INFO-VAX Wed, 17 Oct 2007 Volume 2007 : Issue 567 Contents: Re: Canadians flee Canadian socialized Hillary type healthcare for Re: Canadians flee Canadian socialized Hillary type healthcare for Re: Canadians flee Canadian socialized Hillary type healthcare for U.S. Re: CHECKSUM oddity? Re: CHECKSUM oddity? login from mailbox? Re: login from mailbox? Re: still not convinced global warming a hoax? Re: still not convinced global warming a hoax? Re: still not convinced global warming a hoax? Re: still not convinced global warming a hoax? Re: still not convinced global warming a hoax? Re: still not convinced global warming a hoax? Re: TCPIP SMTP receiver issues (SYSTEM-F-NOLINKS) Re: TCPIP SMTP receiver issues (SYSTEM-F-NOLINKS) Re: TCPIP SMTP receiver issues (SYSTEM-F-NOLINKS) Which delete statement is faster? Re: Which delete statement is faster? Re: Which delete statement is faster? Re: Which delete statement is faster? Re: Which delete statement is faster? Re: Which delete statement is faster? Re: Which delete statement is faster? Re: Which delete statement is faster? Re: Which delete statement is faster? Re: Which delete statement is faster? Re: Which delete statement is faster? Re: Which delete statement is faster? Re: Which delete statement is faster? Re: Which delete statement is faster? Re: Which delete statement is faster? Re: Which delete statement is faster? Re: www.hp.com/go/openvms is still toast Re: www.hp.com/go/openvms is still toast ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 20:07:01 -0700 From: Neil Rieck Subject: Re: Canadians flee Canadian socialized Hillary type healthcare for Message-ID: <1192590421.628571.301320@y27g2000pre.googlegroups.com> On Oct 16, 10:06 am, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: > In article , koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: > [...snip...] > > 13 May 1961 President John F. Kennedy (D) > Despite United Nation pleading not to escalate the war in > Indochina sends 100 "special forces" to South Vietnam. > > Ike wanted to but did not. JFK sent the first troops. > Kind of reminds me of George W. Bush. While UN inspectors were still doing their thing, the Bush administration gets Powel (backed up by Tenant) to give a speech at the UN stating that the CIA had evidence of WMDs. But they didn't. ### But in the end all war is a waste of time + money and must be the very last step after failed diplomatic talks. The current price tag for Iraq is around one trillion dollars and I can only dream of what the US could have done with that money if it were used for creative purposes. Unlike other wars which were financed with war bonds, the cost of this war is totally borrowed and I fear it will hurt the US economy for many years to come. NSR ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 19:56:13 -0700 From: Neil Rieck Subject: Re: Canadians flee Canadian socialized Hillary type healthcare for Message-ID: <1192589773.883190.265180@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com> On Oct 16, 9:07 am, Ron Johnson wrote: > On 10/16/07 07:47, Bob Koehler wrote: > > And the other instances of Democrat misdeeds/foolishness? > > Ron Johnson, Jr. > There's enough blaim to taint every political ideology. The folly come's when they trick us into choosing one over the other. (you know they're lieing because you can see their lips moving) But what choice do we have? If we eliminated one of the political parties we'd be no different than China, Russia, or Nazi Germany. (but somehow I think Bob would be OK with this :-) NSR ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 19:48:57 -0700 From: Neil Rieck Subject: Re: Canadians flee Canadian socialized Hillary type healthcare for U.S. Message-ID: <1192589337.261018.218830@e34g2000pro.googlegroups.com> On Oct 15, 11:50 pm, Ron Johnson wrote: > On 10/15/07 21:55, Neil Rieck wrote: > [...snip...] > > > Yeah, the conservatives have a spotless track record... > > As spotless as the Democrats. > > Ron Johnson, Jr. > Jefferson LA USA > You had better check my previous posts. I never said that one party (or ideology) is better than the other, but Bob did. Before that I claimed that most of the people I encounter are centrists. Bob didn't like that point of view either. NSR ------------------------------ Date: 16 Oct 2007 20:35:51 +0200 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOeGER) Subject: Re: CHECKSUM oddity? Message-ID: <471520a7@news.langstoeger.at> In article <1192542873.238000.42110@e34g2000pro.googlegroups.com>, Hein RMS van den Heuvel writes: >CHECKSUM > /ALGORITHM > /ALGORITHM=option > /ALGORITHM=XOR (default) > > Selects the algorithm used for file checksums. The default is the > XOR algorithm for data within records, as used by the previous > Checksum utilities on OpenVMS Alpha and VAX systems. Options > include: > > o CRC - A CRC-32 algorithm for all bytes within the file > (possible record structures are ignored); this algorithm is > also known as AUTODIN II, Ethernet, or FDDI CRC. > > o MD5 - The MD5 digest, as published by Ronald L. Rivest > (RFC 1321), for all bytes within the file (possible record > structures are ignored). > > o XOR - An XOR algorithm for all data, according to the record > structure of the file. When is SHA1 expected? -- Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER Network and OpenVMS system specialist E-mail peter@langstoeger.at A-1030 VIENNA AUSTRIA I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 13:02:01 -0800 From: glen herrmannsfeldt Subject: Re: CHECKSUM oddity? Message-ID: George Cornelius wrote: (snip) > This can be true of CRC's as well. The CRC16 calculation on 9-track > tapes was _appended_ to the data as it was written to tape. The > result was that when the CRC algorithm was applied to the full string > of bits read from the tape later on, the outcome was zero. > [Simple enough to explain if you understand that while CRC's are thought > of as remainders from polynomial divisions with coefficients being modulo > 2 integers, the reality is that they are essentially ordinary binary > division simplified by discarding carries/borrows. Since such a > polynomial modulo two is its own negative (-RMDR(X)=RMDR(X)), we are > appending the negative of the remainder to the original input, and if > the division is redone, the remainder from the initial portion cancels > the RMDR(X) = -RMDR(X) we appended. [To make this all work, I think > the original calculation needed to have 16 zero bits appended during > the division phase]] I have known that this works, but never saw the detailed description of why it works. The common serial implementation using a LFSR (linear feedback shift register) makes it easy, and the required hardware very simple. As to your last statement, appending zero bits is done by feeding zeros into the shift register and sending as data what comes out the other end. In some cases the shift register is initialized with ones, otherwise initial zero bits in the input are not checked. Another interesting case is the ability to read tapes backwards. While many newer drives can't do that, most of the older ones did. There are sorting algorithms specifically optimized for tape drives that can read backwards. (The data appears in the buffer in the right order, filling from the end toward the start.) It must also be possible to verify the CRC backwards. -- glen ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:20:10 -0400 From: norm.raphael@metso.com Subject: login from mailbox? Message-ID: This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 006A362D85257376_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" What would cause a briefly logged-in process from a mailbox with a forced exit? [OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-1 (AlphaServer 1200 5/533 4MB)] INTERACTIVE Process Termination ------------------------------- Username: USER_X UIC: [USER_X] Account: Finish time: 25-FEB-2007 17:18:06.19 Process ID: 20E0E538 Start time: 25-FEB-2007 17:18:05.91 Owner ID: Elapsed time: 0 00:00:00.28 Terminal name: MBA4662 Processor time: 0 00:00:00.20 Remote node addr: Priority: 7 Remote node name: Privilege <31-00>: 533FEDBF Remote ID: Privilege <63-32>: 00000004 Remote full name: Queue entry: Final status code: 00002BD4 Queue name: Job name: Final status text: %SYSTEM-F-EXITFORCED, forced exit of image or process by SYS$ DELPRC Page faults: 245 Direct IO: 544 Page fault reads: 41 Buffered IO: 117 Peak working set: 2048 Volumes mounted: 0 Peak page file: 169952 Images executed: 6 --=_alternative 006A362D85257376_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
What would cause a briefly logged-in process from a mailbox with a forced exit?

[OpenVMS  Alpha V7.3-1 (AlphaServer 1200 5/533 4MB)]


INTERACTIVE Process Termination
-------------------------------
Username:          USER_X            UIC:               [USER_X]
Account:                             Finish time:       25-FEB-2007 17:18:06.19
Process ID:        20E0E538          Start time:        25-FEB-2007 17:18:05.91
Owner ID:                            Elapsed time:                0 00:00:00.28
Terminal name:     MBA4662           Processor time:              0 00:00:00.20
Remote node addr:                    Priority:          7
Remote node name:                    Privilege <31-00>: 533FEDBF
Remote ID:                           Privilege <63-32>: 00000004
Remote full name:
Queue entry:                         Final status code: 00002BD4
Queue name:
Job name:
Final status text: %SYSTEM-F-EXITFORCED, forced exit of image or process by SYS$
  DELPRC

Page faults:              245        Direct IO:                544
Page fault reads:          41        Buffered IO:              117
Peak working set:        2048        Volumes mounted:            0
Peak page file:        169952        Images executed:            6
--=_alternative 006A362D85257376_=-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 21:47:31 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: login from mailbox? Message-ID: norm.raphael@metso.com wrote: > What would cause a briefly logged-in process from a mailbox with a forced > exit? Process 1 creates a subprocess 2 with input/output being mailbox devices. Process 2 sends the output to process 1 and process 1, having gotten its wanted information, kills process 2 (its subprocess) before it has a chance to exit. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 14:57:18 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: still not convinced global warming a hoax? Message-ID: <54267$4715098f$cef8887a$4954@TEKSAVVY.COM> >> Folks here probably know how Greenland got its name. > > Greenland, hell.... Hasn't anyone here ever read aboiut what they find > in core samples taken through the ice in Antarctica? Yes, eosn ago (million years ? billion years ?, whatever), the earth had totally different weather. And yes, they have found tree fossils in ellesmere island way up there in the arctic indicating it used to be a much more temperate climate. And yes, they have found evidence of high CO2 contents when boring through very tick ice. But as it ever occured to you that land animals may have only been able to happen once enough CO2 was taken out of the atmospheric cycle and burried (what is now coal and oil) ? Has it ever occured to you that when the arctic was not a huge ice storage facility, that ocean levels were much higher and that habitable landmasses were smaller with large flooded areas ? So, over billions and billions and billions of years, the excess CO2 was slowly stored deep under the ground surface to allow atmopspheric CO2 cycle to be greatly reduced and planet temperature to lower enough to start storing/freezing excess water in the arctic (and antarctic) as well as making the air breathable for animals to emerge from the water. Now fast forward to today. In the last 50-100 years, we have extracted HUGE quantities of all that excess CO2 and released it into the air. Slight temperature increase has already resulted in vast areas of permafrost to thaw a little more in the summer, releasing huge quantities of what used to be frozen vegetation which is now allowed to decompose and generate methane (another greehhouse gas). Do you really think that you can justify allowing higher CO2 levels because such levels have existed in the past ? Have you ever stopped to wonder if such CO2 levels have existed at a time when humans/mammals were the dominant species on earth ? Have you ever stopped to wonder if such high CO2 levels have existed at a time when current coastlines housed a very large proportion of humankind who would be displaced shoudl water levels rise ? (and who would also see greater destruction from more severe weather (think about what would Kathrina would have done if a direct hit on New York city). Trying to find excuses to deny the dangers of global warming is absolutely stupid. Which which company has just ousted GE from the the 2nd largest corporation in the world ? PETRO CHINA. Now consider China's booming economy and 2 billion people awakening a huge apetite for coal and oil. If that doesn't scare you, then you are clearly blind. And you can't tell China (and India and others) to NOT develop their economy based on fossil fuel energy if you not only continue to do it for yourself, but also work hard to protect your own fossil fuel industry (aka: oil, coal companies as well as protecting car company profits by protecting those SUV contraptions which lack car fuel ecomony targets because nice politicians ensured SUVs were except from them). ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 16:55:44 -0700 From: AEF Subject: Re: still not convinced global warming a hoax? Message-ID: <1192578944.310398.75510@v29g2000prd.googlegroups.com> On Oct 16, 8:40 am, b...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote: > In article <47141695.7CEF3...@spam.comcast.net>, > David J Dachtera writes: > > > Neil Rieck wrote: > > >> On Oct 12, 9:00 am, koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob > >> Koehler) wrote: > >> > Congrats to Al Gore and the UN panel on the environment on the > >> > Nobel Peace Prize. > > >> Some scientists predicted that the long sought after "North West > >> Passage" would be permanently open sometime before 2015. Guess what? > >> It opened last month. > > >>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6995999.stm > > > Folks here probably know how Greenland got its name. > > Greenland, hell.... Hasn't anyone here ever read aboiut what they find > in core samples taken through the ice in Antarctica? > > > > > Suffice it to say - circles are never-ending, and this is the next time around > > this circle, one of many that comprise the cycles of this planet. > > But espousing that won't get you grant money to study Global Warming. Bill, Quick question: Suppose global warming really is what the scientists say it is. What would be different that you or I would be able to read of see compared to if it weren't? If you can't come up with some significant difference, you can't rule out GW. > > bill > > -- > Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves > b...@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. > University of Scranton | > Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include AEF ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 19:22:17 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: still not convinced global warming a hoax? Message-ID: <471555B9.4588D52E@spam.comcast.net> Bill Gunshannon wrote: > > In article <47141695.7CEF387A@spam.comcast.net>, > David J Dachtera writes: > > Neil Rieck wrote: > >> > >> On Oct 12, 9:00 am, koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob > >> Koehler) wrote: > >> > Congrats to Al Gore and the UN panel on the environment on the > >> > Nobel Peace Prize. > >> > >> Some scientists predicted that the long sought after "North West > >> Passage" would be permanently open sometime before 2015. Guess what? > >> It opened last month. > >> > >> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6995999.stm > > > > Folks here probably know how Greenland got its name. > > Greenland, hell.... Hasn't anyone here ever read aboiut what they find > in core samples taken through the ice in Antarctica? > > > > > Suffice it to say - circles are never-ending, and this is the next time around > > this circle, one of many that comprise the cycles of this planet. > > But espousing that won't get you grant money to study Global Warming. Hhmmm... Interesting thought... ...but I wonder if I could get enough grant money to not only revive DJE Systems, but also buy VMS away from HP! Let's see... I need minorities and women, maybe a few seniors, ... Hey! The bulk of the OVMS Engr Refugees are "grey-heads"! This just might have a chance! Anyone know a good grant proposal writer? -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 20:15:23 -0700 From: Neil Rieck Subject: Re: still not convinced global warming a hoax? Message-ID: <1192590923.655461.207500@v23g2000prn.googlegroups.com> On Oct 15, 9:40 pm, David J Dachtera wrote: > Neil Rieck wrote: > [...snip...] > > Folks here probably know how Greenland got its name. > > Suffice it to say - circles are never-ending, and this is the next time around > this circle, one of many that comprise the cycles of this planet. > > David J Dachtera Over 1000 years ago the Vikings realized that Iceland was a good place to live and Greenland was not. Being clever real estate scammers, they misnamed the islands on their maps which shifted the immigration from Iceland to Greenland. NSR ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 20:23:54 -0700 From: Neil Rieck Subject: Re: still not convinced global warming a hoax? Message-ID: <1192591434.490446.51780@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com> On Oct 16, 8:25 pm, David J Dachtera wrote: > [...snip...] > Repeat after me: > Global warming is natural, it is *NOT* caused by humans. > Correct. The current phase is a combination of the various natural cycles "combined" with human activity. Let's remember that in the 1930s there were only 2 Billion people on the planet, no jets, few cars, etc. Today there are over 6 billion people on the planet, lots of jets, many cars in the west, many people living in other countries trying to emulate the west, etc. On top of all this there are still many active volcanoes, solar cycles, and god knows what else. NSR ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 00:02:04 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: still not convinced global warming a hoax? Message-ID: <3083e$4715893d$cef8887a$22023@TEKSAVVY.COM> Neil Rieck wrote: > Correct. The current phase is a combination of the various natural > cycles "combined" with human activity. Techically correct, but a very misleading statement. The natural cycles happen at a very slow pace. The current warming has happened at a pace that is orders of magnitudes faster than natural cycles. So the "natural" warming that would have occured without human intervention wouldn't be significant when measured over just 50 years. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:06:25 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: TCPIP SMTP receiver issues (SYSTEM-F-NOLINKS) Message-ID: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote: > But that is the problem with your whole comparison of DECNET versus TCPIP. > DECNET and TCPIP are communication protocols. NCP or NCL which control how > DECNET objects are setup and who can set them up are not part of the > communication protocol they are implementation specific management > structures. The big difference is that with DECNET, credentials of the calling party are transmitted to the called party. And the VMS system can then verify this before even handing the call to the application behind it. A server process can define its object to accept connections from anyone and everyone, but you still get credentials of the calling party as part of the call setup. With TCPIP, all you get is the IP and a port number of the calling party. It can be argued that the credentials can be faked, especially if the calling party doesn't run VMS and uses some hacked DECNET stack. There can be *some* security in TCPIP. For instance, the OSU web server has a management utility that uses a predermined port to make the outgoing call FROM. So the web server process then ensures that a management request comes from a port defined in the configuration. If that config specifies a port that is less than 1024, then the person using the management client must have privileges to enable the management client to use a known port number for its outgoing port. (for instance, client connects from port 930 on his node to port 80 on the web server's node). > It would be entirely possible to implement a version of those DECNET management > structures which would allow unprivileged users to setup DECNET objects But it would not be possible on VMS itself. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 13:16:16 -0800 From: glen herrmannsfeldt Subject: Re: TCPIP SMTP receiver issues (SYSTEM-F-NOLINKS) Message-ID: Rich Alderson wrote: (snip) > On Tops-20, available from the same vendor as VMS, all TCP/IP service programs > require special privileges (OPERATOR, ARPANET-WIZARD, ABSOLUTE-ARPANET-SOCKETS > are the three lowest required--and the names should give you some idea of how > old those privilege bits are). A user program can only attempt to open a > connection to a well-known socket such as Telnet or FTP-Control, and that only > because the general protection requirements are explicitly set aside in the > monitor for those. The usual unix implementation restricts listen sockets on ports up to 1024. Clients then trust that they are connecting to a server task and not a user opened socket on a multi-user machine. The traditional ftp expects the client to open a socket and the server to connect back to that socket. Does TOPS-20 allow for the ftp data connection? > So the hypothetical junior programmer cannot create and run a program that > listens on an oddball socket without some system admin giving the JP privileges > to do so. That seems overly restrictive. Especially since anyone with a DOS PC on the net (or any other machine they have administrator rights for) can open any socket they want to. -- glen ------------------------------ Date: 16 Oct 2007 15:32:32 -0500 From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Subject: Re: TCPIP SMTP receiver issues (SYSTEM-F-NOLINKS) Message-ID: <$jULw4nG5sbB@eisner.encompasserve.org> In article , glen herrmannsfeldt writes: > Rich Alderson wrote: >> So the hypothetical junior programmer cannot create and run a program that >> listens on an oddball socket without some system admin giving the JP privileges >> to do so. > > That seems overly restrictive. Especially since anyone with a DOS PC on > the net (or any other machine they have administrator rights for) > can open any socket they want to. The goal is to have _better_ security than a DOS PC. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 14:07:14 -0400 From: "Mike Minor" Subject: Which delete statement is faster? Message-ID: <13h9vel51sekc1b@corp.supernews.com> Is there any difference in the speed at which the command is executed in the following examples? del a*.*;* del a*.txt;* del a*.txt;1 Thank you for your help Mike ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:28:35 -0700 From: Bob Gezelter Subject: Re: Which delete statement is faster? Message-ID: <1192559315.965673.325490@v23g2000prn.googlegroups.com> On Oct 16, 2:07 pm, "Mike Minor" wrote: > Is there any difference in the speed at which the command is executed in the > following examples? > > del a*.*;* > del a*.txt;* > del a*.txt;1 > > Thank you for your help > > Mike Mike, The answer depends on what else is in the directory. In the degenerate case (only a.txt;1 is present), the differences are minuscule. If there are thousands of files in the directory, the answer is different. There is also a semantic problem. Specifying ";1" will not have the desired result if a command procedure is interrupted, leaving the file behind. Specifying the wildcad (e.g., ";*") deletes ALL versions. (Specifying ";0" only deletes the highest numbered version). In general, I advise my clients to exercise EXTREME CAUTION with this type of coding, as it is quite easy to create mayhem if two different processes are executing the code in the same directory. - Bob Gezelter, http://www.rlgsc.com ------------------------------ Date: 16 Oct 2007 13:44:37 -0500 From: briggs@encompasserve.org Subject: Re: Which delete statement is faster? Message-ID: In article <13h9vel51sekc1b@corp.supernews.com>, "Mike Minor" writes: > Is there any difference in the speed at which the command is executed in the > following examples? > > del a*.*;* > del a*.txt;* > del a*.txt;1 All things being equal (i.e. the only files in the directory that match the a*.*;* wildcard also match a*.txt;1), I'd expect no significant performance difference. The real work is going to be the disk I/O writing directory contents back to disk. Reading directory entries into cache and parsing and searching directory entries from cache is unlikely to be the bottleneck. Why do you ask? Historically, the thing that absolutely kills delete performance is the "bubble down" that can take place if you delete the last directory entry in a block near the front end of a _HUGE_ .DIR file. Various tweaks over the years have improved this behavior by orders of magnitude. If it's still an issue for you, a reverse-alphabetical-order delete is one thing that can sometimes be of use. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:20:53 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: Which delete statement is faster? Message-ID: briggs@encompasserve.org wrote: > In article <13h9vel51sekc1b@corp.supernews.com>, "Mike Minor" writes: >> Is there any difference in the speed at which the command is executed in the >> following examples? >> >> del a*.*;* >> del a*.txt;* >> del a*.txt;1 I think that a non-wildcarded delete will be the fastest since it can do a direct lookup. (but this is not in your example) In the above cases, the delete command would still have to sequentially scan all files in the directory beginning with "a" and then see if it matches the mask. Obviously, the more "*" you have in a mask, the more CPU will be needed to decide if a full file spec matches the wildcard, but unless you are running an All Mighty Microvax II, you might not see any difference since the delete command will spend the most time in IO and the CPU time needed to check a string against a wildcard specification is fairly trivial. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:23:26 -0400 From: "Mike Minor" Subject: Re: Which delete statement is faster? Message-ID: <13ha3tiakjblj1b@corp.supernews.com> I have a directory with 200000+files, all in the a*.txt;1 range. I need to ftp these files to another server. After sending 30,000+ files via FTP I realized the magnatude of the ftp process, and interrupted it. I want to delete the 30,000+ file already ftp'ed before going back and looking at continueing the ftp process in a different manner and it just seems to be taking an extremely long time to perform the delete. I think the hang up is the re-write of the directory contents back to disk after a few files are deleted. I did the delete with a /log to watch how long it took to delete a file. I noticed a pause of a few seconds after it listed 15 to 20 files that were deleted..... Thank you for your help.... Mike wrote in message news:iO4j523y6UmT@eisner.encompasserve.org... > In article <13h9vel51sekc1b@corp.supernews.com>, "Mike Minor" > writes: >> Is there any difference in the speed at which the command is executed in >> the >> following examples? >> >> del a*.*;* >> del a*.txt;* >> del a*.txt;1 > > All things being equal (i.e. the only files in the directory that > match the a*.*;* wildcard also match a*.txt;1), I'd expect no significant > performance difference. > > The real work is going to be the disk I/O writing directory contents > back to disk. Reading directory entries into cache and parsing > and searching directory entries from cache is unlikely to be the > bottleneck. > > Why do you ask? > > Historically, the thing that absolutely kills delete performance is > the "bubble down" that can take place if you delete the last directory > entry in a block near the front end of a _HUGE_ .DIR file. > > Various tweaks over the years have improved this behavior by orders > of magnitude. If it's still an issue for you, a > reverse-alphabetical-order > delete is one thing that can sometimes be of use. ------------------------------ Date: 16 Oct 2007 14:38:13 -0500 From: briggs@encompasserve.org Subject: Re: Which delete statement is faster? Message-ID: In article <13ha3tiakjblj1b@corp.supernews.com>, "Mike Minor" writes: > I have a directory with 200000+files, all in the a*.txt;1 range. I need to > ftp these files to another server. After sending 30,000+ files via FTP I > realized the magnatude of the ftp process, and interrupted it. I want to > delete the 30,000+ file already ftp'ed before going back and looking at > continueing the ftp process in a different manner and it just seems to be > taking an extremely long time to perform the delete. I think the hang up is > the re-write of the directory contents back to disk after a few files are > deleted. I did the delete with a /log to watch how long it took to delete a > file. I noticed a pause of a few seconds after it listed 15 to 20 files that > were deleted..... Top posting. *sigh*. In any case, you've hit the "bubble down" problem that I alluded to. And, because you want to delete the first 30,000 files in a 200,000 file directory, reverse alphabetical order isn't going to do much for you. Hmmmm... There _is_ a sneaky approach. How about if instead of $ delete a*.txt;1 you $ rename a*.txt;1 *.*;2 /log That should run pretty fast because the directory entries can be modified in place. There won't be any "bubble down". You can press control-Y when you come to the 30,000th file. Then you can go back in and ftp all of your remaining version 1 files. ftp> mput a*.txt;1 When you're finished you can do a reverse alphabetical order delete on the whole directory. > wrote in message > news:iO4j523y6UmT@eisner.encompasserve.org... >> In article <13h9vel51sekc1b@corp.supernews.com>, "Mike Minor" >> writes: >>> Is there any difference in the speed at which the command is executed in >>> the >>> following examples? >>> >>> del a*.*;* >>> del a*.txt;* >>> del a*.txt;1 >> >> All things being equal (i.e. the only files in the directory that >> match the a*.*;* wildcard also match a*.txt;1), I'd expect no significant >> performance difference. >> >> The real work is going to be the disk I/O writing directory contents >> back to disk. Reading directory entries into cache and parsing >> and searching directory entries from cache is unlikely to be the >> bottleneck. >> >> Why do you ask? >> >> Historically, the thing that absolutely kills delete performance is >> the "bubble down" that can take place if you delete the last directory >> entry in a block near the front end of a _HUGE_ .DIR file. >> >> Various tweaks over the years have improved this behavior by orders >> of magnitude. If it's still an issue for you, a >> reverse-alphabetical-order >> delete is one thing that can sometimes be of use. > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 19:45:39 GMT From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan-Erik_S=F6derholm?= Subject: Re: Which delete statement is faster? Message-ID: JF Mezei wrote: > briggs@encompasserve.org wrote: >> In article <13h9vel51sekc1b@corp.supernews.com>, "Mike Minor" >> writes: >>> Is there any difference in the speed at which the command is executed >>> in the following examples? >>> >>> del a*.*;* >>> del a*.txt;* >>> del a*.txt;1 > > I think that a non-wildcarded delete will be the fastest since it can do > a direct lookup. (but this is not in your example) > > In the above cases, the delete command would still have to sequentially > scan all files in the directory beginning with "a" and then see if it > matches the mask. Obviously, the more "*" you have in a mask, the more > CPU will be needed to decide if a full file spec matches the wildcard, > but unless you are running an All Mighty Microvax II, you might not see > any difference since the delete command will spend the most time in IO > and the CPU time needed to check a string against a wildcard > specification is fairly trivial. Note also that if you'd like to delete *all* files in the directory, The DELETE option in DFU is (claimed to be) much faster then DCL DELETE. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:50:01 -0400 From: "Mike Minor" Subject: Re: Which delete statement is faster? Message-ID: <13ha5fdsicpqc27@corp.supernews.com> wrote in message news:HmX+K+xGtyXe@eisner.encompasserve.org... > In article <13ha3tiakjblj1b@corp.supernews.com>, "Mike Minor" > writes: >> I have a directory with 200000+files, all in the a*.txt;1 range. I need >> to >> ftp these files to another server. After sending 30,000+ files via FTP I >> realized the magnatude of the ftp process, and interrupted it. I want to >> delete the 30,000+ file already ftp'ed before going back and looking at >> continueing the ftp process in a different manner and it just seems to be >> taking an extremely long time to perform the delete. I think the hang up >> is >> the re-write of the directory contents back to disk after a few files are >> deleted. I did the delete with a /log to watch how long it took to delete >> a >> file. I noticed a pause of a few seconds after it listed 15 to 20 files >> that >> were deleted..... > > Top posting. *sigh*. > > In any case, you've hit the "bubble down" problem that I alluded to. > And, because you want to delete the first 30,000 files in a 200,000 > file directory, reverse alphabetical order isn't going to do > much for you. > > Hmmmm... > > There _is_ a sneaky approach. > > How about if instead of > > $ delete a*.txt;1 > > you > > $ rename a*.txt;1 *.*;2 /log > > That should run pretty fast because the directory entries can be > modified in place. There won't be any "bubble down". > > You can press control-Y when you come to the 30,000th file. > > Then you can go back in and ftp all of your remaining version 1 files. > > ftp> mput a*.txt;1 > > When you're finished you can do a reverse alphabetical order delete > on the whole directory. > Sorry for the top down....the group I spend the most of my time in prefers it that way.... any way, BRILLIANT!.....the rename makes alot of sense and I will give that a try. Thanks! Mike ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 19:58:14 -0000 From: Hein RMS van den Heuvel Subject: Re: Which delete statement is faster? Message-ID: <1192564694.945154.321350@k35g2000prh.googlegroups.com> On Oct 16, 3:23 pm, "Mike Minor" wrote: > I have a directory with 200000+files, all in the a*.txt;1 range. I need to > ftp these files to another server. After sending 30,000+ files via FTP I > realized the magnatude of the ftp process, and interrupted it. I want to > delete the 30,000+ file already ftp'ed before going back and looking at So those files are 'early on' in the directory. 'In place' renaming to ;2 for easy exclusion with FTP is not a bad thought! What OpenVMS version? The problem is somewhat similar to one discussed in: http://forums1.itrc.hp.com/service/forums/questionanswer.do?threadId=1165943 You may want to check out my rename suggestion there. It does a double rename to allow the system to allways take from and add to the end. This avoids the expensive 1-block shuflef up to make room when inserting an 'early' file and the equally expensive shuffle down when the last entry from vbn 1 is removed. You may want to adjust it to pre-establish 5K - 25K - chunks of file to be dealt with. Cheers, Hein. ------------------------------ Date: 16 Oct 2007 13:39:40 -0700 From: Bob Gezelter Subject: Re: Which delete statement is faster? Message-ID: <1192559440.491945.135390@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com> On Oct 16, 2:07 pm, "Mike Minor" wrote: > Is there any difference in the speed at which the command is executed in the > following examples? > > del a*.*;* > del a*.txt;* > del a*.txt;1 > > Thank you for your help > > Mike Mike, The answer depends on what else is in the directory. In the degenerate case (only a.txt;1 is present), the differences are minuscule. If there are thousands of files in the directory, the answer is different. There is also a semantic problem. Specifying ";1" will not have the desired result if a command procedure is interrupted, leaving the file behind. Specifying the wildcad (e.g., ";*") deletes ALL versions. (Specifying ";0" only deletes the highest numbered version). In general, I advise my clients to exercise EXTREME CAUTION with this type of coding, as it is quite easy to create mayhem if two different processes are executing the code in the same directory. - Bob Gezelter, http://www.rlgsc.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 16:45:41 -0400 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" Subject: Re: Which delete statement is faster? Message-ID: <471522F5.5040800@comcast.net> Mike Minor wrote: > I have a directory with 200000+files, all in the a*.txt;1 range. I need to > ftp these files to another server. After sending 30,000+ files via FTP I > realized the magnatude of the ftp process, and interrupted it. I want to > delete the 30,000+ file already ftp'ed before going back and looking at > continueing the ftp process in a different manner and it just seems to be > taking an extremely long time to perform the delete. I think the hang up is > the re-write of the directory contents back to disk after a few files are > deleted. I did the delete with a /log to watch how long it took to delete a > file. I noticed a pause of a few seconds after it listed 15 to 20 files that > were deleted..... > > > Thank you for your help.... > > Mike 200,000+ files in one directory is so ridiculous I can scarcely imagine anyone doing it. You are now finding out just one of the reasons why it's ridiculous. Can you just INIT the disk and start over? Or back up everything else, INIT and restore? The last time I had to cope with something like this was eight or nine years ago at McGraw-Hill. Some woman had gone on maternity leave. She had some sort of self resubmitting job that just went right on creating these files.... ISTR that, by the time we discovered it, the directory was well over 2000 blocks in size! It took DAYS to delete all those files! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 21:29:04 GMT From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan-Erik_S=F6derholm?= Subject: Re: Which delete statement is faster? Message-ID: Richard B. Gilbert wrote: > Mike Minor wrote: >> I have a directory with 200000+files, all in the a*.txt;1 range. I >> need to ftp these files to another server. After sending 30,000+ files >> via FTP I realized the magnatude of the ftp process, and interrupted >> it. I want to delete the 30,000+ file already ftp'ed before going back >> and looking at continueing the ftp process in a different manner and >> it just seems to be taking an extremely long time to perform the >> delete. I think the hang up is the re-write of the directory contents >> back to disk after a few files are deleted. I did the delete with a >> /log to watch how long it took to delete a file. I noticed a pause of >> a few seconds after it listed 15 to 20 files that were deleted..... >> >> >> Thank you for your help.... >> >> Mike > > 200,000+ files in one directory is so ridiculous I can scarcely imagine > anyone doing it. You are now finding out just one of the reasons why > it's ridiculous. > > Can you just INIT the disk and start over? Or back up everything else, > INIT and restore? > > The last time I had to cope with something like this was eight or nine > years ago at McGraw-Hill. Some woman had gone on maternity leave. She > had some sort of self resubmitting job that just went right on creating > these files.... ISTR that, by the time we discovered it, the directory > was well over 2000 blocks in size! It took DAYS to delete all those files! > > VMS's handling of .DIR files is much better today then 8-9 years ago, if I'm not wrong. And, as I wrote in another post, DFU has some tools such as bulk erase of a dir or dir-tree and compress/defrag of .DIR files to make the "cleaning job" easier. Re-init of the disk should not be needed on a reasonable new VMS version and using reasonable modern disk subsystems. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 19:32:37 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: Which delete statement is faster? Message-ID: <47155825.BFB7C400@spam.comcast.net> Jan-Erik Söderholm wrote: > > JF Mezei wrote: > > briggs@encompasserve.org wrote: > >> In article <13h9vel51sekc1b@corp.supernews.com>, "Mike Minor" > >> writes: > >>> Is there any difference in the speed at which the command is executed > >>> in the following examples? > >>> > >>> del a*.*;* > >>> del a*.txt;* > >>> del a*.txt;1 > > > > I think that a non-wildcarded delete will be the fastest since it can do > > a direct lookup. (but this is not in your example) > > > > In the above cases, the delete command would still have to sequentially > > scan all files in the directory beginning with "a" and then see if it > > matches the mask. Obviously, the more "*" you have in a mask, the more > > CPU will be needed to decide if a full file spec matches the wildcard, > > but unless you are running an All Mighty Microvax II, you might not see > > any difference since the delete command will spend the most time in IO > > and the CPU time needed to check a string against a wildcard > > specification is fairly trivial. > > Note also that if you'd like to delete *all* files in the > directory, The DELETE option in DFU is (claimed to be) much > faster then DCL DELETE. ...; however, be VERY CAREFUL which DFU version you use. V2.7-1 can't handle big trees. It will crash and leave a mess to cleanup, although ANALYZE/DISK/REPAIR handles it nicely. -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 19:34:19 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: Which delete statement is faster? Message-ID: <4715588B.A5D31B9A@spam.comcast.net> Mike Minor wrote: > > wrote in message > news:HmX+K+xGtyXe@eisner.encompasserve.org... > > In article <13ha3tiakjblj1b@corp.supernews.com>, "Mike Minor" > > writes: > >> I have a directory with 200000+files, all in the a*.txt;1 range. I need > >> to > >> ftp these files to another server. After sending 30,000+ files via FTP I > >> realized the magnatude of the ftp process, and interrupted it. I want to > >> delete the 30,000+ file already ftp'ed before going back and looking at > >> continueing the ftp process in a different manner and it just seems to be > >> taking an extremely long time to perform the delete. I think the hang up > >> is > >> the re-write of the directory contents back to disk after a few files are > >> deleted. I did the delete with a /log to watch how long it took to delete > >> a > >> file. I noticed a pause of a few seconds after it listed 15 to 20 files > >> that > >> were deleted..... > > > > Top posting. *sigh*. > > > > In any case, you've hit the "bubble down" problem that I alluded to. > > And, because you want to delete the first 30,000 files in a 200,000 > > file directory, reverse alphabetical order isn't going to do > > much for you. > > > > Hmmmm... > > > > There _is_ a sneaky approach. > > > > How about if instead of > > > > $ delete a*.txt;1 > > > > you > > > > $ rename a*.txt;1 *.*;2 /log > > > > That should run pretty fast because the directory entries can be > > modified in place. There won't be any "bubble down". > > > > You can press control-Y when you come to the 30,000th file. > > > > Then you can go back in and ftp all of your remaining version 1 files. > > > > ftp> mput a*.txt;1 > > > > When you're finished you can do a reverse alphabetical order delete > > on the whole directory. > > > > Sorry for the top down....the group I spend the most of my time in prefers > it that way.... Really??!! Which group is that? Even the UN*X groups soundly thrash people for top posting. -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 19:59:51 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: Which delete statement is faster? Message-ID: <47155E87.C3FBFC0A@spam.comcast.net> Mike Minor wrote: > > Is there any difference in the speed at which the command is executed in the > following examples? > > del a*.*;* > del a*.txt;* > del a*.txt;1 As I think you've discovered, the answer is, "it depends". Lots of ;1 files means lots of directory entries - not necessarily a good or bad thing, just something to consider, in light of what it takes to delete a single version file at the beginning of a large directory. Unusual part of VMS directories is that a single directory entry can represent multiple versions of a "name.ext". Pull a small directory into EDT sometime (*PLEASE* use /READ!!!) and check it out. Each directory record begins with a length attribute (but you won't see that because EDT does RECORD I/O!), then a version limit, some binary fields before the "name.ext", then the version numbers and FIDs of the various versions out to the end of the record. I don't have the code at hand just now, but I wrote a FILCNT.COM to count the number of files in a directory simply by reading the directory. It never hits the file headers, and so is a bit faster than trying to use the DIRECTORY command using only the default qualifiers (/HEADING, /TRAILING). It does only one READ for each directory entry, then calculates the number of versions represented by the entry. The code *IS* in http://www.djesys.com/freeware/vms/4038_freeware.zip I went ahead and extracted the code: FILCNT.COM $ open/read/share=write dir &p1 $ filcnt_l = 0 $read_loop: $ read/end=eof_dir dir p9 $ namlen_s = f$extr( 3, 1, p9 ) $ namlen_l = f$cvui( 0, 8, namlen_s ) $ versns_l = (f$length( p9 ) - 4 - namlen_l) / 8 $ filcnt_l = filcnt_l + versns_l $ goto read_loop $eof_dir: $ close dir $ show symbol filcnt_l $ exit I suppose you could make "filcnt_l" (file count, long) a global symbol and use it for another purpose. Example usage: $ @filcnt mydir.dir I was just sitting here watching defrag run on my W98-SE machine, thinking about various - totally UNSUPPORTED!!! - ways to accomplish such things as deleting files the way you said you needed to in your response to Mr. Briggs. Creative, but not recommendable. Involves doing things folks here would scoff at. You could, of course, employ the RENAME to ;2 strategy, then start up another FTP and kick off a delete of the ;2 files in batch. That's fully supported/-able. -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 07:54:43 +0200 From: "Rudolf Wingert" Subject: Re: Which delete statement is faster? Message-ID: <004401c81082$374a53b0$994614ac@domina.fom> Hello, the search for a*.*;* should be the fastest way. If the first letter matches, the rest can be ignored and the file can be deleted. For the a*.txt;* the file extension must match too and in the third case OpenVMS have to search for three matches. Best regards Rudolf Wingert. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:20:08 -0400 From: "warren sander" Subject: Re: www.hp.com/go/openvms is still toast Message-ID: The current server is located in a data center that is closing. It was supposed to be closed by the end of october and several of the groups have already re-allocated their resources into the new data centers in atlanta, houston and austin. I'm still working the exception for the OpenVMS server to continue to be on OpenVMS and in the TAY data center until that center really 'exits'. The problem is that most of the external connectivity in that center has moved already and I'm part of the stub left behind. That has caused some issues like the switch got something done to it on sunday morning not sending a blast out that was acted on. Until I was in and couldn't get to the site and contacted the folks left in TAY to fix it there hadn't been a call logged. The server was up and the pings to the server were working so the IT folks on my side of the firewall were never alerted. -warren "Richard B. Gilbert" wrote in message news:4714A594.1030000@comcast.net... > Cluster-Karl wrote: >> I reported it to HP and got a mail from Warren, it was a bad port and >> has been fixed. >> >> Works now again... >> >> regards kalle >> > > The hardware in question does not seem to be very reliable! I've been > using the same router/switch (Linksys BEFR81) for five or six years now > with out single failure. It cost me about $80. I suspect that the HP > switch in question would cost me $1000 or more. > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 19:28:26 GMT From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan-Erik_S=F6derholm?= Subject: Re: www.hp.com/go/openvms is still toast Message-ID: warren sander wrote: > The current server is located in a data center that is closing. It was > supposed to be closed by the end of > october and several of the groups have already re-allocated their resources > into the new data centers in > atlanta, houston and austin. > > I'm still working the exception for the OpenVMS server to continue to be on > OpenVMS and in the TAY data > center until that center really 'exits'. The problem is that most of the > external connectivity in that center > has moved already and I'm part of the stub left behind. That has caused some > issues like the switch got > something done to it on sunday morning not sending a blast out that was > acted on. Until I was in and couldn't > get to the site and contacted the folks left in TAY to fix it there hadn't > been a call logged. The server was up > and the pings to the server were working so the IT folks on my side of the > firewall were never alerted. > > -warren > > "Richard B. Gilbert" wrote in message > news:4714A594.1030000@comcast.net... >> Cluster-Karl wrote: >>> I reported it to HP and got a mail from Warren, it was a bad port and >>> has been fixed. >>> >>> Works now again... >>> >>> regards kalle >>> >> The hardware in question does not seem to be very reliable! I've been >> using the same router/switch (Linksys BEFR81) for five or six years now >> with out single failure. It cost me about $80. I suspect that the HP >> switch in question would cost me $1000 or more. >> > > Sounds like just about any other OpenVMS sysmgr out there. Forgotten, left behind, never thought of... :-) Jan-Erik. ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2007.567 ************************