Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site Cascade.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!sdcsvax!dcdwest!ittvax!decvax!decwrl!CSL-Vax!Cascade!marks From: marks@Cascade.ARPA Newsgroups: net.followup Subject: Re: VM/IX on IBM 4341 Message-ID: <1675@Cascade.ARPA> Date: Tue, 4-Dec-84 02:43:58 EST Article-I.D.: Cascade.1675 Posted: Tue Dec 4 02:43:58 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 6-Dec-84 03:45:45 EST References: <117@circadia.UUCP> <411@mhuxd.UUCP>, <634@pucc-k> <105@v1.UUCP> <397@gitpyr.UUCP> Organization: Stanford University Lines: 25 > I've never heard of an operating system under VM that work as a > 'disconnected virtual machine' where commands are sent to. Not only > would it be slow, but, I believe, it would be almost technically > impossible for VM to handle a high load of inter-virtual-machine > messages (unless, of course, you used the virtual card-punches and > card-readers :-). > -- > Robert Viduya > Office of Computing Services > Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta GA 30332 > Phone: (404) 894-4669 When I worked at IBM's Palo Alto Scientific Center, their 370 did exactly what you described above with your ":-)". They ran OS/VS1 (not VS2/MVS, but VS1) in an disconnected virtual machine, and punched jobs to it thru the virtual punches and read output from virtual readers. This makes a lot of sense if you want VS1 to run only batch jobs. My impression is that it's difficult to talk to VS1 directly anyway. Have you ever tried to type OS JCL sitting on-line at a terminal? The system administrator there used CMS to edit a JCL file and punch it to VS1. ---------- Stuart Marks, Computer Systems Lab, Stanford University {ucbvax,decvax}!decwrl!glacier!marks, marks@su-cascade.ARPA