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

[DaveFroble]

Richard Maher wrote:
> 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!

The DLM is rather useful on a single system.

There is always room for improvement.


-- 
David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef at tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA  15486