from Daylight Saving Time. > > (in time zones that use Daylight Saving Time) > > > =A0 =A0 LOCAL TIME ZONE =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=3D EASTERN / US -- DAYLIGHT = TIME > > =A0 =A0 LOCAL SYSTEM TIME =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=3D 11-MAR-2008 12:31:26.90 (ED= T) > > =A0 =A0 TIME DIFFERENTIAL FACTOR =3D -4:00 > > =A0 =A0 TIME ZONE RULE =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =3D EST5EDT4,M3.2.0/02,M11.1.= 0/02 > > =A0 =A0 Change EST to EDT on the Second Sunday of March (9-Mar-2008) at > > 02:00 > > =A0 =A0 Change EDT to EST on the First Sunday of November (2-Nov-2008) a= t > > 02:00 > > > (That's the wrong time BTW, it added an hour via the boot) > > There is another message > > TDFSET Summer time or standard time changeover new SYS > $TIMEZONE_DIFFERENTIAL -14400 old -18000 > > the TDFSET and SETTDF messages come out before the site specific > startup command file runs.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - There is a TX-V0300 patch. But it seems to just add Canada, no bug fixes since TX-V0200: http://www12.itrc.hp.com/service/patch/patchDetail.do?patchid=3DVMS732_TZ-V0= 300&sel=3D{openvms:alpha:7.3-2,}&BC=3Dmain|search Maybe I have something configured wrong, but I can't think what it is. Things worked right last spring. But perhaps I did not reboot any systems right after the time change. Maybe it has something to do with the period between the new rule's date and the old rule's date. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 17:15:51 GMT From: "Professor" Subject: Re: Time changing after reboot Message-ID: X-No-Archive: Yes The gig is up Lamar, time to start praying. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:24:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Volker Halle Subject: Re: Time changing after reboot Message-ID: <892b7701-41cd-4f55-b293-9a431880b336@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com> Before the next reboot test, try to collect some more information: $ SET AUDIT/AUDIT/ENABLE=TIME ! Enable time change auditing - look at the audit after the boot $ ANAL/SYS SDA> EXA/TIME EXE$GQ_TDF SDA> EXIT $ SHOW LOG SYS$TIME* If the system thinks, it's being rebooted after a seasonal time change and it believes the old TDF is -18000 (= -5 hours) and the new TDF is now -14400 (= -4 hours), then it would be correct, to increase the local system time by 1 hour, wouldn't it ?! Question is: why does the system think that the old TDF is still -5 hours ? Volker. ------------------------------ Date: 11 Mar 2008 13:22:00 -0600 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: Time changing after reboot Message-ID: In article <056fcdca-4c33-4a6b-b84f-5a53d09669b4@q78g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, tadamsmar writes: > I have some systems set up for automatic time change. Everything > appeared to work fine on March 9, but... > > I just had to reboot one of them and it jumped forward one hour! > Then I rebooted another one and the same thing happened on that > system. Did you use sys$system:shutdown.com, or some shortcut? If you did, were there any errors? There are commands in that .com file which make sure the current time is synched back to the hardware clock, as well as the system image. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 03:54:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Dave Gullen Subject: VMS Backup reverse date order restore Message-ID: Hi, I've recently discovered that a semicolon in the output file spec of a backup command results in file versions restored in reverse date order. I found this when trying to work out why a colleague's restore command was doing this - it was just a typo, so a completely serendipitous discovery. I've been trying to work out the 'VMS Logic' of this. Any suggestions? Anyone seen this before? Cheers, Dave G $ dir/date TEST_FILE.TXT;* Directory GSE_USERS:[GULLEN_D] TEST_FILE.TXT;1846 11-MAR-2008 06:00:03.52 TEST_FILE.TXT;1845 10-MAR-2008 06:00:03.41 TEST_FILE.TXT;1844 9-MAR-2008 06:00:03.01 TEST_FILE.TXT;1843 8-MAR-2008 06:00:03.10 TEST_FILE.TXT;1842 7-MAR-2008 06:00:03.23 TEST_FILE.TXT;1841 6-MAR-2008 06:00:03.05 TEST_FILE.TXT;1840 5-MAR-2008 06:00:03.10 TEST_FILE.TXT;1839 4-MAR-2008 06:00:03.30 Total of 8 files. $ $ backup TEST_FILE.TXT;* test.bck/save $ del test_file.txt;* $ backup test.bck/save []; !<- Note the semicolon $ dir/date TEST_FILE.TXT;* Directory GSE_USERS:[GULLEN_D] TEST_FILE.TXT;8 4-MAR-2008 06:00:03.30 TEST_FILE.TXT;7 5-MAR-2008 06:00:03.10 TEST_FILE.TXT;6 6-MAR-2008 06:00:03.05 TEST_FILE.TXT;5 7-MAR-2008 06:00:03.23 TEST_FILE.TXT;4 8-MAR-2008 06:00:03.10 TEST_FILE.TXT;3 9-MAR-2008 06:00:03.01 TEST_FILE.TXT;2 10-MAR-2008 06:00:03.41 TEST_FILE.TXT;1 11-MAR-2008 06:00:03.52 Total of 8 files. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:28:00 -0000 From: "David Biddulph" Subject: Re: VMS Backup reverse date order restore Message-ID: <47d668cc$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net> "Dave Gullen" wrote in message news:fde9c9a2-9f55-4143-9ff3-ce29e12b9f31@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... > Hi, > > I've recently discovered that a semicolon in the output file spec of a > backup command results in file versions restored in reverse date > order. I found this when trying to work out why a colleague's restore > command was doing this - it was just a typo, so a completely > serendipitous discovery. > > I've been trying to work out the 'VMS Logic' of this. Any > suggestions? Anyone seen this before? > > Cheers, > > Dave G > > $ dir/date TEST_FILE.TXT;* > > Directory GSE_USERS:[GULLEN_D] > > TEST_FILE.TXT;1846 11-MAR-2008 06:00:03.52 > TEST_FILE.TXT;1845 10-MAR-2008 06:00:03.41 > TEST_FILE.TXT;1844 9-MAR-2008 06:00:03.01 > TEST_FILE.TXT;1843 8-MAR-2008 06:00:03.10 > TEST_FILE.TXT;1842 7-MAR-2008 06:00:03.23 > TEST_FILE.TXT;1841 6-MAR-2008 06:00:03.05 > TEST_FILE.TXT;1840 5-MAR-2008 06:00:03.10 > TEST_FILE.TXT;1839 4-MAR-2008 06:00:03.30 > > Total of 8 files. > $ > $ backup TEST_FILE.TXT;* test.bck/save > $ del test_file.txt;* > $ backup test.bck/save []; !<- Note the > semicolon > $ dir/date TEST_FILE.TXT;* > > Directory GSE_USERS:[GULLEN_D] > > TEST_FILE.TXT;8 4-MAR-2008 06:00:03.30 > TEST_FILE.TXT;7 5-MAR-2008 06:00:03.10 > TEST_FILE.TXT;6 6-MAR-2008 06:00:03.05 > TEST_FILE.TXT;5 7-MAR-2008 06:00:03.23 > TEST_FILE.TXT;4 8-MAR-2008 06:00:03.10 > TEST_FILE.TXT;3 9-MAR-2008 06:00:03.01 > TEST_FILE.TXT;2 10-MAR-2008 06:00:03.41 > TEST_FILE.TXT;1 11-MAR-2008 06:00:03.52 > > Total of 8 files. Presumably it is backing up ;8 to []; and calling it ;1, then backing up ;7 to []; and calling it ;2, and so on? -- David Biddulph ------------------------------ Date: 11 Mar 2008 08:00:15 -0600 From: briggs@encompasserve.org Subject: Re: VMS Backup reverse date order restore Message-ID: In article , Dave Gullen writes: > Hi, > > I've recently discovered that a semicolon in the output file spec of a > backup command results in file versions restored in reverse date > order. I found this when trying to work out why a colleague's restore > command was doing this - it was just a typo, so a completely > serendipitous discovery. > > I've been trying to work out the 'VMS Logic' of this. Any > suggestions? Anyone seen this before? [snip] > $ backup TEST_FILE.TXT;* test.bck/save > $ del test_file.txt;* > $ backup test.bck/save []; !<- Note the Yes. That's expected behavior. A semicolon with no version number is treated as ";0". Version 0 is treated as "highest existing version" on input and as "next higher version" on output. If there is no pre-existing file, version 1 is used on output. Wildcards are normally scanned in reverse version number order. So the BACKUP save pass processes TEST_FILE.TXT in reverse version number order, saving versions 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 and finally 1. The BACKUP restore pass processes the save set in sequential order. It finds TEST_FILE.TXT;8 in the save set and restores it as TEST_FILE.TXT;0. That results in the creation of TEST_FILE.TXT;1 It finds TEST_FILE.TXT;7 in the save set and restores it as TEST_FILE.TXT;0. That results in the creation of TEST_FILE.TXT;2 The result is the the version numbers are reversed. This same trick is sometimes used to re-version files in a directory so that version numbers start at one (rather than incrementing on toward the version limit of 32767). $ PURGE /KEEP=100 BATCH_JOB.LOG $ RENAME BATCH_JOB.LOG;* [TEMP_DIR]*.*; ! Reverses version numbers $ RENAME [TEMP_DIR]BATCH_JOB.LOG;* []; ! Reverses them back ------------------------------ Date: 11 Mar 2008 08:34:32 -0600 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: VMS Backup reverse date order restore Message-ID: In article , Dave Gullen writes: > Hi, > > I've recently discovered that a semicolon in the output file spec of a > backup command results in file versions restored in reverse date > order. I found this when trying to work out why a colleague's restore > command was doing this - it was just a typo, so a completely > serendipitous discovery. > > I've been trying to work out the 'VMS Logic' of this. Any > suggestions? Anyone seen this before? The wild card ";" for a version, means "highest". If you're opening an existing file, its the highest one. If your opening a new file it's one more than the highest one. BACKUP, like most utilities, processes files highest version first. It obeys what you tell it to do in creating output files. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 14:42:34 GMT From: Michael Austin Subject: Re: VMS Backup reverse date order restore Message-ID: Dave Gullen wrote: > Hi, > > I've recently discovered that a semicolon in the output file spec of a > backup command results in file versions restored in reverse date > order. I found this when trying to work out why a colleague's restore > command was doing this - it was just a typo, so a completely > serendipitous discovery. someone has been doing too much UNIX perl or shell scripting :) ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2008.142 ************************