[Info-vax] Pathworks or one of its descendants on x86

[already5chosen at yahoo.com]

On Wednesday, February 21, 2018 at 5:45:21 PM UTC+2, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 2/21/2018 10:29 AM, Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:
> > Den 2018-02-21 kl. 15:46, skrev Arne Vajhøj:
> >> On 2/21/2018 8:57 AM, Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:
> >>> Den 2018-02-21 kl. 05:40, skrev terry-groups at glaver.org:
> >>>> On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 7:40:05 AM UTC-5, Kerry Main wrote:
> >>>>> New OpenVMS file system notes: 
> >>>>> <http://www.hp-connect.se/SIG/New_File_System_VMS_Boot%20Camp_2016.pdf> 
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Those slides say "Fully compatible API − 99% of applications run 
> >>>> without
> >>>> modification" which I interpret as meaning RMS or RMS emulation. If 
> >>>> that
> >>>> is the case, any file-serving to PC clients is going to need to do the
> >>>> same "if it isn't fixed-512, read the file a record at a time and munge
> >>>> the record attributes" that PATHWORKS did before sending it to a PC
> >>>> client. I think I'll stick with my "an inefficient choice for anything
> >>>> other than accessing files that must reside on the VMS system" comment
> >>>> until convinced otherwise.
> >>>
> >>> I have never seen file serving from VMS as anything but a convienient
> >>> way of sharing files that was either created on VMS, or was needed
> >>> by something on the VMS system. For a general "file server", there
> >>> was easier solutions.
> >>>
> >>> Was using VMS for file sharing/serving since PCSA 1.2 or 2.0 (I think).
> >>
> >> Same here. PathWorks was pretty cool late 80's early 90's. Long time ago.
> >>
> >> The ability to move files between VMS and PC's in a transparent
> >> way is very convenient and I do think such a feature has some
> >> users.
> >>
> >> But I think that the fraction of these users where performance
> >> is important would be very small.
> > 
> > And today, for files created on VMS that has PC users (by far the
> > most common direction), it is easier to run a web server and just
> > present the directory for download.
> > 
> > I have a hard time seeing VMS as a general file server today...
> 
> That was what I was trying to agree to.
> 
> This is not production for the large number of users, but convenience
> for the system manager.
> 
> Which is why performance should not matter.
> 
> Arne

Which still does not answer in which scenario Pathworks would be more convenient than Samba.