[Info-vax] OpenVMS servers and clusters as a cloud service

[Richard Maher]

On 02-Jan-18 1:45 PM, DaveFroble wrote:
> Richard Maher wrote:
>> On 01-Jan-18 1:01 PM, DaveFroble wrote:
>>> Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
>>>> In article <p2bjfs$b3j$1 at dont-email.me>, Stephen Hoffman
>>>> <seaohveh at hoffmanlabs.invalid> writes:
>>>>> You're creating a more complex variant of just part of what 
>>>>> sandboxing and provisioning provide.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps.  The question is how one can come up with a more efficient 
>>>> upgrade mechanism without making it too difficult to adapt existing 
>>>> configurations.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Perhaps one just doesn't try to do that.  As Steve has perhaps 
>>> mentioned once, or twice, or a million times, holding onto the past 
>>> too hard can really screw up the future.
>>>
>>> If VSI comes up with some better stuff, I for one don't have a 
>>> problem with a fresh install.  Come to think about it, every x86 VMS 
>>> system will require a fresh install.
>>>
>>
>> Exactly. There is *no* common system disk save a Desired State image 
>> copy. And, at least for IaaS, VMS Clusters are dead. The DLM is dead 
>> unless you can tolerate the irony of licensing Oracle's.
> 
> I don't agree.  The DLM is alive and well, and if VSI uses a 
> recommendation I sent to them, it would have numeric range locking.
> 

You're missing the point :-( The DLM is/was amazing and lives on in VMS 
Clusters but that pathetically limited (geographically and scalability 
wise) architecture has been resigned to niche applications.

If VMS wants to grow it needs World Wide Session State services and lock 
managers.

32 byte lock value blocks are a fucking joke today!