[Info-vax] VSI strategy for OpenVMS

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 9/14/2021 5:04 PM, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
> In article <shq41f$1ca5$1 at gioia.aioe.org>, =?UTF-8?Q?Arne_Vajh=c3=b8j?=
> <arne at vajhoej.dk> writes:
>>>>> There are certainly many big VMS customers who run clusters partly for
>>>>> increased computing power.  Of course, disaster tolerance, rolling
>>>>> upgrades, and so on are also reasons.
>>>>
>>>> 30 years ago: certainly.
>>>>
>>>> Today: not so sure.
>>>>
>>>> A single Itanium got lots of power.
>>>
>>> Sure, but what are big VMS customers doing today?
>>
>> Most likely running the same applications they did 30 years ago.
> 
> Are you sure?  Some are running SIMILAR applications, which however have
> grown so that orders of magnitude more power is required.

The investment in VMS applications seems to have been relative
low for the last couple of decades.

The large new features seems to have been implemented outside
of VMS most places.

The VMS applications has been maintained and enhanced as business
requirements has evolved.

But way more +5% code projects than x5 code projects.

>>>> Disaster tolerance can be achieved in different ways.
>>>
>>> But none as good as a VMS cluster.
>>
>> Businesses are interested in application availability. They
>> do not care whether that is provided by OS features or
>> application features.
> 
> They should care if they have to hire twice as many people to implement
> the non-VMS solution.

But why should they need to hitre more people??

Let us take Rdb vs Oracle DB aka Classic with RAC (real RAC
not RAC One). Both use a DLM but Rdb use VMS DLM while Oracle DB
RAC use its own DLM.

Does it matter for developers or operations? Not really.

Arne