INFO-VAX Mon, 03 Nov 2008 Volume 2008 : Issue 594
Contents:
Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Re: Most impressive VAX installations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2008 20:21:48 +0100
From: Michael Kraemer <M.Kraemer@gsi.de>
Subject: Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Message-ID: <gekukb$les$00$1@news.t-online.com>
H Vlems schrieb:
> On 1 nov, 23:55, Michael Kraemer <M.Krae...@gsi.de> wrote:
>
>>H Vlems schrieb:
>>
>>
>>>One of my VAXstation 4000-90A's has 128 MB main memory. Which is its
>>>configuration maximum IIRC.
>>
>>Mine too. And yes, it maxes out at 128MB. But that was
>>an impressive (and expensive) amount of memory back then.
>
>
> That is absolutely true Michael, When hardware prices wouldn't have
> come down as they have then we'd all be running SIMH....
Found a historical quote (as of 1990):
2x4MB for a VS3176 for close to 3000 DEM (approx $1500 back then).
And that's already the cheaper OEM price, not the original DEC one.
I think VS4000 memory wasn't that much cheaper.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2008 14:26:18 -0500
From: "John Reagan" <johnrreagan@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Message-ID: <Tr6dnY3aA8FFY5DUnZ2dnUVZ_jydnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Here's the largest one we have in our cluster
$ write sys$output f$getsyi("hw_name")
VAX 7000-820
$ show memory/physical
System Memory Resources on 2-NOV-2008 14:20:19.63
Physical Memory Usage (pages): Total Free In Use Modified
Main Memory (2304.00Mb) 4718592 4374674 337265 6653
Of the physical pages in use, 294903 pages are permanently allocated to
OpenVMS.
John
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2008 15:25:01 -0500
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk>
Subject: Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Message-ID: <490e0c99$0$90272$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
> In article <490ca76d$0$90264$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk> writes:
>> JF Mezei wrote:
>>> At the opposite scale of things...
>>>
>>> I ran an all mighty Microvax 2 with 8 megs of RAM and a 154meg drive to
>>> support 8 users runing WPS-Plus. The success of the project lead the
>>> MVII to be upgraded to 16 meg of RAM to support 12 users.
>>>
>>> This was circa 1987.
>> And today a single word processing user is using a PC
>> with 4 MB L2 cache, 2 GB RAM and 320 GB disk ...
>
> Isn't Billzebub's bloatware just wonderful?
>
> Micro$oft...
> ... keeping Moore's Law in check by several factors for over 20 years!
It is not just MS. IBM, Oracle, SUN, SAP, Borland etc. all let
HW requirements follow current hardware.
Arne
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2008 15:27:32 -0500
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk>
Subject: Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Message-ID: <490e0d30$0$90272$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
> In article <op.ujzut6gchv4qyg@murphus.hsd1.ca.comcast.net>, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.company> writes:
>> On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 07:36:13 -0700, VAXman- <@SendSpamHere.ORG> wrote:
>>> In article <op.ujxxcay0hv4qyg@murphus.hsd1.ca.comcast.net>, "Tom Linden"
>>> <tom@kednos.company> writes:
>>>> On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 05:00:33 -0700, FrankS <sapienza@noesys.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 31, 9:15 pm, "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilber...@comcast.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> I don't know of ANY VAX that actually supported four GB of memory. I
>>>>>> don't recall the largest VAX memory I ever encountered but I doubt if
>>>>>> it
>>>>>> was more than 128 MB.
>>>>> I have a client with VAX 6000 series that contain 1.25gb of memory. I
>>>>> was at the Sungard facility in PA this past week and they have a VAX
>>>>> 7630s with over 2gb+ installed. The spec for the VAX 7000 says 3.5gb
>>>>> maximum.
>>>> Just curious why they continue running theses as opposed to, say, ES47?
>>>
>>> Perhaps because an ES47 is an Alpha and not a VAX?
>> Well, I thinkl you know what I meant, i.e., what specifically was missing
>> precluding a port. For example one space mission that I am familiar with
>> written in PL/I requires H-Float.
>
> BINGO! There still are sites that have not bothered to port their apps to
> Alpha or Itanium. If H-float is needed, I'd wager that a library could be
> developed to provide it and, on faster hardware, it may even best perform-
> ance on VAX.
Considering that the VAX'es most likely emulate H-floating then
absolutely.
If I remember correctly then only VAX 7xx, 8xxx and 9xxx implemented
H-floating in HW.
And I would expect the VAX'es still running to be 6xxx, 7xxx, 4xxx
and 3xxx.
Arne
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2008 15:50:15 -0500
From: "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Message-ID: <LqKdncVRP7voj5PUnZ2dnUVZ_srinZ2d@giganews.com>
Michael Kraemer wrote:
> H Vlems schrieb:
>> On 1 nov, 23:55, Michael Kraemer <M.Krae...@gsi.de> wrote:
>>
>>> H Vlems schrieb:
>>>
>>>
>>>> One of my VAXstation 4000-90A's has 128 MB main memory. Which is its
>>>> configuration maximum IIRC.
>>>
>>> Mine too. And yes, it maxes out at 128MB. But that was
>>> an impressive (and expensive) amount of memory back then.
>>
>>
>> That is absolutely true Michael, When hardware prices wouldn't have
>> come down as they have then we'd all be running SIMH....
>
> Found a historical quote (as of 1990):
> 2x4MB for a VS3176 for close to 3000 DEM (approx $1500 back then).
> And that's already the cheaper OEM price, not the original DEC one.
> I think VS4000 memory wasn't that much cheaper.
>
DEC could not, or would not, sell anything cheaply! That's one of the
many reasons DEC is no more; their competitors could and did sell things
cheaper than DEC did.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2008 16:03:29 -0500
From: "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Message-ID: <wpmdnRePQ9wSiJPUnZ2dnUVZ_tHinZ2d@giganews.com>
Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
>> In article <490ca76d$0$90264$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>,
>> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk> writes:
>>> JF Mezei wrote:
>>>> At the opposite scale of things...
>>>>
>>>> I ran an all mighty Microvax 2 with 8 megs of RAM and a 154meg drive to
>>>> support 8 users runing WPS-Plus. The success of the project lead the
>>>> MVII to be upgraded to 16 meg of RAM to support 12 users.
>>>>
>>>> This was circa 1987.
>>> And today a single word processing user is using a PC
>>> with 4 MB L2 cache, 2 GB RAM and 320 GB disk ...
>>
>> Isn't Billzebub's bloatware just wonderful?
>>
>> Micro$oft...
>> ... keeping Moore's Law in check by several factors for over 20 years!
>
> It is not just MS. IBM, Oracle, SUN, SAP, Borland etc. all let
> HW requirements follow current hardware.
>
> Arne
Funny! I do word processing on a PC with ONLY 1 GB of RAM and only 40
GB of disk! I don't recall how much "Level X" cache it has; If anyone
cares, it's an HP DC5750 with W/XP SP2.
I can do the same sorts of things on a Sun Ultra 10 Creator-3D
workstation with as little as 128 MB of RAM. More RAM gives better
performance of course.
I still use my PC because I'm more familiar with Word than with "Star
Office" and the help function is more helpful.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2008 16:06:30 -0500
From: "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Message-ID: <wpmdnRaPQ9zZi5PUnZ2dnUVZ_tHinZ2d@giganews.com>
Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
>> In article <op.ujzut6gchv4qyg@murphus.hsd1.ca.comcast.net>, "Tom
>> Linden" <tom@kednos.company> writes:
>>> On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 07:36:13 -0700, VAXman- <@SendSpamHere.ORG> wrote:
>>>> In article <op.ujxxcay0hv4qyg@murphus.hsd1.ca.comcast.net>, "Tom
>>>> Linden" <tom@kednos.company> writes:
>>>>> On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 05:00:33 -0700, FrankS <sapienza@noesys.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Oct 31, 9:15 pm, "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilber...@comcast.net>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> I don't know of ANY VAX that actually supported four GB of
>>>>>>> memory. I
>>>>>>> don't recall the largest VAX memory I ever encountered but I
>>>>>>> doubt if it
>>>>>>> was more than 128 MB.
>>>>>> I have a client with VAX 6000 series that contain 1.25gb of
>>>>>> memory. I
>>>>>> was at the Sungard facility in PA this past week and they have a VAX
>>>>>> 7630s with over 2gb+ installed. The spec for the VAX 7000 says 3.5gb
>>>>>> maximum.
>>>>> Just curious why they continue running theses as opposed to, say,
>>>>> ES47?
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps because an ES47 is an Alpha and not a VAX?
>>> Well, I thinkl you know what I meant, i.e., what specifically was
>>> missing
>>> precluding a port. For example one space mission that I am familiar
>>> with
>>> written in PL/I requires H-Float.
>>
>> BINGO! There still are sites that have not bothered to port their
>> apps to
>> Alpha or Itanium. If H-float is needed, I'd wager that a library
>> could be
>> developed to provide it and, on faster hardware, it may even best
>> perform-
>> ance on VAX.
>
> Considering that the VAX'es most likely emulate H-floating then
> absolutely.
>
> If I remember correctly then only VAX 7xx, 8xxx and 9xxx implemented
> H-floating in HW.
>
> And I would expect the VAX'es still running to be 6xxx, 7xxx, 4xxx
> and 3xxx.
>
> Arne
Arne,
Did you drop an "x" up there? VAX 7xx???? I hope you meant 7000
because the 700 series VAXen did not have H-floating point!
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2008 13:30:33 -0800 (PST)
From: ed696 <eric@eric696.fsnet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Message-ID: <5e3be552-1ef0-444d-b59f-3d9114cd7e4f@40g2000prx.googlegroups.com>
On Nov 2, 7:26=A0pm, "John Reagan" <johnrrea...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Here's the largest one we have in our cluster
>
> $ write sys$output f$getsyi("hw_name")
> VAX 7000-820
> $ show memory/physical
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 System Memory Resources on =A02-NOV-2008 14:2=
0:19.63
>
> Physical Memory Usage (pages): =A0 =A0 Total =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Free =A0 =A0 =
=A0In Use =A0 =A0Modified
> =A0 Main Memory (2304.00Mb) =A0 =A0 =A0 =A04718592 =A0 =A0 4374674 =A0 =
=A0 =A0337265 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A06653
>
> Of the physical pages in use, 294903 pages are permanently allocated to
> OpenVMS.
>
> John
We used to run 4gb ram with max cpus in ayo mnfg to "burn-in" both
cpus and mem modules before shipping , gave us the opportunity to try
out interleave configs and let us run some custom memory pattern
testing under Sitp
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2008 13:38:13 -0800 (PST)
From: johnwallace4@yahoo.co.uk
Subject: Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Message-ID: <ebf34b5e-a419-419e-933a-fdabfd02e8f3@f40g2000pri.googlegroups.com>
On Nov 2, 8:50 pm, "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilber...@comcast.net>
wrote:
> Michael Kraemer wrote:
> > H Vlems schrieb:
> >> On 1 nov, 23:55, Michael Kraemer <M.Krae...@gsi.de> wrote:
>
> >>> H Vlems schrieb:
>
> >>>> One of my VAXstation 4000-90A's has 128 MB main memory. Which is its
> >>>> configuration maximum IIRC.
>
> >>> Mine too. And yes, it maxes out at 128MB. But that was
> >>> an impressive (and expensive) amount of memory back then.
>
> >> That is absolutely true Michael, When hardware prices wouldn't have
> >> come down as they have then we'd all be running SIMH....
>
> > Found a historical quote (as of 1990):
> > 2x4MB for a VS3176 for close to 3000 DEM (approx $1500 back then).
> > And that's already the cheaper OEM price, not the original DEC one.
> > I think VS4000 memory wasn't that much cheaper.
>
> DEC could not, or would not, sell anything cheaply! That's one of the
> many reasons DEC is no more; their competitors could and did sell things
> cheaper than DEC did.
It's not strictly true to say that DEC could not or would not sell
anything cheaply. Their early stuff was presumably a bargain judging
by the way it sold, as were VAXes in their heyday. Low end alphas
towards their end of life weren't priced that badly in hardware terms,
and if anyone had wanted to build "clone" motherboards at interesting
prices the technology and support was there for them to do it.
But the marketing wasn't there, and nor (courtesy of MS) were the
apps. The AlphaPowered program had a go but in general it was too
little too late.
Those in HQ had for too long ignored the "you gotta eat your own lunch
before someone else eats it for you" (?) rule; there was too much
emphasis from HQ on "upselling" and not enough on retaining (let alone
growing) market share by being competitively priced feature for
feature.
Yes there were lots of competitors that could and did sell "stuff"
cheaper than DEC did, but it often wasn't, and often still isn't,
really comparable "stuff", especially in sectors where VMS was/is
relevant.
Unfortunately Palmer and others post-Olsen "bought the WNT Kool-
Aid" (?) from MS, and as is typical with MS, "business partner" =
"organ donor" (eg just ask the companies who bought into PowerPC and
MIPS NT-box vision). Hence, as Kerry just mentioned, no proper non-
debug versions of NT/Alpha software, to name but one example.
By the time people outside HQ realised that WNT wasn't (and was never
really going to be) VMS++, and that OSF/1/Tru64 was going nowhere fast
vs Solaris and AIX despite being technically very competent indeed,
the corporate damage had been done. Then the remaining DEC hardware
and software crown jewels were given to Intel in the ten year
agreement which was part of the DEC/Intel patent dispute settlement,
and we know where that led to.
My 2p. Ymmv.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2008 17:34:17 -0500
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk>
Subject: Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Message-ID: <490e2ae7$0$90265$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
>>> In article <op.ujzut6gchv4qyg@murphus.hsd1.ca.comcast.net>, "Tom
>>> Linden" <tom@kednos.company> writes:
>>>> On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 07:36:13 -0700, VAXman- <@SendSpamHere.ORG> wrote:
>>>>> In article <op.ujxxcay0hv4qyg@murphus.hsd1.ca.comcast.net>, "Tom
>>>>> Linden" <tom@kednos.company> writes:
>>>>>> On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 05:00:33 -0700, FrankS <sapienza@noesys.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Oct 31, 9:15 pm, "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilber...@comcast.net>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I don't know of ANY VAX that actually supported four GB of
>>>>>>>> memory. I
>>>>>>>> don't recall the largest VAX memory I ever encountered but I
>>>>>>>> doubt if it
>>>>>>>> was more than 128 MB.
>>>>>>> I have a client with VAX 6000 series that contain 1.25gb of
>>>>>>> memory. I
>>>>>>> was at the Sungard facility in PA this past week and they have a VAX
>>>>>>> 7630s with over 2gb+ installed. The spec for the VAX 7000 says
>>>>>>> 3.5gb
>>>>>>> maximum.
>>>>>> Just curious why they continue running theses as opposed to, say,
>>>>>> ES47?
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps because an ES47 is an Alpha and not a VAX?
>>>> Well, I thinkl you know what I meant, i.e., what specifically was
>>>> missing
>>>> precluding a port. For example one space mission that I am familiar
>>>> with
>>>> written in PL/I requires H-Float.
>>>
>>> BINGO! There still are sites that have not bothered to port their
>>> apps to
>>> Alpha or Itanium. If H-float is needed, I'd wager that a library
>>> could be
>>> developed to provide it and, on faster hardware, it may even best
>>> perform-
>>> ance on VAX.
>>
>> Considering that the VAX'es most likely emulate H-floating then
>> absolutely.
>>
>> If I remember correctly then only VAX 7xx, 8xxx and 9xxx implemented
>> H-floating in HW.
>>
>> And I would expect the VAX'es still running to be 6xxx, 7xxx, 4xxx
>> and 3xxx.
>
> Did you drop an "x" up there? VAX 7xx???? I hope you meant 7000
> because the 700 series VAXen did not have H-floating point!
I thought the 700 series did have H-floating.
I just checked some numbers - it seems as if you are correct - only the
785 has H-floating in HW.
Arne
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2008 00:03:24 +0100
From: Michael Kraemer <M.Kraemer@gsi.de>
Subject: Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Message-ID: <gelbjr$rsn$02$1@news.t-online.com>
johnwallace4@yahoo.co.uk schrieb:
>
> It's not strictly true to say that DEC could not or would not sell
> anything cheaply. Their early stuff was presumably a bargain judging
> by the way it sold, as were VAXes in their heyday. Low end alphas
> towards their end of life weren't priced that badly in hardware terms,
> and if anyone had wanted to build "clone" motherboards at interesting
> prices the technology and support was there for them to do it.
>
> But the marketing wasn't there, and nor (courtesy of MS) were the
> apps. The AlphaPowered program had a go but in general it was too
> little too late.
Until the alpha systems arrived,
DEC left a price/performance gap open for about 3 years,
from 1990 to early 1993,
not counting the detour to the Mips based systems.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2008 19:21:20 -0500
From: "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Message-ID: <Z4Sdnf3nuNpz3pPUnZ2dnUVZ_tPinZ2d@giganews.com>
johnwallace4@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On Nov 2, 8:50 pm, "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilber...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>> Michael Kraemer wrote:
>>> H Vlems schrieb:
>>>> On 1 nov, 23:55, Michael Kraemer <M.Krae...@gsi.de> wrote:
>>>>> H Vlems schrieb:
>>>>>> One of my VAXstation 4000-90A's has 128 MB main memory. Which is its
>>>>>> configuration maximum IIRC.
>>>>> Mine too. And yes, it maxes out at 128MB. But that was
>>>>> an impressive (and expensive) amount of memory back then.
>>>> That is absolutely true Michael, When hardware prices wouldn't have
>>>> come down as they have then we'd all be running SIMH....
>>> Found a historical quote (as of 1990):
>>> 2x4MB for a VS3176 for close to 3000 DEM (approx $1500 back then).
>>> And that's already the cheaper OEM price, not the original DEC one.
>>> I think VS4000 memory wasn't that much cheaper.
>> DEC could not, or would not, sell anything cheaply! That's one of the
>> many reasons DEC is no more; their competitors could and did sell things
>> cheaper than DEC did.
>
> It's not strictly true to say that DEC could not or would not sell
> anything cheaply. Their early stuff was presumably a bargain judging
> by the way it sold, as were VAXes in their heyday. Low end alphas
> towards their end of life weren't priced that badly in hardware terms,
> and if anyone had wanted to build "clone" motherboards at interesting
> prices the technology and support was there for them to do it.
>
> But the marketing wasn't there, and nor (courtesy of MS) were the
> apps. The AlphaPowered program had a go but in general it was too
> little too late.
>
> Those in HQ had for too long ignored the "you gotta eat your own lunch
> before someone else eats it for you" (?) rule; there was too much
> emphasis from HQ on "upselling" and not enough on retaining (let alone
> growing) market share by being competitively priced feature for
> feature.
>
> Yes there were lots of competitors that could and did sell "stuff"
> cheaper than DEC did, but it often wasn't, and often still isn't,
> really comparable "stuff", especially in sectors where VMS was/is
> relevant.
>
I'm thinking of the Rainbow that I bought second hand for $900 or so.
New, when they first hit the streets, they were about $5,000.00. IBM
clones were less than half that. DEC wanted about $700.00 US for 256 KB
of memory. I bought third party memory for $30! It worked perfectly!
This was the same box that supposedly could not format its own floppy
disks; something every other PC, PC clone, and McIntosh could do with
ease! DEC sold formatted floppies for $5 US each. I bought mine for
$0.50 each and formatted them using third party software. The 20MB hard
disk was $2200.00 US. I bought brand X (Seagate) for $300 and it worked
perfectly. I could go on for hours but I hope you get the idea; DEC's
prices were nothing sort of highway robbery!
Then there was the Micro 11/23 that my boss bought for huge bucks. We
bought a hard disk and interface from Emulex because DEC wanted four or
five times what Emulex did. Was the Emulex product just as good?
There's no way to tell, now, twenty years later. It did work and worked
for a couple of years until the boss could afford a VAX 8200.
At one DECUS symposium I attended, a speaker got a huge laugh by saying;
"I got a phone call from a terrorist last week; of course HE thinks he's
a DEC salesman!"
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2008 03:16:39 GMT
From: andy/christine <nospam@collingwood.upperkumbuktawest>
Subject: Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Message-ID: <490e6d14@news.mel.dft.com.au>
urbancamo wrote:
> To anyone listening!
>
> I was flicking through the VAX Architecture Reference Manual earlier
> and it got me wondering about the ratio between physically installed
> memory in a VAX setup and the maximum theoretical limit of 4 GB. As
> far as I'm aware for VAXen the physical never to close to the virtual.
>
> I remember when 64MB was an astronomic amount of memory, which was
> around the time of the last VAXes, so I'm asking - how much RAM did
> you see crammed into the latest or greatest of the VAXen (and what
> else was interesting about the setups, for example maximum number of
> users, storage etc)
>
> Or just tell me to get a life ;)
>
> Mark.
The biggest VAXcluster I had anything to do with, had the VAX8500
and HSC50 on the fifteenth floor, four STARcoupler cables run down
the cable riser to the ninth floor, the STARcoupler in the cloak
cupboard next door to the riser (with a sign asking the wet stuff
NOT be hung above it) and two STARcoupler cables going down to
the computer room on the first floor where the VAX8800 sat.
(The 8820 was the same beast except it had a MicroVAX II console.)
Fourteen floors high, it was big! :-)
We had a VT220 on the fifteenth floor connected via 4 wire modem
as the secondary console to the VAX8800s PRO380.
It could do everything but power on/off.
The problems why it was so far spread were political mainly.
(And floor loading). I was the person to suggest running
the cables, as a joke. To my surprise, they built it!
(but guess which idiot ran it :-).
Andy Stewart.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2008 20:02:18 -0800 (PST)
From: Neil Rieck <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Message-ID: <dce60f84-db52-47af-aa78-631ce72b4879@w24g2000prd.googlegroups.com>
On Oct 31, 8:15=A0pm, "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilber...@comcast.net>
wrote:
> urbancamo wrote:
> > To anyone listening!
>
> > I was flicking through the VAX Architecture Reference Manual earlier
> > and it got me wondering about the ratio between physically installed
> > memory in a VAX setup and the maximum theoretical limit of 4 GB. As
> > far as I'm aware for VAXen the physical never to close to the virtual.
>
> > I remember when 64MB was an astronomic amount of memory, which was
> > around the time of the last VAXes, so I'm asking - how much RAM did
> > you see crammed into the latest or greatest of the VAXen (and what
> > else was interesting about the setups, for example maximum number of
> > users, storage etc)
>
> > Or just tell me to get a life ;)
>
> > Mark.
>
> I don't know of ANY VAX that actually supported four GB of memory. =A0I
> don't recall the largest VAX memory I ever encountered but I doubt if it
> was more than 128 MB.
>
> RISC processors, such as the Alpha need a great deal more memory for the
> executable code, about four times as much as a VAX. =A0With the Alphas, a
> GB or more was not only reasonable but also possible! =A0But only if you
> were very rich! ;-)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
We are currently running 3 GB of memory in our AS-DS20e. IIRC, each
gig was $700 which seemed reasonable at the time. One unexpected
surprise is that most of our RMS database is cached in memory.
Neil Rieck
Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,
Ontario, Canada.
http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2008 20:42:58 -0800
From: Glen Herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu>
Subject: Re: Most impressive VAX installations
Message-ID: <gelvhl$bad$1@aioe.org>
Arne Vajhøj wrote:
(snip)
> I thought the 700 series did have H-floating.
> I just checked some numbers - it seems as if you are correct - only the
> 785 has H-floating in HW.
And the 11/730 if by hardware you mean microcode.
(Are all the VAX microcoded?)
-- glen
------------------------------
End of INFO-VAX 2008.594
************************