开云体育In preparation for d7.0, I was wondering which version of Hercules has the mods to allow networking (FTP, Telnet, etc)?? ? Mike, I know you mentioned that you had to check in changes. ? I still can’t get d6.0 to work with Hercules 4.5 – it super-dumps from 30 seconds to 1 week after IPL. ? I may upgrade to CentOs 9 and all of the latest utilities. My VM machine is CentOs 7.0. ? John |
开云体育MTS requires special code because of how it interfaced with the internet. It used specialized hardware. ?Work is being done to add support into Hercules for this hardware. Other systems can already use networking with Hercules, MTS cannot yet do this. ? The work is being done as part of the release of the last MTS version that was in use before U of M shut it down. This is being called ‘d7.0’. ? The issue I had with Hercules 4.5 is that MTS would crash anywhere from 2 minutes to a week after IPL. It may be my combination of OS (Linux), gcc compiler, etc. ? My question was to determine if the networking changes were already checked in to the current (4.6?) version of Hercules.? If so, I was going to download that onto a CentOS 9 vm to see if it had the crash problem. ? From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Marco Antoniotti
Sent: Sunday, April 9, 2023 04:30 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [H390-MTS] Which Hercules version for d7.0? ? ... AFAIK, SDL 4.5 has all the necessary socket support.? FTP runs on MVS3.8j for example. |
|
Hi
I do not know any detail, but I understand the issues, which have been reported before here. I can just tell you that I have been running 6.0a on SDL Hercules/Hyperion 4.5 on a W11 machine with no apparent problems, at least in a short time frame (between IPL and shutdown).? I have no experience on Linux. I guess the best thing to do is to post this issue on the Hercules forum and see what the people there (mostly Fish) say.? If I remember correctly a rather obscure bug was discovered and fixed in 4.5 a couple of months ago. All the best Marco |
开云体育Off topic I know, but running MTS under Hercules and getting a week of uptime probably pretty much matches the real mainframe experience. At UBC the maximum uptime was something like 7 days when the system shutdown to clients ?for a total (weekly) file save followed by an IPL.?
|
|
Douglas Wade wrote:
> Off topic I know, but running MTS under Hercules and getting a week of uptime probably pretty much matches the real mainframe experience. At UBC the maximum uptime was something like 7 days when the system shutdown to clients? for a total (weekly) file save followed by an IPL. I am commenting on an ancient thread (from last April), I thought I had re-registered for this group when it switched to groups.io but apparently I did not.? I am really only responding to the comment made by Douglas Wade, (and only for historical completeness) but if you want to see the entire thread see the link at the very bottom. tl;dr: There is no longer any time limit (that I am aware of) on how long MTS/UMMPS can run without experiencing a non-recoverable program interrupt while in supervisor state.? Just to be clear though, this is with regard to weeks and/or months of up time, not years and/or decades. If I recall correctly, I am pretty sure that at U of M we did not routinely re-ipl after filesave every week, so in the early 1990's when there was somewhat less development work going on, the system would generally stay up for multiple weeks at a time.? There was however a supervisor intertask code bug that would cause a crash approximately 2,147,483,647 (2^31 - 1) milliseconds, or 24.85 days after ipl due to an uncaught fixed point divide overflow in the supervisor intertask module.? This bug obviously also exists in the supervisor that was distributed as part of D6.0. ? In September of 1993, I made a quick fix to the code and changed the variable that caused the fixed point divide exception from a 32 bit signed integer to a 32 bit *unsigned* integer, which obviously doubled the possible system up time from 24.85 days to 49.71 days.? After MTS was shutdown for general use at U of M, it continued to be run on a couple of Flex-ES systems as well as obviously on Hercules.? With even less of a reason to reboot the system on any kind of regular schedule, in August of 2015 I coded a more permanent fix for the problem (I think, I haven't done any 2042 TOD clock rollover testing (and I doubt anyone else has either)). So as of now (if the patch is applied) the supervisor should be able to run indefinitely.? There is one remaining bug in MTS related to this though, if a task that is started at IPL, is left unused, if the system is shutdown after it has been up more than 49.71 days, or an attempt is made to use the task, the unused task will snark.? Any freshly started tasks are unaffected. ?? Thomas Valerio ? ?? /g/H390-MTS/topic/which_hercules_version_for/98115982?p=,,,20,0,0,0::recentpostdate/sticky,,,20,2,0,98115982,previd%3D1697596044835478369,nextid%3D1672385293156727066&previd=1697596044835478369&nextid=1672385293156727066 |
|
My experience with d6.0 under Hercules is that the system can stay up about two weeks before it will crash. The crash takes the form of a super-dump and is triggered by someone trying to sign into an already existing terminal line task. ? So, if I sign off of that terminal and try to sign back in to any user, it will cause a super-dump. ??I never leave an instance up more than 10 days without reloading. ? Sounds like Tom’s fixes were in code released after d6.0. Not sure if the issue he fixed is causing my issues. Douglas Wade wrote: |
Marco Antoniotti