Most impressive VAX installations - DEC

This is a discussion on Most impressive VAX installations - DEC ; 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 ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 80

Thread: Most impressive VAX installations

  1. Most impressive VAX installations

    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.

  2. Re: Most impressive VAX installations

    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. I
    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. With the Alphas, a
    GB or more was not only reasonable but also possible! But only if you
    were very rich! ;-)

  3. Re: Most impressive VAX installations

    Richard B. Gilbert 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. I
    > 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. With the Alphas, a
    > GB or more was not only reasonable but also possible! But only if you
    > were very rich! ;-)


    http://www.compaq.com/alphaserver/va.../vax10000.html

    says 3.5 GB.

    Arne


  4. Re: Most impressive VAX installations

    On Oct 31, 9:15*pm, "Richard B. Gilbert"
    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.

  5. Re: Most impressive VAX installations

    On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 05:00:33 -0700, FrankS wrote:

    > On Oct 31, 9:15*pm, "Richard B. Gilbert"
    > 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?

    --
    PL/I for OpenVMS
    www.kednos.com

  6. Re: Most impressive VAX installations

    Not a single system, but I came across comments in the disk shadowing code
    for a bugfix where a byte field was being treated as a negative number
    if it exceeded 127. That byte field was the number of nodes in a cluster,
    and it was found by a customer (I think I know who), not internal testing.

    Also the test followed a decrement of that field, meaning a node left the
    cluster, so the bug wouldn't have been seen unless there were 129 or
    more nodes in the cluster at some point. (Supported limit was/is 96)

  7. Re: Most impressive VAX installations

    In article , "Tom Linden" writes:
    >On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 05:00:33 -0700, FrankS wrote:
    >
    >> On Oct 31, 9:15*pm, "Richard B. Gilbert"
    >> 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?

    --
    VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM

    .... pejorative statements of opinion are entitled to constitutional protection
    no matter how extreme, vituperous, or vigorously expressed they may be. (NJSC)

    Copr. 2008 Brian Schenkenberger. Publication of _this_ usenet article outside
    of usenet _must_ include its contents in its entirety including this copyright
    notice, disclaimer and quotations.

  8. Re: Most impressive VAX installations

    FrankS wrote:
    > On Oct 31, 9:15 pm, "Richard B. Gilbert"
    > 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.


    With what Sungard charges, I suppose they can afford it! Was that the
    Philly office? Been there, awesome collection of hardware!!

  9. Re: Most impressive VAX installations

    Tom Linden wrote:
    > On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 05:00:33 -0700, FrankS wrote:
    >
    >> On Oct 31, 9:15 pm, "Richard B. Gilbert"
    >> 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?
    >


    In the case of Sungard, it's necessary in order to support their
    clients. Sungard offers a disaster recovery site for companies that
    need such. If you have a contract with them and something horrible
    happens to your data center, you let them know, grab your backup tapes,
    go there, and restore your backups on their hardware. It ain't cheap
    but it does keep you up and running when lightning zaps your substation
    or or a 747 tries to land on your roof.

    They have an awesome collection of hardware over there! It's probably
    both bigger and faster than what you have because they have to support
    the largest customer with a contract at that site. They have a UPS that
    has to be seen to be believed. There are diesel generators in the back
    yard that they can fire up before the batteries run down.

  10. Re: Most impressive VAX installations

    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.

  11. Re: Most impressive VAX installations

    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 ...

    HW has changed !

    Arne

  12. Re: Most impressive VAX installations

    Arne Vajh°j wrote:
    > 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 ...
    >
    > HW has changed !
    >
    > Arne


    It has gotten a lot cheaper!

    When someone builds a faster computer, someone else will write slower
    software to run on it!

  13. Re: Most impressive VAX installations

    On 2008-11-01 20:01, "Arne Vajh°j" wrote:

    > And today a single word processing user is using a PC
    > with 4 MB L2 cache, 2 GB RAM and 320 GB disk ...
    >
    > [...]


    Don't forget the 256 MB of RAM for the graphics card ... ;-)

    Michael

    --
    Real names enhance the probability of getting real answers.
    My e-mail account at DECUS Munich is no longer valid.


  14. Re: Most impressive VAX installations

    On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 18:31:54 UTC, 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.


    Impressive, but look back and read what OS/8 was able to do!

  15. Re: Most impressive VAX installations

    VAX 7000-630 running OpenVMS V7.1
    System Memory Resources on 1-NOV-2008 18:17:01.31

    Physical Memory Usage (pages): Total Free In Use Modified
    Main Memory (2048.00Mb) 4194304 3855692 275650 62962


  16. Re: Most impressive VAX installations

    On 1 nov, 02:15, "Richard B. Gilbert" 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. *I
    > 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. *With the Alphas, a
    > GB or more was not only reasonable but also possible! *But only if you
    > were very rich! ;-)- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht niet weergeven -
    >
    > - Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -


    One of my VAXstation 4000-90A's has 128 MB main memory. Which is its
    configuration maximum IIRC.

    Hans

  17. Re: Most impressive VAX installations

    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.


  18. Re: Most impressive VAX installations

    On Nov 1, 8:37*am, "Tom Linden" wrote:
    > Just curious why they continue running theses as opposed to, say, ES47?


    Many years of poor decisions.

  19. Re: Most impressive VAX installations

    On Nov 1, 10:58*am, "Richard B. Gilbert"
    wrote:
    > Was that the
    > Philly office? *Been there, awesome collection of hardware!!


    Yes, the Philadelphia office.

  20. Re: Most impressive VAX installations

    On 1 nov, 23:55, Michael Kraemer 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....

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast